Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The prognostic impact of age in patients with triple-negative breast cancer

  • Epidemiology
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to assess the prognostic impact of age in patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). 1,732 patients with primary TNBC were analyzed. Five age cohorts (≤30, 31–40, 41–50, 51–60, and >60 years) at diagnosis were correlated with clinical/pathological parameters. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to examine the effect of age on disease-free (DFS), distant disease-free (DDFS), and overall survival (OS). In patients with TNBC, increasing age at diagnosis was inversely correlated with tumor grade (P < 0.0001); likelihood of being non-Caucasian (P = 0.0001); likelihood of getting chemotherapy (P < 0.0001); and positively correlated with DFS (P = 0.0003); DDFS (P < 0.0001); and OS (P < 0.0001). The median DFS for patients 31–40 and older than 60 years was 4 years [95 % confidence interval (95 % CI) 2–5] and 8 years (95 % CI 5–14, respectively, P = 0.0003). The DDFS and OS were also statistically significantly shorter for younger patients. In multivariate analysis, tumor size, nodal stage, tumor grade, and age remained significant independent prognostic variables. Clinical characteristics of TNBC differ by age group, patients ≤40 years have poorer survival despite more aggressive systemic therapy.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, Pollack JR, Ross DT, Johnsen H, Akslen LA et al (2000) Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 406(6797):747–752

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gluz O, Liedtke C, Gottschalk N, Pusztai L, Nitz U, Harbeck N (2009) Triple-negative breast cancer—current status and future directions. Ann Oncol 20(12):1913–1927

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Liedtke C, Mazouni C, Hess KR, Andre F, Tordai A, Mejia JA, Symmans WF, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Hennessy B, Green M et al (2008) Response to neoadjuvant therapy and long-term survival in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 26(8):1275–1281

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Aleskandarany MA, Green AR, Benhasouna AA, Barros FF, Neal K, Reis-Filho JS, Ellis IO, Rakha EA (2012) Prognostic value of proliferation assay in the luminal, HER2-positive, and triple-negative biologic classes of breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 14(1):R3

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fredholm H, Eaker S, Frisell J, Holmberg L, Fredriksson I, Lindman H (2009) Breast cancer in young women: poor survival despite intensive treatment. PLoS ONE 4(11):e7695

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Azim HA Jr, Michiels S, Bedard PL, Singhal SK, Criscitiello C, Ignatiadis M, HaibeKains B, Piccart MJ, Sotiriou C, Loi S (2012) Elucidating prognosis and biology of breast cancer arising in young women using gene expression profiling. Clin Cancer Res 18(5):1341–1351

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Kim EK, Noh WC, Han W, Noh DY (2011) Prognostic significance of young age (<35 years) by subtype based on ER, PR, and HER2 status in breast cancer: a nationwide registry-based study. World J Surg 35(6):1244–1253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, Bassett LW, Berry D, Bland KI, Borgen PI, Clark G, Edge SB, Hayes DF et al (2002) Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 20(17):3628–3636

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, Caplan R (1988) Relative worth of estrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06. J Clin Oncol 6(7):1076–1087

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Mazouni C, Peintinger F, Wan-Kau S, Andre F, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Symmans WF, Meric-Bernstam F, Valero V, Hortobagyi GN, Pusztai L (2007) Residual ductal carcinoma in situ in patients with complete eradication of invasive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not adversely affect patient outcome. J Clin Oncol 25(19):2650–2655

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bayraktar S, Hernadez-Aya LF, Lei X, Meric-Bernstam F, Litton JK, Hsu L, Hortobagyi GN, Gonzalez-Angulo AM (2012) Effect of metformin on survival outcomes in diabetic patients with triple receptor-negative breast cancer. Cancer 118(5):1202–1211

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H, Hastie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS et al (2001) Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 98(19):10869–10874

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Carey LA, Dees EC, Sawyer L, Gatti L, Moore DT, Collichio F, Ollila DW, Sartor CI, Graham ML, Perou CM (2007) The triple negative paradox: primary tumor chemosensitivity of breast cancer subtypes. Clin Cancer Res 13(8):2329–2334

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Kassam F, Enright K, Dent R, Dranitsaris G, Myers J, Flynn C, Fralick M, Kumar R, Clemons M (2009) Survival outcomes for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer: implications for clinical practice and trial design. Clin Breast Cancer 9(1):29–33

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bayraktar S, Gutierrez-Barrera AM, Liu D, Tasbas T, Akar U, Litton JK, Lin E, Albarracin CT, Meric-Bernstam F, Gonzalez-Angulo AM et al (2011) Outcome of triple-negative breast cancer in patients with or without deleterious BRCA mutations. Breast Cancer Res Treat 130(1):145–153

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Brufsky A, Valero V, Tiangco B, Dakhil S, Brize A, Rugo HS, Rivera R, Duenne A, Bousfoul N, Yardley DA (2012) Second-line bevacizumab-containing therapy in patients with triple-negative breast cancer: subgroup analysis of the RIBBON-2 trial. Breast Cancer Res Treat 133(3):1067–1075

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Perez EA, Suman VJ, Davidson NE, Martino S, Kaufman PA, Lingle WL, Flynn PJ, Ingle JN, Visscher D, Jenkins RB (2006) HER2 testing by local, central, and reference laboratories in specimens from the North Central Cancer Treatment Group N9831 intergroup adjuvant trial. J Clin Oncol 24(19):3032–3038

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pusztai L, Viale G, Kelly CM, Hudis CA (2010) Estrogen and HER-2 receptor discordance between primary breast cancer and metastasis. Oncologist 15(11):1164–1168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Timms KM, Liu S, Chen H, Litton JK, Potter J, Lanchbury JS, Stemke-Hale K, Hennessy BT, Arun BK et al (2011) Incidence and outcome of BRCA mutations in unselected patients with triple receptor-negative breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res 17(5):1082–1089

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

  The authors have declared no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Schleswig–Holstein, Campus Luebeck, Ratzeburger Allee 160, 23538, Luebeck, Germany

    Cornelia Liedtke & A. Rody

  2. Department of Biostatistics, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    K. R. Hess

  3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, J. W. Goethe-University, Frankfurt, Germany

    T. Karn

  4. Department of Gynecology and Obstetric, University of Muenster, Muenster, Germany

    L. Kiesel

  5. Department of Breast Medical Oncology, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA

    G. N. Hortobagyi & A. M. Gonzalez-Angulo

  6. Breast Medical Oncology, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA

    L. Pusztai

Authors
  1. Cornelia Liedtke
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. K. R. Hess
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. T. Karn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Rody
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. L. Kiesel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. G. N. Hortobagyi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. L. Pusztai
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. A. M. Gonzalez-Angulo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Cornelia Liedtke.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Liedtke, C., Hess, K.R., Karn, T. et al. The prognostic impact of age in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 138, 591–599 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2461-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2461-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation