Dogs have been proposed as spontaneous animal models of human breast cancer, based on clinicopathologic similarities between canine and human mammary carcinomas. We hypothesized that a better knowledge of the natural history and prognostic factors of canine invasive mammary carcinomas would favor the design of preclinical trials using dogs as models of breast cancer.
The 2-year outcome of 350 female dogs with spontaneous invasive mammary carcinoma was studied. The investigated prognostic factors included age at diagnosis, pathologic tumor size, pathologic nodal stage, lymphovascular invasion, histological grade, and expression of Estrogen Receptor alpha (ERα), Progesterone Receptor, Ki-67, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2, basal cytokeratins 5/6, and Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor. Multivariate survival analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazards model.
The overall survival after mastectomy was 11 months. Within 1 year post mastectomy, 41.5% of dogs (145/350) died from their mammary carcinoma. By multivariate analysis, the significant prognostic factors for overall survival included a pathologic tumor size larger than 20 mm [HR 1.47 (95% confidence interval 1.15–1.89)], a positive nodal stage [pN+, HR 1.89 (1.43–2.48)], a histological grade III [HR 1.32 (1.02–1.69)], ERα negativity [HR 1.39 (1.01–1.89)], a high Ki-67 proliferation index [HR 1.32 (1.04–1.67)], and EGFR absence [HR 1.33 (1.04–1.69)].
The short natural history of spontaneous canine invasive mammary carcinomas and high rate of cancer-related death allow for rapid termination of preclinical investigations. The prognostic factors of invasive mammary carcinomas are remarkably similar in dogs and humans, highlighting the similarities in cancer biology between both species.
Breast cancer represents the most prevalent cancer and the leading cause of cancer death in women worldwide . Despite considerable progress in breast cancer management, prognosis in the metastatic setting remains poor. The 5-year specific survival after initial diagnosis was estimated 97% for stage I, 88% for stage II, 70% for stage III, and only 25% for stage IV breast cancer . One of the current challenges is to define molecular tools and relevant models that can predict the response and potential resistance to therapies. The classic in vitro (tumor cell lines) and in vivo (xenografts) preclinical models have indeed limitations related to the difficulty to reproduce interactions with the microenvironment, the absent or incomplete metastatic pattern, and their inability to fully integrate the host immune response . Spontaneous tumor models are thus of high interest, to study the pharmacokinetics of innovative therapeutics in vivo, their effect on tumor (pathologic response) and patient (metastasis, survival), and the interactions between tumor cells and their microenvironment. In this respect, canine spontaneous cancers seem particularly relevant to human oncology [4,5,6].
Although their prevalence decreases in regions where early preventive ovariectomy is routinely performed, canine mammary carcinomas (CMCs) remain the most common canine cancer, with an estimated annual incidence of 182 per 100,000 female dogs . Recent publications describe the relevance of spontaneous CMCs as models of human breast cancer, because of their high incidence, similarities in relative age of onset, risk factors, biological behavior, and metastatic pattern [8,9,10,11]. However, the biological behavior of CMCs needs further evaluation. Few studies dealt with the natural history of CMCs, i.e., the outcome of dogs after mastectomy as single therapy [12,13,14,15,16,17]. The prognostic factors of CMCs were poorly described, usually in medium-sized cohorts (45–229 dogs), and mostly by univariate analyses [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29], although multivariate analyses are available [14, 30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41]. Because adjuvant chemotherapy does not significantly improve survival in dogs with advanced invasive CMC , and because tamoxifen-based hormone therapy is associated with significant adverse effects , most dogs benefit only from mastectomy, sometimes associated with ovariohysterectomy . This situation allows studies of the natural history of invasive CMCs, and the identification of prognostic factors without the confounding effects of adjuvant therapy. This also favors preclinical therapeutic trials of new anti-cancer drugs as first-line regimens, rather than in relapsed patients with advanced cancer.
Here, we hypothesized that (1) knowledge of the natural history of CMCs would emphasize the aggressive and short course of the disease, and could be useful for the design of preclinical therapeutic trials in dogs with CMC, as translational models of human breast cancer; (2) knowledge of the prognostic factors of CMCs would highlight the biological similarities between spontaneous CMCs and breast cancers.
The aims of this study were thus to describe the natural history of invasive CMCs, i.e., cancer progression and mortality rates, in the largest cohort collected so far (350 female dogs); to describe invasive CMCs using human pathological criteria including immunohistochemical markers; and to validate these criteria as prognostic factors able to predict patients' outcome. In part 2 of this article, we evaluated the prognostic significance of the immunohistochemical classification of human breast cancer applied to dogs.
Patients and samples
This retrospective study included 350 female dogs with invasive mammary carcinoma, but free from other cancer, initially diagnosed in two laboratories of veterinary histopathology (Laboratoire d’Histopathologie Animale, Oniris, Nantes, and Laboratoire d’Anatomie Pathologique Vétérinaire d’Amboise, France) between 2007 and 2010. The owners’ written consent and approval from the Oniris College of Veterinary Medicine local Animal Welfare Committee were obtained prior to inclusion.
Dogs were eligible for inclusion when a histological diagnosis of invasive mammary carcinoma was established and confirmed by an absent layer of p63-positive myoepithelial cells (anti-p63 antibody, clone ab111449, Abcam) by immunohistochemistry (IHC) that differentiates invasive from in situ mammary carcinomas [44, 45]. All dogs were treated surgically by their veterinarian, and none of them received any additional treatment before and/or after mastectomy. Age, breed, spay status, parity, contraception, prior benign mammary lesions, medical history, and outcome were obtained through written questionnaires or telephone interviews with referring veterinarians and owners. All 350 dogs were followed for at least 48 months with particular emphasis on the occurrence of locoregional relapse (time between mastectomy and the earliest local recurrence on the same mammary gland, new primary mammary tumor, or lymph node metastasis), distant metastasis-free interval (time from mastectomy to first evidence of distant metastases by medical imaging), and disease-free interval (interval from mastectomy to the first local recurrence, new primary tumor, lymph node metastasis, and/or distant metastasis). Overall survival was defined as the time between mastectomy and death from any cause. Specific survival was defined as the time between mastectomy and death attributable to the mammary carcinoma.
Histological examination was performed on 3-μm-thick hematoxylin–eosin-saffron (HES) stained sections. The 350 tumors were classified according to the human breast cancer classification adapted to dogs (World Health Organization classification system) [46, 47], and graded according to the criteria of Elston and Ellis  adapted to canine mammary carcinomas . The pathologic tumor size (pT, measured on histological slides), lymphovascular invasion (LVI), dermal infiltration, cutaneous ulceration, muscle invasion, margin status, and central necrosis were recorded for each case. Peritumoral lymphohistiocytic inflammation was considered positive when moderate to severe. In case of multicentric CMC, the largest tumor and/or tumor of highest histological grade was considered for prognostic purposes.
The methods used for IHC were detailed previously . Briefly, automated IHC (Benchmark XT Ventana, Roche Diagnostics) was performed on 3-μm-thick serial sections using the following antibodies: monoclonal mouse anti-human Estrogen Receptor alpha (ERα, clone C311, Santa Cruz, dilution 1:50), monoclonal rabbit anti-human Progesterone Receptor (PR, clone 1E2, Roche Diagnostics, prediluted), monoclonal rabbit anti-Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Type 2 (HER2, clone 4B5, Roche Diagnostics, prediluted), polyclonal rabbit anti-HER2 (Dako A0485, dilution 1:400), monoclonal mouse anti-human Ki-67 (clone MIB1, Dako, dilution 1:50), monoclonal mouse anti-human Cytokeratins 5/6 (CK5/6, clone D5/16B4, Dako, dilution 1:50), and monoclonal mouse anti-Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Type 1 (EGFR, clone 31G7, Invitrogen, dilution 1:20).
ERα, PR, and Ki-67 were assessed based on the number of positive nuclei among > 500 neoplastic cells (manual image analysis, Image J software, National Institute of Health, Bethesda, Maryland, USA), and considered positive at threshold ≥ 10% for ERα and PR [45, 49], CK5/6, and EGFR . The > 33.3% threshold for Ki-67 was evaluated by the receiver-operator-characteristic curve calculated for 2-year cancer-specific mortality. HER2 was scored 0 for no staining at all or incomplete, faint/barely perceptible membrane staining in ≤ 10% of tumor cells; 1 + for incomplete and faint/barely perceptible membrane staining in > 10% of tumor cells; 2 + for circumferential and incomplete and/or weak/moderate membrane staining in > 10% of tumor cells; or incomplete and circumferential membrane staining that is intense but within ≤ 10% of tumor cells; and 3 + for circumferential, complete, and intense membrane staining in > 10% of tumor cells. Carcinomas were considered HER2 positive only for a 3 + IHC score [45, 51].
Negative controls were included in each IHC run, and consisted in replacing the primary antibody with normal mouse or rabbit serum (prediluted reagents, Roche Diagnostics). The positive controls were mostly internal (epidermis and hair follicles for Ki-67, CK5/6, and EGFR; non-neoplastic mammary gland surrounding the carcinoma for ERα and PR; sebaceous glands for ERα). For HER2, the pathway HER2 4-in-1 control slides (Roche Diagnostics) were chosen to assess the quality of staining for each HER2 score (0, 1 + , 2 + , 3 +).
Four veterinary pathologists (JA, FN, LP, AG) and 1 medical pathologist (DL) examined the HES and IHC slides blindly (i.e., without any information on the dog or on the other pathologists’ interpretation). In case of discrepancy between evaluators, cases were collectively reviewed in order to achieve a consensual diagnosis, grade, and immunohistochemical scoring.
The MedCalc® statistical software (Ostend, Belgium) was used. Continuous variables are expressed as median, [range], mean ± standard deviation. Correlations between categorical variables were analyzed using the Pearson Chi-square test. The Kaplan–Meier method and log-rank tests were used for univariate survival analyses, and Cox proportional hazards models for multivariate survival analyses, whose results are reported using the Hazard Ratio (HR), its confidence interval (95%-CI), and the p value of each covariate. For all statistical tests, a p value < 0.05 was considered significant.
Clinicopathologic features of invasive canine mammary carcinomas (CMCs)
The cohort comprises 350 female dogs with invasive CMC, including 253 (72.3%) intact and 97 (27.7%) spayed female dogs. The main characteristics of patients and CMCs are given in Table 1. The mean age at diagnosis was 11.0 ± 2.1 years [range (3.6–16.3), median 11.0 years]. Fifty-seven breeds were represented. Mixed-breed dogs (n = 78, 22.3%) outnumbered Poodles (n = 50; 14.3%), German Shepherds (n = 25; 7.1%), Brittany and Labrador Retrievers (n = 19 each; 5.4%), and Yorkshire Terriers (n = 10; 2.9%).
In 235 dogs (67.1%), the invasive carcinoma was the first mammary lesion detected, whereas 115 (32.9%) dogs had a history of previous non-malignant mammary lesions. Parity was unknown in 269 dogs (76.9%), and nulliparous females (n = 49; 14.0%) slightly outnumbered multiparous (n = 32; 9.1%) females. History of contraceptive use was reported in 20 (5.7%) dogs.
Tumors involved the abdominal and inguinal mammary glands (M3 to M5) in 256 cases (73.1%), the thoracic mammary glands (M1–M2) in 50 (14.3%), both in 11 (3.1%), and location was unrecorded in 33 cases (9.4%). The most common surgical procedure was radical mastectomy (excision of the 5 mammary glands of the affected side) in 156 dogs (44.6%), followed by regional (M1–M3 or M3–M5) mastectomy in 112 cases (32.0%), and single mastectomy in 64 cases (18.3%). Information on the surgical procedure was missing in 18 dogs (5.1%).
The mean pathologic tumor size was 18 ± 7 mm [median 18 mm, range (2–49), n = 227 dogs]; in the other cases, the pathologic tumor size could not be precisely determined due to larger size and/or positive margins. In 236 dogs (67.4%), the pathologic nodal stage was pNX due to absence of lymph node sampling for histopathology. Nodal stage pN+ (with metastasis of any size) was confirmed in 75 cases (21.4%). Six dogs (1.7%) had evidence of distant metastasis (M1) at diagnosis.
All of the included cases correspond to invasive mammary carcinomas according to breast cancer classification. The predominant histological types were simple tubulopapillary (n = 176; 50.3%), simple solid (n = 103; 29.4%), and complex carcinomas (malignant epithelial proliferation associated with benign myoepithelial proliferation, n = 31, 8.6%). The mean mitotic index was 41 ± 29 mitoses in 10 high-power fields [× 400, diameter of the field of view 0.55 mm; median 33, range (5–236)].
Regarding histopathological criteria of aggressiveness, dermal infiltration was present in 119 cases (34.0%), cutaneous ulceration in 50 cases (14.3%), abdominal or thoracic muscle infiltration in 65 cases (18.6%), peritumoral inflammation in 168 cases (48.0%), and central necrosis in 261 cases (74.6%).
The mean ERα index was 6.3 ± 14.0% (0–87.6%); 58.0% of cases (n = 203) did not express ERα at all. The mean PR index was 5.4 ± 14.8% (0–92.0%); 65.4% (n = 229) of CMCs did not express PR at all. At positive threshold 10%, 57 CMCs (16.3%) were ER + and 40 (11.4%) were PR+ (Fig. 1). Two hundred and sixty-seven CMCs (76.3%) were ER – PR − , 26 (7.4%) were ER − PR + , 43 (12.3%) were ER + PR − , and only 14 (4.0%) were ER + PR + . The mean Ki-67 index was 36.2 ± 17.4% [median 35.4%, range (1.3–94.6%)].
Both immunohistochemical protocols used to assess HER2 expression were highly correlated (p < 0.0001, Chi-square test). HER2 score 0 was predominant (70.3% of the cases with clone 4B5, 74.9% with polyclonal A0485), followed by HER2 score 1 + (Table 1). The cohort does not comprise any case with HER2 overexpression (score 3 +).
Natural history and prognostic factors of canine invasive mammary carcinoma
Locoregional relapse (LRR)
The median time to LRR was 26.4 months; the LRR probability was 34% at 1 year, and 47% at 2 years post diagnosis (Fig. 2a). At the end of the follow-up period, 76 dogs (21.7%) had experienced tumor recurrence at the site of prior mastectomy, 56 dogs (16.0%) a new primary mammary tumor, and 18 dogs (5.1%) more than one locoregional event.
By univariate analysis, 11 parameters were significantly associated with the LRR risk (Table 2), of which 4 remained as significant independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis (p < 0.0001): the strongest predictor of locoregional relapse was ERα positivity (HR 0.48), followed by the pathological nodal stage pN + (HR 1.92), the presence of lymphovascular invasion, and positive margins (HR = 1.55 for each).
Distant Metastasis-Free Interval (DMFI)
The risk of distant metastasis was 17% at 1 year and 24% at 2 years post diagnosis (Fig. 2b), and was likely underestimated in this retrospective cohort, as the dogs’ owners may have declined complete staging, for financial reasons.
By univariate analysis, six parameters were significantly associated with DMFI (Table 3), of which four remained as significant independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis (p < 0.0001): the strongest was lymphovascular invasion (HR 2.66), followed by age at diagnosis (HR 2.16 for older dogs), multicentricity (HR 1.89), and the Ki-67 proliferation index (HR 1.0149).
Disease-free interval (DFI)
The median DFI was 34.4 months. Cancer progression (locoregional recurrence and/or distant metastasis) was recorded in 34% of dogs at 1 year post diagnosis, and 45% at 2 years.
By univariate analysis, 13 parameters were significantly associated with DFI (Table 4), of which 4 were independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis (p < 0.0001): the pathologic nodal stage pN + (HR 1.92), ERα negativity (HR 1.69), a high proliferation index (HR 1.59), and positive margins (HR 1.54).
Overall survival (OS)
During the follow-up period, 310 dogs (88.6%) died (Fig. 2c). The median OS was 11.4 months (2 days–75 months). The mortality rate was 51.7% at 1 year and 72.0% at 2 years post diagnosis. Death was unrelated to cancer in 58 dogs (16.6%), from unknown causes in 65 dogs (18.6%), and attributable to the invasive CMC in 187 dogs (53.4%).
By univariate analysis, 16 parameters were significantly associated with OS (Table 5), of which 6 were independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis (p < 0.0001). The strongest prognostic factors were the pathologic nodal stage (pN + : HR 1.89) and pathologic tumor size (pT ≥ 20 mm: HR 1.47), followed by the histological grade, ERα positivity, the Ki-67 index, and EGFR expression (HR 1.32–1.39).
The median time to death attributable to cancer was 19.5 months [2 days–56 months] (Fig. 2d). The cancer-related death rate was 41.5% at 1 year and 54.1% at 2 years post diagnosis.
By univariate analysis, 15 clinicopathologic parameters were significantly associated with cancer-related death (Table 6), of which six were independent prognostic factors by multivariate analysis (p < 0.0001). The most significant predictors of cancer-related death were those that define the stage of invasive CMCs: the pathologic tumor size (pT ≥ 20 mm: HR 1.41), pathologic nodal stage (pN + : HR = 1.82), and the presence of distant metastases at diagnosis (M1: HR 2.61). Peritumoral inflammation (HR 1.54), ERα negativity (HR 1.56), and a high Ki-67 proliferation index (HR 1.67) were also associated with cancer-related death, independently of the stage of the carcinoma at diagnosis.
Dogs with invasive mammary carcinomas have been proposed as a useful resource for preclinical research in comparative oncology due to epidemioclinical, biological, and pathological similarities with human breast cancer [8,9,10,11]. There was, however, a relative uncertainty of predictability of this spontaneous cancer as a translational model, as the natural history and prognostic factors have been described in relatively small cohorts [19,20,21,22,23,24,25, 27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39,40,41]. The present study is of particular interest because (1) mammary carcinomas in situ have been carefully excluded from analysis, using p63 immunohistochemistry when necessary, which is rarely, if ever, performed in veterinary studies, but of paramount importance in human breast oncology; (2) the cases were reviewed blindly by veterinary and medical pathologists, until consensus diagnoses were achieved, which permitted interpretation of canine samples using the criteria used for human breast cancer; (3) this is the largest cohort of CMCs described so far, which allowed for multivariate survival analyses with sufficient statistical power; (4) this study is one of the rare reports [14, 15, 17, 30, 37] of locoregional recurrence, distant metastasis-free interval, and specific survival in dogs with CMCs, as most previous studies focused on disease-free survival and overall survival only [18,19,20,21, 23,24,25, 28, 29, 31, 32, 35, 38, 39].
The epidemiological characteristics of CMCs in this cohort, although in agreement with some previous reports [20, 33], are characterized by an older age at diagnosis, lower rate of positivity to ERα and PR, and higher Ki-67 index than previous descriptions [19, 23, 27, 31, 37, 39]. These differences can be attributed at least in part to the systematic exclusion of mammary carcinomas in situ, which are diagnosed in younger dogs, and are more commonly ERα and PR positive compared to invasive CMCs (unpublished observations, manuscript in preparation), as described in human breast cancer .
Another particularity of this cohort is the absence of any HER2-positive CMC, as previously reported . However, HER2-positive CMCs have been previously described by immunohistochemistry, with the polyclonal A0485 antibody [18, 26, 54,55,56,57,58] or the CB11 clone . In this study, the external positive controls (cytospins of breast carcinoma cell lines, representative of the HER2 scores 0–3 +) ensured that HER2 expression was neither underestimated nor overestimated on the canine slides, a precaution that was rarely taken in veterinary oncology [26, 54]. Of note, HER2 gene amplification was not previously found in CMCs , and thus the existence of HER2-positive mammary carcinomas in dogs is still uncertain [61, 62].
The natural history of invasive CMCs is much shorter in dogs (54% cancer-related death at 2 years post diagnosis in this study) than in human breast cancer , probably in relation to shorter life expectancy in dogs, and the lack of adjuvant therapy, a situation that favors the setting of preclinical trials in the canine species. The effects of a given compound on patient survival, including in first-line regimen, is expected to be evaluable in short delays in dogs with CMCs, an advantage already highlighted for other canine cancers [4, 5]. The prognostic factors of invasive CMCs, described here in the largest retrospective cohort described so far, include the pathologic tumor size, pathologic nodal stage, lymphovascular invasion, histological grade, and ERα positivity, which are all also strong prognostic factors in human breast cancer , confirming the similar biology of invasive mammary carcinomas in both species.
The results of the present study confirm that canine invasive mammary carcinomas have a short disease course, which is predictable with clinicopathologic criteria close to those of human oncology. In the second part of this article, we hypothesized that CMCs could be subdivided into luminal and triple-negative cases with different outcomes, as in human breast cancer.
95% confidence interval
Cytokeratins 5 and 6
Canine mammary carcinoma
Distant metastasis-free interval
Epidermal growth factor receptor (type 1)
Estrogen receptor alpha
Human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2
Pathologic tumor size
Pathologic nodal stage
Ferlay J, Soerjomataram I, Dikshit R, Eser S, Mathers C, Rebelo M et al (2015) Cancer incidence and mortality worldwide: sources, methods and major patterns in GLOBOCAN 2012. Int J Cancer 136:E359–E386
Macià F, Porta M, Murta-Nascimento C, Servitja S, Guxens M, Burón A et al (2012) Factors affecting 5- and 10-year survival of women with breast cancer: an analysis based on a public general hospital in Barcelona. Cancer Epidemiol 36:554–559
Vargo-Gogola T, Rosen JM (2007) Modelling breast cancer: one size does not fit all. Nat Rev Cancer 7:659–672
Gordon I, Paoloni M, Mazcko C, Khanna C (2009) The Comparative Oncology Trials Consortium: using spontaneously occurring cancers in dogs to inform the cancer drug development pathway. PLoS Med 6:e1000161
Paoloni M, Khanna C (2008) Translation of new cancer treatments from pet dogs to humans. Nat Rev Cancer 8:147–156
Ranieri G, Gadaleta CD, Patruno R, Zizzo N, Daidone MG, Hansson MG et al (2013) A model of study for human cancer: spontaneous occurring tumors in dogs. Biological features and translation for new anticancer therapies. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 88:187–197
Merlo DF, Rossi L, Pellegrino C, Ceppi M, Cardellino U, Capurro C et al (2008) Cancer incidence in pet dogs: findings of the Animal Tumor Registry of Genoa, Italy. J Vet Intern Med 22:976–984
Pinho SS, Carvalho S, Cabral J, Reis CA, Gärtner F (2012) Canine tumors: a spontaneous animal model of human carcinogenesis. Transl Res 159:165–172
Rivera P, von Euler H (2011) Molecular biological aspects on canine and human mammary tumors. Vet Pathol 48:132–146
Uva P, Aurisicchio L, Watters J, Loboda A, Kulkarni A, Castle J et al (2009) Comparative expression pathway analysis of human and canine mammary tumors. BMC Genomics 10:135
Vail DM, MacEwen EG (2000) Spontaneously occurring tumors of companion animals as models for human cancer. Cancer Invest 18:781–792
Benjamin SA, Lee AC, Saunders WJ (1999) Classification and behavior of canine mammary epithelial neoplasms based on life-span observations in beagles. Vet Pathol 36:423–436
Moulton JE, Rosenblatt LS, Goldman M (1986) Mammary tumors in a colony of beagle dogs. Vet Pathol 23:741–749
Rasotto R, Berlato D, Goldschmidt MH, Zappulli V (2017) Prognostic significance of canine Mammary tumor histologic subtypes: an observational cohort study of 229 cases. Vet Pathol 54:571–578
Santos AA, Lopes CC, Marques RM, Amorim IF, Gärtner MF, de Matos AJ (2012) Matrix metalloproteinase-9 expression in mammary gland tumors in dogs and its relationship with prognostic factors and patient outcome. Am J Vet Res 73:689–697
Schneider R, Dorn CR, Taylor DO (1969) Factors influencing canine mammary cancer development and postsurgical survival. J Natl Cancer Inst 43:1249–1261
Stratmann N, Failing K, Richter A, Wehrend A (2008) Mammary tumor recurrence in bitches after regional mastectomy. Vet Surg 37:82–86
Araújo MR, Campos LC, Damasceno KA, Gamba CO, Ferreira E, Cassali GD (2016) HER-2, EGFR, Cox-2 and Ki67 expression in lymph node metastasis of canine mammary carcinomas: association with clinical-pathological parameters and overall survival. Res Vet Sci 106:121–130
Chang CC, Tsai MH, Liao JW, Chan JP, Wong ML, Chang SC (2009) Evaluation of hormone receptor expression for use in predicting survival of female dogs with malignant mammary gland tumors. J Am Vet Med Assoc 235:391–396
Chang SC, Chang CC, Chang TJ, Wong ML (2005) Prognostic factors associated with survival two years after surgery in dogs with malignant mammary tumors: 79 cases (1998–2002). J Am Vet Med Assoc 227:1625–1629
Ferreira E, Bertagnolli AC, Cavalcanti MF, Schmitt FC, Cassali GD (2009) The relationship between tumour size and expression of prognostic markers in benign and malignant canine mammary tumours. Vet Comp Oncol 7:230–235
Gama A, Alves A, Schmitt F (2010) Expression and prognostic significance of CK19 in canine malignant mammary tumours. Vet J 184:45–51
Gama A, Alves A, Schmitt F (2008) Identification of molecular phenotypes in canine mammary carcinomas with clinical implications: application of the human classification. Virchows Arch 453:123–132
Karayannopoulou M, Kaldrymidou E, Constantinidis TC, Dessiris A (2005) Histological grading and prognosis in dogs with mammary carcinomas: application of a human grading method. J Comp Pathol 133:246–252
Pérez Alenza MD, Peña L, Nieto AI, Castaño M (1997) Clinical and pathological prognostic factors in canine mammary tumors. Ann Ist Super Sanita 33:581–585
Ressel L, Puleio R, Loria GR, Vannozzi I, Millanta F, Caracappa S et al (2013) HER-2 expression in canine morphologically normal, hyperplastic and neoplastic mammary tissues and its correlation with the clinical outcome. Res Vet Sci 94:299–305
Sassi F, Benazzi C, Castellani G, Sarli G (2010) Molecular-based tumour subtypes of canine mammary carcinomas assessed by immunohistochemistry. BMC Vet Res 6:5
Szczubiał M, Łopuszynski W (2011) Prognostic value of regional lymph node status in canine mammary carcinomas. Vet Comp Oncol 9:296–303
Yamagami T, Kobayashi T, Takahashi K, Sugiyama M (1996) Prognosis for canine malignant mammary tumors based on TNM and histologic classification. J Vet Med Sci 58:1079–1083
Betz D, Schoenrock D, Mischke R, Baumgärtner W, Nolte I (2012) Postoperative treatment outcome in canine mammary tumors. Multivariate analysis of the prognostic value of pre- and postoperatively available information. Tierarztl Prax Ausg K Kleintiere Heimtiere 40:235–242
De Las Mulas JM, Millán Y, Dios R (2005) A prospective analysis of immunohistochemically determined estrogen receptor alpha and progesterone receptor expression and host and tumor factors as predictors of disease-free period in mammary tumors of the dog. Vet Pathol 42:200–212
Diessler ME, Castellano MC, Portiansky EL, Burns S, Idiart JR (2017) Canine mammary carcinomas: influence of histological grade, vascular invasion, proliferation, microvessel density and VEGFR2 expression on lymph node status and survival time. Vet Comp Oncol 15:450–461
Hellmén E, Bergström R, Holmberg L, Spångberg IB, Hansson K, Lindgren A (1993) Prognostic factors in canine mammary tumors: a multivariate study of 202 consecutive cases. Vet Pathol 30:20–27
Itoh T, Uchida K, Ishikawa K, Kushima K, Kushima E, Tamada H et al (2005) Clinicopathological survey of 101 canine mammary gland tumors: differences between small-breed dogs and others. J Vet Med Sci 67:345–347
Jaillardon L, Abadie J, Godard T, Campone M, Loussouarn D, Siliart B et al (2015) The dog as a naturally-occurring model for insulin-like growth factor type 1 receptor-overexpressing breast cancer: an observational cohort study. BMC Cancer 15:664
Misdorp W, Hart AA (1976) Prognostic factors in canine mammary cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 56:779–786
Nieto A, Peña L, Pérez-Alenza MD, Sánchez MA, Flores JM, Castaño M (2000) Immunohistologic detection of estrogen receptor alpha in canine mammary tumors: clinical and pathologic associations and prognostic significance. Vet Pathol 37:239–247
Peña L, De Andrés PJ, Clemente M, Cuesta P, Pérez-Alenza MD (2013) Prognostic value of histological grading in noninflammatory canine mammary carcinomas in a prospective study with two-year follow-up: relationship with clinical and histological characteristics. Vet Pathol 50:94–105
Peña LL, Nieto AI, Pérez-Alenza D, Cuesta P, Castaño M (1998) Immunohistochemical detection of Ki-67 and PCNA in canine mammary tumors: relationship to clinical and pathologic variables. J Vet Diagn Invest 10:237–246
Philibert JC, Snyder PW, Glickman N, Glickman LT, Knapp DW, Waters DJ (2003) Influence of host factors on survival in dogs with malignant mammary gland tumors. J Vet Intern Med 17:102–106
Tran CM, Moore AS, Frimberger AE (2016) Surgical treatment of mammary carcinomas in dogs with or without postoperative chemotherapy. Vet Comp Oncol 14:252–262
Tavares WL, Lavalle GE, Figueiredo MS, Souza AG, Bertagnolli AC, Viana FA et al (2010) Evaluation of adverse effects in tamoxifen exposed healthy female dogs. Acta Vet Scand 52:67
Kristiansen VM, Peña L, Díez Córdova L, Illera JC, Skjerve E, Breen AM et al (2016) Effect of ovariohysterectomy at the time of tumor removal in dogs with mammary carcinomas: a randomized controlled trial. J Vet Intern Med 30:230–241
Shamloula MM, El-Shorbagy SH, Saied EM (2007) P63 and cytokeratin8/18 expression in breast, atypical ductal hyperplasia, ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive duct carcinoma. J Egypt Natl Canc Inst 19:202–210
Peña L, Gama A, Goldschmidt MH, Abadie J, Benazzi C, Castagnaro M et al (2014) Canine mammary tumors: a review and consensus of standard guidelines on epithelial and myoepithelial phenotype markers, HER2, and hormone receptor assessment using immunohistochemistry. Vet Pathol 51:127–145
Goldschmidt M, Peña L, Rasotto R, Zappulli V (2011) Classification and grading of canine mammary tumors. Vet Pathol 48:117–131
Misdorp W, Else RW, Hellmen E, Lipscomb TP (1999) Histological classification of mammary tumors of the dog and cat. 2nd series. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, Washington, DC
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 19:403–410
Gama A, Gärtner F, Alves A, Schmitt F (2009) Immunohistochemical expression of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in canine mammary tissues. Res Vet Sci 87:432–437
Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Green AR, Paish EC, Lee AH, Ellis IO (2007) Breast carcinoma with basal differentiation: a proposal for pathology definition based on basal cytokeratin expression. Histopathology 50:434–438
Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, Dowsett M, McShane LM, Allison KH et al (2014) Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: american Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. Arch Pathol Lab Med 138:241–256
Bravaccini S, Granato AM, Medri L, Foca F, Falcini F, Zoli W et al (2013) Biofunctional characteristics of in situ and invasive breast carcinoma. Cell Oncol (Dordr) 36:303–310
Campos LC, Silva JO, Santos FS, Araújo MR, Lavalle GE, Ferreira E et al (2015) Prognostic significance of tissue and serum HER2 and MUC1 in canine mammary cancer. J Vet Diagn Invest 27:531–535
Beha G, Brunetti B, Asproni P, Muscatello LV, Millanta F, Poli A et al (2012) Molecular portrait-based correlation between primary canine mammary tumor and its lymph node metastasis: possible prognostic-predictive models and/or stronghold for specific treatments? BMC Vet Res 8:219
Dutra AP, Granja NV, Schmitt FC, Cassali GD (2004) c-erbB-2 expression and nuclear pleomorphism in canine mammary tumors. Braz J Med Biol Res 37:1673–1681
Kim JH, Im KS, Kim NH, Yhee JY, Nho WG, Sur JH (2011) Expression of HER-2 and nuclear localization of HER-3 protein in canine mammary tumors: histopathological and immunohistochemical study. Vet J 189:318–322
Muhammadnejad A, Keyhani E, Mortazavi P, Behjati F, Haghdoost IS (2012) Overexpression of her-2/neu in malignant mammary tumors; translation of clinicopathological features from dog to human. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 13:6415–6421
Singer J, Weichselbaumer M, Stockner T, Mechtcheriakova D, Sobanov Y, Bajna E et al (2012) Comparative oncology: erbB-1 and ErbB-2 homologues in canine cancer are susceptible to cetuximab and trastuzumab targeting. Mol Immunol 50:200–209
Im KS, Kim NH, Lim HY, Kim HW, Shin JI, Sur JH (2014) Analysis of a new histological and molecular-based classification of canine mammary neoplasia. Vet Pathol 51:549–559
de las Mulas JM, Ordás J, Millán Y, Fernández-Soria V, y Cajal SR (2003) Oncogene HER-2 in canine mammary gland carcinomas: an immunohistochemical and chromogenic in situ hybridization study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 80:363–367
Burrai GP, Tanca A, De Miglio MR, Abbondio M, Pisanu S, Polinas M et al (2015) Investigation of HER2 expression in canine mammary tumors by antibody-based, transcriptomic and mass spectrometry analysis: is the dog a suitable animal model for human breast cancer? Tumour Biol 36:9083–9091
Liu D, Xiong H, Ellis AE, Northrup NC, Rodriguez CO Jr, O’Regan RM et al (2014) Molecular homology and difference between spontaneous canine mammary cancer and human breast cancer. Cancer Res 74:5045–5056
van de Vijver MJ (2014) Molecular tests as prognostic factors in breast cancer. Virchows Arch 464:283–291
The authors deeply acknowledge Dr. Chand Khanna (EthosDiscovery, EthosVeterinary Health) for his help in reviewing the manuscript. The authors thank Dr. Claire Hanzenne, Dr. Ingrid Bemelmans, Dr. Floriane Morio, and Dr. Clotilde de Brito, who helped in collecting the clinical and follow-up data. The authors also thank Dr. Laëtitia Jaillardon for her involvement in data analysis, the veterinary pathologists (Dr. Jean-Loïc Le Net, Dr. Virginie Théau, Dr. Pierre Lagourette, Dr. Olivier Albaric and Dr. Sophie Labrut) who performed the initial diagnoses of canine mammary carcinomas, as well as the technicians in histopathology (Mr. Bernard Fernandez, Mrs. Florence Lezin, and Mrs. Catherine Guéreaud) who made the slides. Finally, we thank the referring veterinarians and the owners of the dogs included in this study, who gave us the clinical and follow-up data.
This work was supported by the French National Cancer Institute (INCa, Institut National du Cancer) with a grant for translational research (INCa-DHOS 2010, Pr M. Campone) and one grant for PhD students on translational research (Grant N°201108; 2011); and by Roche Diagnostics GmbH, Germany, which provided financial and technical support for the immunohistochemical characterization of the carcinomas.
Conflicts of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
All applicable international, national, and/or institutional guidelines for the care and use of animals were followed. The owners’ written consent and approval from the Oniris College of Veterinary Medicine local Animal Welfare Committee were obtained prior to inclusion of each canine mammary carcinoma in this retrospective observational study.
About this article
Cite this article
Nguyen, F., Peña, L., Ibisch, C. et al. Canine invasive mammary carcinomas as models of human breast cancer. Part 1: natural history and prognostic factors. Breast Cancer Res Treat 167, 635–648 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-017-4548-2
- Spontaneous animal model
- Breast cancer
- Estrogen Receptor alpha