Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The time-related changes of the importance of prognostic factors in breast cancer. A sequential multivariate analysis of 1423 Japanese patients

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

Summary

The value of individual prognostic factors may change dependent on the length of the follow-up period, if some factors have their greatest prognostic potential immediately after operation. It is not clear how long these factors keep their prognostic relevance. We retrospectively examined data on 1423 surgically treated Japanese patients with primary breast cancer between 1983 and 2002. Survival analysis was done starting at 2.5-yearly intervals after operation and follow-up in the first analysis started at the time of the operation. The changing importance of the prognostic factors during different follow-up periods was investigated by univariate and multivariate analysis. Based on multivariate analysis, tumor size retained its prognostic value even up to 7.5 years after operation, whereas the age, vascular involvement, ER and PgR showed a changing influence on prognosis dependent on the length of the follow-up period. The prognosis of patients some years after operation is necessarily different from the initial prognosis established after operation. Detecting the changing importance of prognostic factors could provide new biological insights that might otherwise be missed, and may help determine the most appropriate clinical use of various factors.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Leitner SP, Swern AS, Weinberger D, Duncan LJ, Hutter RV, 1995 Predictors of recurrence for patients with small (one centimeter or less) localized breast cancer (T1a, b N0 M0) Cancer 76: 2266–2274

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Chevallier B, Mosseri V, Dauce JP, Bastit P, Julien JP, Asselain B, 1990 A prognostic score in histological node negative breast cancer Br J Cancer 61: 436–440

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Aaltomaa S, Lipponen P Eskelinen M, Kosma VM, Marin S, Alhava E, Syrjanen K, 1991 Prognostic scores combining clinical, histological and morphometric variables in assessment of the disease outcome in female breast cancer Int J Cancer 49: 886–892

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Aaltomaa S, Lipponen P Eskelinen M, Kosma VM, Marin S, Alhava E, Syrjanen K, 1991 Hormone receptors as prognostic factors in female breast cancer Ann Med 23: 643–648

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Japanese Breast Cancer Society. 2000 General Rules for Clinical and Pathological Recording of Breast Cancer 14 Kanehara Tokyo

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cox DR, 1972 Regression models and life tables J R Stat Soc Ser B 34: 187–220

    Google Scholar 

  7. Shimada M, Rikimaru T, Hamatsu T, Yamashita Y, Terashi T, Taguchi K, Tanaka S, Shirabe K, Sugimachi K, 2001 The role of macroscopic classification in nodular-type hepatocellular carcinoma Am J Surg 182: 177–182

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Raemaekers JM, Beex LV, Koenders AJ, Pieters GF, Smals AG, Benraad TJ, Kloppenborg PW, 1985 Disease-free interval and estrogen receptor activity in tumor tissue of patients with primary breast cancer: analysis after long-term follow-up Breast Cancer Res Treat 6: 123–130

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Petrangeli E, Lubrano C, Ortolani F, Ravenna L, Vacca A, Sciacchitano S, Frati L, Gulino A, 1994 Estrogen receptors: new perspectives in breast cancer managementJ Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 49: 327–331

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Silvestrini R, Daidone MG, Valagussa P, Di Fronzo G, Mezzanotte G, Bonadonna G, 1989 Cell kinetics as a prognostic indicator in node-negative breast cancer Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 25: 1165–1171

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hietanen P, Miettinen M, Makinen J, 1986 Survival after first recurrence in breast Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 22: 913–919

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mansi JL, Gogas H, Bliss JM, Gazet JC, Berger U, Coombes RC, 1999 Outcome of primary-breast-cancer patients with micrometastases: a long-term follow-up study Lancet 354: 197–202

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Braun S, Pantel K, Muller P, Janni W, Hepp F, Kentenich CR, Gastroph S, Wischnik A, Dimpfl T, Kindermann G, Piethmuller G, Schlimok G, 2000 Cytokeratin-positive cells in the bone marrow and survival of patients with stage I, II, or III breast cancer N Engl J Med 342: 525–533

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Rosen PP, Groshen S, Kinne DW, Norton L, 1993 Factors influencing prognosis in node-negative breast carcinoma: analysis of 767 T1N0M0/T2N0M0 patients with long-term follow-up J Clin Oncol 11: 2090–2100

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Gilchrist KW, Gould VE, Hirschl S, Imbriglia JE, Patchefsky AS, Penner DW, Pickren J, Schwartz IS, Wheeler JE, Barnes JM, Mansour EG, 1982 Interobserver variation in the identification of breast carcinoma in intramammary lymphatics Hum Pathol 13: 170–172

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. de Mascarel I, Bonichon F, Durand M, Mauriac L, MacGrogan G, Soubeyran I, Picot V, Avril A, Coindre JM, Trojani M, 1998 Obvious peritumoral emboli: an elusive prognostic factor reappraised. Multivariate analysis of 1320 node-negative breast cancersEur J Cancer 34: 58–65

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lauria R, Perrone F, Carlomagno C, De Laurentiis M, Morabito A, Gallo C, Varriable E, Pettinato G, Panico L, Petrella G, 1995 The prognostic value of lymphatic and blood vessel invasion in operable breast cancer Cancer 76: 1772–1778

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Clayton F, 1991 Pathologic correlates of survival in 378 lymph node-negative infiltrating ductal carcinomas. Mitotic count is the best single predictor Cancer 68: 1309–1317

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Oita Prefectural Hospital, 870-8511, Oita, Japan

    Hideya Takeuchi & Tadashi Kano

  2. Department of Surgery and Science, Graduate School of Medical Science, Kyushu University, 812-8582, Fukuoka , Japan

    Hideo Baba & Yoshihiko Maehara

  3. Department of Surgery, Oita Prefectural Hospital, Bunyo 476, 870-8511, Oita, Japan

    Hideya Takeuchi

Authors
  1. Hideya Takeuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hideo Baba
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tadashi Kano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yoshihiko Maehara
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hideya Takeuchi.

Additional information

Address for offprints and correspondence: Hideya Takeuchi, MD, Department of Surgery, Oita Prefectural Hospital, Bunyo 476, Oita 870-8511, Japan; Tel.: 81-97-546-7111; Fax: 81-97-546-0725; E-mail: t3996@go2.enjoy.ne.jp

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Takeuchi, H., Baba, H., Kano, T. et al. The time-related changes of the importance of prognostic factors in breast cancer. A sequential multivariate analysis of 1423 Japanese patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 94, 273–278 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-005-9014-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-005-9014-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation