Breast Cancer Staging: Predicting Outcome and Response to Treatment

  • Stephen B. Edge
  • Robert W. Carlson


A cornerstone of clinical oncology is estimating the risks of cancer recurrence and death, and the likelihood that treatment will reduce these risks. This information is central to treatment decisions and is critical for helping patients put their cancer and treatment in the proper perspective. Many factors impact these risks. These are codified at the time of diagnosis using so-called “staging systems.” Traditional staging systems only account for the anatomic extent of disease. However, it is increasingly understood that the biologic behavior of cancer may be quantified through examination of other nonanatomic characteristics. A limited number of these characteristics can be reliably measured and have been validated for use in outcome prediction. In the future, these factors will have an increasing role in supplementing, and perhaps supplanting, anatomic extent of disease in outcome and treatment response prediction. Algorithms beyond the anatomic systems to apply these characteristics of cancers to specific cancer types and situations are under active development.


Breast Cancer Sentinel Node Biopsy National Comprehensive Cancer Network Inflammatory Breast Cancer Stage Group 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, Fritz A, Balch CM, Haller DG, et al., editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed. New York: Springer; 2002.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Sobin LH, Wittekind C, editors. TNM classification of malignant tumours. 6th ed. Hoboken: Wiley; 2002.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carlson RW, Anderson BO, Burstein HJ, Carter WB, Edge SB, Farrar WB, et al. Invasive breast cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2007;5(3):246–312.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    American Joint Committee on Cancer – Last accessed 10 May 2008.
  5. 5.
    Güth U, Jane Huang D, Holzgreve W, Wight E, Singer G. T4 breast cancer under closer inspection: a case for revision of the TNM classification. Breast. 2007;16(6):625–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Quiet CA, Ferguson DJ, Weichselbaum RR, et al. Natural history of node-negative breast cancer: a study of 826 patients with long-term follow-up. J Clin Oncol. 1995;13:201044–51.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Singletary SE, Cristofanilli M. Defining the diagnosis of inflammatory breast cancer. Semin Oncol. 2008;35(1):7–10.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brito RA, Valero V, Buzdar AU, Booser DJ, Ames F, Strom E, et al. Long-term results of combined-modality therapy for locally advanced breast cancer with ipsilateral supraclavicular metastases: The University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center experience. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(3):628–33.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weaver DL, Krag DN, Manna EA, Ashikaga T, Waters BL, Harlow SP, et al. Detection of occult sentinel lymph node micrometastases by immunohistochemistry in breast cancer. An NSABP protocol B-32 quality assurance study. Cancer. 2006;107(4):661–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Chagpar A, Middleton LP, Sahin AA, Meric-Bernstam F, Kuerer HM, Reig BW, et al. Clinical outcome of patients with lymph node-negative breast carcinoma who have sentinel node micrometastases detected by immunohistochemistry. Cancer. 2005;104(8):1581–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 2010.
    Tan LK, Giri D, Hummer AJ, Panageas KS, Brogi E, Norton L, et al. Occult axillary node metastases in breast cancer are prognostically significant: results in 368 node-negative patients with 20-year follow-up. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(2010):1803–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Patani N, Mokbel K. The clinical significance of sentinel lymph node micrometastasis in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;20104:393–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Wolmark N, Wang J, Mamounas E, Bryant J, Fisher B. Preoperative chemotherapy in patients with operable breast cancer: nine-year results from national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project B-18. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2001;30:96–102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jeruss JS, Mittendorf EA, Tucker SL, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Buchholz TA, et al. Combined use of clinical and pathologic staging variables to define outcomes for breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant therapy. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(2):246–52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hodul PJ, Yeatman TJ. TNM staging is obsolete. J Surg Oncol. 2007;95(1):8–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hanrahan EO, Valero V, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Hortobagyi GN. Prognosis and management of patients with node-negative invasive breast carcinoma that is 1 cm or smaller in size (stage 1; T1a, bN0M0): a review of the literature. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:220103–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Lee AHS, Elston SW, Grainge JM, Hodi Z, et al. Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(19):3153–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Colozza M, Azambuja E, Dardoso F, Sotiriou C, Larsimont D, Piccart MJ. Proliferative markers as prognostic and predictive tools in early breast cancer: where are we now? Ann Oncol. 2005;16(2010):1723–39.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hayes DF. Prognostic and predictive factors revisited. Breast. 2005;14:493–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    van’t Veer L, Paik S, Hayes DF. Gene expression profiling of breast cancer: a new tumor marker. J Clin Oncol. 2004;23:1631–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Marchionni L, Wilson RF, Wolff AC, Marinopoulos S, Parmigiani G, Bass EB, et al. Systematic review: gene expression profiling assays in early-stage breast cancer. Ann Intern Med. 2008;148(5):358–69.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, Kim C, Baker J, Wanseop K, 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.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Buyse M, Loi S, van’t Veer L, Viale G, Delorenzi M, Glas AM, et al. Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. J Natl Caner Inst. 2006;98(17):201083–92.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pustztai L. Current status of prognostic profiling in breast cancer. Oncologist. 2008;13(4): 350–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, Dressler LG, Cowan D, Conway K, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA. 2006;295(21): 2492–502.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Sloan-Kettering Prediction Tools. Last accessed 13 May 2008.
  27. 27.
    Olivotto IA, Bajkik CD, Ravdin PM, Speers CH, Coldman AJ, Norris BD, et al. Population-based validation of the prognostic model adjuvant! For early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(12):2716–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Peele PB, Siminoff LA, Xu Y, Ravdin PM. Decreased use of adjuvant breast cancer therapy in a randomized controlled trial of a decision aid with individualized risk information. Med Decis Making. 2005;25(3):301–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29. Last accessed 13 May 2008.

Additional Suggested Reading

  1. Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, et al. Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2002;20(17):3628–36.Google Scholar
  2. Woodward WA, Strom EA, Tucker SL, et al. Changes in the 2003 American Joint Committee on Cancer staging for breast cancer dramatically affect stage-specific survival. J Clin Oncol 2003;21(17):3244–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer New York 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Surgical OncologyRoswell Park Cancer Institute, University of BuffaloBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations