Advertisement

Hormones and Cancer

, Volume 1, Issue 3, pp 156–165 | Cite as

Risk of Mortality by Histologic Type of Breast Cancer in the United States

  • Christopher I. LiEmail author
Article

Abstract

There are several histologic types of breast cancer that beyond their histopathologic differences have distinct clinical characteristics. However, it is unclear how histology is related to risk of mortality particularly when differences in hormone receptor status, tumor size, and nodal status are incorporated. This study utilized a cohort of 319,463 breast cancer patients ≥30 years of age diagnosed from 1992 to 2007 identified from 17 population-based cancer registries that participate in the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results Program. Multivariate adjusted risks of mortality associated with seven breast cancer histologic subtypes were estimated using Cox regression. Mucinous, tubular, and medullary carcinomas were associated with 31–79% lower risks of mortality compared to ductal carcinoma. Inflammatory breast cancer was associated with a 50–53% increased risk of mortality depending on age. While lobular carcinomas carried the same risk of mortality as ductal carcinoma among women 30–49 years of age, among women ≥50 years of age with node-negative disease lobular carcinoma was associated with an 11% reduced risk of mortality, but among those with node-positive disease it was associated with a 10% increased risk of mortality. This study confirms that mucinous, tubular, and medullary carcinomas have a more favorable prognosis compared to ductal carcinoma, and that inflammatory carcinoma has a poorer prognosis. Though many of these histologic subtypes are quite rare, consideration of the mortality risk associated with a given subtype may be clinically useful when making decisions regarding treatment and follow-up.

Keywords

Breast cancer Mortality Ductal carcinoma Lobular carcinoma Histology 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by institutional support provided by the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center.

Conflict of interest

Dr. Li does not have any financial conflicts relevant to the content of this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Li CI, Daling JR (2007) Changes in breast cancer incidence rates in the United States by histologic subtype and race/ethnicity, 1995 to 2004. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 16(12):2773–2780CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Li CI, Uribe DJ, Daling JR (2005) Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer. Br J Cancer 93(9):1046–1052CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Li CI, Moe RE, Daling JR (2003) Risk of mortality by histologic type of breast cancer among women aged 50 to 79 years. Arch Intern Med 163(18):2149–2153CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cox DR (1972) Regression models and life tables (with discussion). J R Stat Soc (B) 34:187–220Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rakha EA, Lee AH, Evans AJ et al (2009) Tubular carcinoma of the breast: further evidence to support its excellent prognosis. J Clin Oncol 28(1):99–104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Louwman MW, Vriezen M, van Beek MW et al (2007) Uncommon breast tumors in perspective: incidence, treatment and survival in the Netherlands. Int J Cancer 121(1):127–135CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Hance KW, Anderson WF, Devesa SS, Young HA, Levine PH (2005) Trends in inflammatory breast carcinoma incidence and survival: the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results program at the National Cancer Institute. J Natl Cancer Inst 97(13):966–975CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dian D, Herold H, Mylonas I et al (2009) Survival analysis between patients with invasive ductal and invasive lobular breast cancer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 279(1):23–28CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Allemani C, Sant M, Berrino F et al (2004) Prognostic value of morphology and hormone receptor status in breast cancer—a population-based study. Br J Cancer 91(7):1263–1268CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ugnat AM, Xie L, Morriss J, Semenciw R, Mao Y (2004) Survival of women with breast cancer in Ottawa, Canada: variation with age, stage, histology, grade and treatment. Br J Cancer 90(6):1138–1143CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Viale G, Rotmensz N, Maisonneuve P et al (2009) Lack of prognostic significance of “classic” lobular breast carcinoma: a matched, single institution series. Breast Cancer Res Treat 117(1):211–214CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, Elledge RM (2004) Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res 6(3):R149–R156CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pestalozzi BC, Zahrieh D, Mallon E et al (2008) Distinct clinical and prognostic features of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: combined results of 15 International Breast Cancer Study Group clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 26(18):3006–3014CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Davis RP, Nora PF, Kooy RG, Hines JR (1979) Experience with lobular carcinoma of the breast. Emphasis on recent aspects of management. Arch Surg 114(4):485–488PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Dixon JM, Anderson TJ, Page DL, Lee D, Duffy SW (1982) Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Histopathology 6(2):149–161CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Division of Public Health SciencesFred Hutchinson Cancer Research CenterSeattleUSA

Personalised recommendations