Advertisement

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 141, Issue 3, pp 507–514 | Cite as

Prognosis of metastatic breast cancer subtypes: the hormone receptor/HER2-positive subtype is associated with the most favorable outcome

  • Dorien J. A. Lobbezoo
  • Roel J. W. van Kampen
  • Adri C. Voogd
  • M. Wouter Dercksen
  • Franchette van den Berkmortel
  • Tineke J. Smilde
  • Agnes J. van de Wouw
  • Frank P. J. Peters
  • Johanna M. G. H. van Riel
  • Natascha A. J. B. Peters
  • Maaike de Boer
  • George F. Borm
  • Vivianne C. G. Tjan-Heijnen
Epidemiology

Abstract

Contrary to the situation in early breast cancer, little is known about the prognostic relevance of the hormone receptor (HR) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) in metastatic breast cancer. The objectives of this study were to present survival estimates and to determine the prognostic impact of breast cancer subtypes based on HR and HER2 status in a recent cohort of metastatic breast cancer patients, which is representative of current clinical practice. Patients diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer between 2007 and 2009 were included. Information regarding patient and tumor characteristics and treatment was collected. Patients were categorized in four subtypes based on the HR and HER2 status of the primary tumor: HR positive (+)/HER2 negative (−), HR+/HER2+, HR−/HER2+ and triple negative (TN). Survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Cox proportional hazards model was used to determine the prognostic impact of breast cancer subtype, adjusted for possible confounders. Median follow-up was 21.8 months for the 815 metastatic breast cancer patients included; 66 % of patients had the HR+/HER2− subtype, 8 % the HR−/HER2+ subtype, 15 % the TN subtype and 11 % the HR+/HER2+ subtype. The longest survival was observed for the HR+/HER2+ subtype (median 34.4 months), compared to 24.8 months for the HR+/HER2− subtype, 19.8 months for the HR−/HER2+ subtype and 8.8 months for the TN subtype (P < 0.0001). In the multivariate analysis, subtype was an independent prognostic factor, as were initial site of metastases and metastatic-free interval. The HR+/HER2+ subtype was associated with the longest survival after diagnosis of distant metastases.

Keywords

Breast cancer Distant metastases Subtypes Prognosis Survival 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development (Grant Number ZonMw: 80-82500-98-8003).

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD et al (2007) Progress and promise: highlights of the international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2007. Ann Oncol 18:1133–1144PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coates AS, Colleoni M, Goldhirsch A (2012) Is adjuvant chemotherapy useful for women with luminal a breast cancer? J Clin Oncol 30:1260–1263PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS et al (2011) Strategies for subtypes–dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St. Gallen International expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2011. Ann Oncol 22:1736–1747PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Yamamoto N, Watanabe T, Katsumata N et al (1998) Construction and validation of a practical prognostic index for patients with metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:2401–2408PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Insa A, Lluch A, Prosper F et al (1999) Prognostic factors predicting survival from first recurrence in patients with metastatic breast cancer: analysis of 439 patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 56:67–78PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chang J, Clark GM, Allred DC et al (2003) Survival of patients with metastatic breast carcinoma: importance of prognostic markers of the primary tumor. Cancer 97:545–553PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jung SY, Rosenzweig M, Sereika SM et al (2012) Factors associated with mortality after breast cancer metastasis. Cancer Causes Control 23:103–112PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Largillier R, Ferrero JM, Doyen J et al (2008) Prognostic factors in 1,038 women with metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 19:2012–2019PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Beslija S, Bonneterre J, Burstein HJ et al (2009) Third consensus on medical treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Ann Oncol 20:1771–1785PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kennecke H, Yerushalmi R, Woods R et al (2010) Metastatic behavior of breast cancer subtypes. J Clin Oncol 28:3271–3277PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dawood S, Broglio K, Buzdar AU et al (2010) Prognosis of women with metastatic breast cancer by HER2 status and trastuzumab treatment: an institutional-based review. J Clin Oncol 28:92–98PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID et al (2002) AJCC cancer staging manual. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Elston CW, Ellis IO (1991) Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 19:403–410PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Planchat E, Durando X, Abrial C et al (2011) Prognostic value of initial tumor parameters after metastatic relapse. Cancer Invest 29:635–643PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Puente J, Lopez-Tarruella S, Ruiz A et al (2010) Practical prognostic index for patients with metastatic recurrent breast cancer: retrospective analysis of 2,322 patients from the GEICAM Spanish El Alamo register. Breast Cancer Res Treat 122:591–600PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chia S (2012) Testing for discordance at metastatic relapse: does it matter? J Clin Oncol 30:575–576PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hoefnagel LD, van de Vijver MJ, van Slooten HJ et al (2010) Receptor conversion in distant breast cancer metastases. Breast Cancer Res 12:R75PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Duchnowska R, Dziadziuszko R, Trojanowski T et al (2012) Conversion of epidermal growth factor receptor 2 and hormone receptor expression in breast cancer metastases to the brain. Breast Cancer Res 14:R119PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Niikura N, Liu J, Hayashi N et al (2010) Loss of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) expression in metastatic sites of HER2-overexpressing primary breast tumors. J Clin Oncol 30:593–599CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Amir E, Miller N, Geddie W et al (2012) Prospective study evaluating the impact of tissue confirmation of metastatic disease in patients with breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 30:587–592PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Amir E, Clemons M, Purdie CA et al (2012) Tissue confirmation of disease recurrence in breast cancer patients: pooled analysis of multi-centre, multi-disciplinary prospective studies. Cancer Treat Rev 38:708–714PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liedtke C, Broglio K, Moulder S et al (2009) Prognostic impact of discordance between triple-receptor measurements in primary and recurrent breast cancer. Ann Oncol 20:1953–1958PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hoefnagel LD, Moelans CB, Meijer SL et al (2012) Prognostic value of estrogen receptor alpha and progesterone receptor conversion in distant breast cancer metastases. Cancer 118:4929–4935PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cardoso F, Costa A, Norton L et al (2012) 1st International consensus guidelines for advanced breast cancer (ABC 1). Breast 21:242–252PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M et al (2010) American society of clinical oncology/college Of American pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 28:2784–2795PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sanpaolo P, Barbieri V, Genovesi D (2011) Prognostic value of breast cancer subtypes on breast cancer specific survival, distant metastases and local relapse rates in conservatively managed early stage breast cancer: a retrospective clinical study. Eur J Surg Oncol 37:876–882PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Bauer K, Parise C, Caggiano V (2010) Use of ER/PR/HER2 subtypes in conjunction with the 2007 St Gallen consensus statement for early breast cancer. BMC Cancer 10:228–240PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dorien J. A. Lobbezoo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Roel J. W. van Kampen
    • 1
  • Adri C. Voogd
    • 1
  • M. Wouter Dercksen
    • 2
  • Franchette van den Berkmortel
    • 3
  • Tineke J. Smilde
    • 4
  • Agnes J. van de Wouw
    • 5
  • Frank P. J. Peters
    • 6
  • Johanna M. G. H. van Riel
    • 7
  • Natascha A. J. B. Peters
    • 8
  • Maaike de Boer
    • 1
  • George F. Borm
    • 9
  • Vivianne C. G. Tjan-Heijnen
    • 1
  1. 1.Maastricht University Medical CenterMaastrichtThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Máxima Medical CenterEindhovenThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Atrium Medical Center ParkstadHeerlenThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Jeroen Bosch HospitalDen BoschThe Netherlands
  5. 5.VieCuri Medical CenterVenloThe Netherlands
  6. 6.Orbis Medical CenterSittardThe Netherlands
  7. 7.St Elisabeth HospitalTilburgThe Netherlands
  8. 8.St Jans HospitalWeertThe Netherlands
  9. 9.Radboud University Medical CenterNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations