Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

KLP-PI: a new prognostic index for luminal B HER-2-negative breast cancer

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Human Cell Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Luminal B HER-2-negative (LBHN) subtype is one of the major subtypes of breast cancer according to different features, clinical behaviors, and treatment response. The LBHN subtype shows a poor prognosis and is insensitive to endocrine therapy. Our work aim is to investigate the prognostic factor in the LBHN subgroup and, meanwhile, try to obtain an optimal prognostic index (PI) contrapose LBHN subgroup which helps to guide chemotherapy. A total of 515 female LBNH patients who underwent diagnosis and surgery at our hospitals from August 2008 to August 2018 were enrolled. Clinical–pathological information was obtained and immunohistochemistry result was available. From these cases, a 30% Ki-67 LI was employed to divide LBHN into two groups with low and high levels; high Ki-67 LI was associated with GIII tumor grade (P < 0.001), positive axillary lymph nodes (ALN) status (P = 0.018) and negative PR status (P = 0.016), and also seemed to be related to T2–T3 tumor size (P = 0.058). High Ki-67 level (HR = 3.30; P < 0.011), positive ALN (HR = 7.29; P < 0.001) and PR negative (HR = 2.63; P = 0.034) significantly associated with poor 5-year DFS in multivariate Cox’s proportional hazard regression model. A novel prognosis prediction model (KLP-PI), based on Ki-67 LI, ALN and PR status, showed a better discriminatory ability compared with traditional Nottingham prognostic index targeted to LBHN breast cancer. Our study highlights that high Ki-67 LI, positive ALN and negative PR status were associated with poor outcome in LBHN patients, and composed by these prognostic factors, KLP-PI improves the prognostic assessment using the Nottingham Prognostic Index when aiming at LBHN subtype.

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
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data sets supporting the conclusions of this article are included in this article. Raw data are available on the main electronic data storage system of First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University and access can be provided upon request to the authors.

References

  1. Chen W, Zheng R, Baade PD, Zhang S, Zeng H, Bray F, et al. Cancer statistics in China, 2015. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66:115–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, et al. Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2000;406:747–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2001;98:10869–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J, Hastie T, Marron JS, Nobel A, et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:8418–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Sotiriou C, Neo SY, McShane LM, Korn EL, Long PM, Jazaeri A, et al. Breast cancer classification and prognosis based on gene expression profiles from a population-based study. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2003;100:10393–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Cancer Genome Atlas Research Network, Weinstein JN, Collisson EA, Mills GB, Shaw KR, Ozenberger BA, et al. The Cancer Genome Atlas Pan-Cancer analysis project. Nat Genet. 2013;45:1113–20.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Bergamaschi A, Kim YH, Wang P, Sorlie T, Hernandez-Boussard T, Lonning PE, et al. Distinct patterns of DNA copy number alteration are associated with different clinicopathological features and gene-expression subtypes of breast cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer. 2006;45:1033–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chin K, DeVries S, Fridlyand J, Spellman PT, Roydasgupta R, Kuo WL, et al. Genomic and transcriptional aberrations linked to breast cancer pathophysiologies. Cancer Cell. 2006;10:529–41.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Curtis C, Shah SP, Chin SF, Turashvili G, Rueda OM, Dunning MJ, et al. The genomic and transcriptomic architecture of 2,000 breast tumours reveals novel subgroups. Nature. 2012;486:346–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature. 2012;490:61–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Banerji S, Cibulskis K, Rangel-Escareno C, Brown KK, Carter SL, Frederick AM, et al. Sequence analysis of mutations and translocations across breast cancer subtypes. Nature. 2012;486:405–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Slamon D, Eiermann W, Robert N, Pienkowski T, Martin M, Press M, et al. Adjuvant trastuzumab in HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;365:1273–83.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Ades F, Zardavas D, Bozovic-Spasojevic I, Pugliano L, Fumagalli D, de Azambuja E, et al. Luminal B breast cancer: molecular characterization, clinical management, and future perspectives. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:2794–803.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Zong Y, Zhu L, Wu J, Chen X, Huang O, Fei X, et al. Progesterone receptor status and Ki-67 index may predict early relapse in luminal B/HER2 negative breast cancer patients: a retrospective study. PLoS One. 2014;9:e95629.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  15. Criscitiello C, Disalvatore D, De Laurentiis M, Gelao L, Fumagalli L, Locatelli M, et al. High Ki-67 score is indicative of a greater benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy when added to endocrine therapy in luminal B HER2 negative and node-positive breast cancer. Breast. 2014;23:69–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Haybittle JL, Blamey RW, Elston CW, Johnson J, Doyle PJ, Campbell FC, et al. A prognostic index in primary breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 1982;45:361–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Blamey RW, Ellis IO, Pinder SE, Lee AH, Macmillan RD, Morgan DA, et al. Survival of invasive breast cancer according to the Nottingham Prognostic Index in cases diagnosed in 1990–1999. Eur J Cancer. 2007;43:1548–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Galea MH, Blamey RW, Elston CE, Ellis IO. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1992;22:207–19.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Balslev I, Axelsson CK, Zedeler K, Rasmussen BB, Carstensen B, Mouridsen HT. The Nottingham Prognostic Index applied to 9,149 patients from the studies of the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1994;32:281–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. D’Eredita G, Giardina C, Martellotta M, Natale T, Ferrarese F. Prognostic factors in breast cancer: the predictive value of the Nottingham Prognostic Index in patients with a long-term follow-up that were treated in a single institution. Eur J Cancer. 2001;37:591–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rostgaard K, Mouridsen HT, Vaeth M, Holst H, Olesen KP, Lynge E. A modified Nottingham prognostic index for breast cancer patients diagnosed in Denmark 1978–1994. Acta Oncol. 2001;40:838–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Malmstrom P, Bendahl PO, Boiesen P, Brunner N, Idvall I, Ferno M, et al. S-phase fraction and urokinase plasminogen activator are better markers for distant recurrences than Nottingham Prognostic Index and histologic grade in a prospective study of premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:2010–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Callagy GM, Pharoah PD, Pinder SE, Hsu FD, Nielsen TO, Ragaz J, et al. Bcl-2 is a prognostic marker in breast cancer independently of the Nottingham Prognostic Index. Clin Cancer Res. 2006;12:2468–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Van Belle V, Van Calster B, Brouckaert O, Vanden Bempt I, Pintens S, Harvey V, et al. Qualitative assessment of the progesterone receptor and HER2 improves the Nottingham Prognostic Index up to 5 years after breast cancer diagnosis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:4129–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Rakha EA, Soria D, Green AR, Lemetre C, Powe DG, Nolan CC, et al. Nottingham Prognostic Index Plus (NPI+): a modern clinical decision making tool in breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2014;110:1688–97.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Beresford MJ, Wilson GD, Makris A. Measuring proliferation in breast cancer: practicalities and applications. Breast Cancer Res BCR. 2006;8:216.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, Gao D, Leung S, Snider J, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:736–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Polley MY, Leung SC, McShane LM, Gao D, Hugh JC, Mastropasqua MG, et al. An international Ki67 reproducibility study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:1897–906.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. de Azambuja E, Cardoso F, de Castro G Jr, Colozza M, Mano MS, Durbecq V, et al. Ki-67 as prognostic marker in early breast cancer: a meta-analysis of published studies involving 12,155 patients. Br J Cancer. 2007;96:1504–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Hao S, He ZX, Yu KD, Yang WT, Shao ZM. New insights into the prognostic value of Ki-67 labeling index in patients with triple-negative breast cancer. Oncotarget. 2016;7:24824–31.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Wolff AC, Mangu PB, Temin S. American society of clinical oncology/college of american pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Oncol Pract Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2010;6:195–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Elston CW, Ellis IO. 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. 1991;19:403–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Yanagawa M, Ikemot K, Kawauchi S, Furuya T, Yamamoto S, Oka M, et al. Luminal A and luminal B (HER2 negative) subtypes of breast cancer consist of a mixture of tumors with different genotype. BMC Res Notes. 2012;5:376.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, Hortobagyi GN, Livingston RB, Yeh IT, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:55–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, Kim C, Baker J, Kim W, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3726–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Cardoso F, van’t Veer LJ, Bogaerts J, Slaets L, Viale G, Delaloge S, et al. 70-Gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375:717–29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Prat A, Cheang MC, Martin M, Parker JS, Carrasco E, Caballero R, et al. Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor-positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined luminal A breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31:203–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Perou CM, Jeffrey SS, van de Rijn M, Rees CA, Eisen MB, Ross DT, et al. Distinctive gene expression patterns in human mammary epithelial cells and breast cancers. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96:9212–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Wirapati P, Sotiriou C, Kunkel S, Farmer P, Pradervand S, Haibe-Kains B, et al. Meta-analysis of gene expression profiles in breast cancer: toward a unified understanding of breast cancer subtyping and prognosis signatures. Breast Cancer Res BCR. 2008;10:R65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: the next generation. Cell. 2011;144:646–74.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bullwinkel J, Baron-Luhr B, Ludemann A, Wohlenberg C, Gerdes J, Scholzen T. Ki-67 protein is associated with ribosomal RNA transcription in quiescent and proliferating cells. J Cell Physiol. 2006;206:624–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Nemoto T, Vana J, Bedwani RN, Baker HW, McGregor FH, Murphy GP. Management and survival of female breast cancer: results of a national survey by the American College of Surgeons. Cancer. 1980;45:2917–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Viale G, Regan MM, Mastropasqua MG, Maffini F, Maiorano E, Colleoni M, et al. Predictive value of tumor Ki-67 expression in two randomized trials of adjuvant chemoendocrine therapy for node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:207–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hugh J, Hanson J, Cheang MC, Nielsen TO, Perou CM, Dumontet C, et al. Breast cancer subtypes and response to docetaxel in node-positive breast cancer: use of an immunohistochemical definition in the BCIRG 001 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1168–76.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Penault-Llorca F, Andre F, Sagan C, Lacroix-Triki M, Denoux Y, Verriele V, et al. Ki67 expression and docetaxel efficacy in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2809–15.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Bardou VJ, Arpino G, Elledge RM, Osborne CK, Clark GM. Progesterone receptor status significantly improves outcome prediction over estrogen receptor status alone for adjuvant endocrine therapy in two large breast cancer databases. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1973–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cui X, Schiff R, Arpino G, Osborne CK, Lee AV. Biology of progesterone receptor loss in breast cancer and its implications for endocrine therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7721–35.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Osborne CK, Shou J, Massarweh S, Schiff R. Crosstalk between estrogen receptor and growth factor receptor pathways as a cause for endocrine therapy resistance in breast cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005;11:865 s–70 s.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  49. Zhang Y, Su H, Rahimi M, Tochihara R, Tang C. EGFRvIII-induced estrogen-independence, tamoxifen-resistance phenotype correlates with PgR expression and modulation of apoptotic molecules in breast cancer. Int J Cancer. 2009;125:2021–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Miller TW, Balko JM, Arteaga CL. Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase and antiestrogen resistance in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4452–61.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Baselga J, Semiglazov V, van Dam P, Manikhas A, Bellet M, Mayordomo J, et al. Phase II randomized study of neoadjuvant everolimus plus letrozole compared with placebo plus letrozole in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2630–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Schmid P, Pinder SE, Wheatley D, Macaskill J, Zammit C, Hu J, et al. Phase II randomized preoperative window-of-opportunity study of the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib plus anastrozole compared with anastrozole alone in patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:1987–94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Partridge AH, Hughes ME, Warner ET, Ottesen RA, Wong YN, Edge SB, et al. Subtype-dependent relationship between young age at diagnosis and breast cancer survival. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:3308–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank all the doctors of the Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery of First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University for providing the necessary information required for our study. Without their help, this article would not have been possible. This study was supported by the Key Project of Science and Technology Innovation Team of Zhejiang Province (2013TD10) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Number 81372380).

Author information

Author notes

  1. Chuanmeng Pan and Adheesh Bhandari contributed equally.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, The Second Affiliated Hospital and Yuying Children’s Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, 325000, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China

    Chuanmeng Pan

  2. Department of Thyroid and Breast Surgery, The First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Nanbai Xiang Street, Wenzhou, 325000, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China

    Adheesh Bhandari, Yehuan Liu, Erjie Xia, Lizhi Lin, Shixu Lv & Ouchen Wang

Authors
  1. Chuanmeng Pan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Adheesh Bhandari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yehuan Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Erjie Xia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lizhi Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Shixu Lv
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Ouchen Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Shixu Lv or Ouchen Wang.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study was subject to approval by the Ethics Committee Board of the First Affiliated Hospital of Wenzhou Medical University, Wenzhou, Zhejiang, People’s Republic of China.

Consent for publication

Written informed consent was issued by the patients for the publication of this study. A copy of the written consent is ready for review by the Editor in Chief of this journal.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pan, C., Bhandari, A., Liu, Y. et al. KLP-PI: a new prognostic index for luminal B HER-2-negative breast cancer. Human Cell 32, 172–184 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13577-018-00229-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13577-018-00229-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation