Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Molecular morphological approach to the pathological study of development and advancement of human breast cancer

  • Award Review
  • Published:
Medical Molecular Morphology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Since the concept of gene profile-based intrinsic subtypes was proposed, various studies on pathological characteristics have been performed. Particularly, triplenegative (TN) breast cancer, which is negative for all hormone receptors [estrogen receptor (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PgR) and human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2)], has been attracting attention because effects of endocrine and targeting therapies cannot be anticipated and thus selecting a treatment method is difficult. TN cancer accounts for about 10%–15% of all invasive breast cancer cases in Japanese, which is significantly lower than the incidence reported in the United States. Cytokeratin (CK) 5/6 or epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is positive in 80%, being classified as basal-like carcinoma, but it should be understood that TN breast cancer and basal-like carcinoma are not necessarily the same. Criteria for positivity judgment of ER, PgR, and HER2 were established to select treatment in cases positive for each marker, and greater importance is attached to strict accuracy control. Inversely, the level of negative findings to judge TN varies among the judgment criteria. In any case, the prognosis of TN breast cancer is poor. Pathologically, TN breast cancer shows certain morphological characteristics, such as high grade and a pushing margin, and abnormalities of BRCA1 and p53 are frequently noted. At present, as no effective therapeutic strategy has been established for TN breast cancer, further clarification of the molecular biological characteristics of such cancers is needed. In addition, the incidence of TN-type ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is low, suggesting that TN does not remain preinvasive DCIS for a prolonged period and that it transforms to invasive cancer in an early stage. Because mammary gland basal cells have characters of progenitor or stem cells that differentiate into both luminal epithelium and myoepithelial cells, these cells may be utilized for the differential diagnosis of the benignity or malignancy of intraductal lesions in routine pathological practice. As proliferation markers, such as Ki-67, and multiple gene arrays for gene signature are also utilized to select adjuvant therapy, analysis may progress further in the future.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thürlimann B, Senn HJ; 10th St. Gallen conference (2007) Progress and promise: highlights of the international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer. 2007. Ann Oncol 18: 1133–1144

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Goldhirsh A, Ingle JN, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thurlimann B, Senn H-J (2009) Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St. Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2009. Ann Oncol 20:1319–1329

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Umemura S, Kurosumi M, Moriya T, Oyama T, Arihiro K, Yamashita H, Umekita Y, Komoike Y, Shimizu C, Fukushima H, Kajiwara H, Akiyama F (2006) Immunohistochemical evaluation for hormone receptors in breast cancer. A practically useful evaluation system and handling protocol. Breast Cancer 13:232–235

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Umemura S, Osamura Y, Akiyama F, Honma K, Kurosyumi M, Sasano H, Toyoshima S, Tsuda H, Rüschoff J (2008) What cause discrepancies in HER2 testing for breast cancer? Am J Clin Pathol 130:883–891

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Gown AM (2008) Current issue in ER and HER2 testing by IHC in breast cancer. Mod Pathol 21:S8–S15

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Harvey JM, Clark GM, Osborne CK, Allred DC (1999) Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligandbinding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 17:1474–1481

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ibrahim M, Dodson A, Barnett S, Fish D, Jasani B, Miller K (2008) Potential for false-positive staining with a rabbit monoclonal antibody to progesterone receptor (SP2): findings of the UK National External Quality Assessment Scheme for immunocytochemistry and FISH highlight the need for correct validation of antibodies on introduction to the laboratory. Am J Clin Pathol 129:398–409

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, Hagerty KL, Allred DC, Cote RJ, Dowsett M, Fitzgibbons PL, Hanna WM, Langer A, McShane LM, Paik S, Pegram MD, Perez EA, Press MF, Rhodes A, Sturgeon C, Taube SE, Tubbs R, Vance GH, van de Vijver M, Wheeler TM, Hayes DF, American Society of Clinical Oncology, College of American Pathologists (2007) American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 25:118–145

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H, Hastie T, Eisen MB, van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Thorsen T, Quist H, Matese JC, Brown PO, Botstein D, Eystein Lønning P, Børresen-Dale AL (2001) Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 98:10869–10874

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, Dressler LG, Cowan D, Conway K, Karaca G, Troester MA, Tse CK, Edmiston S, Deming SL, Geradts J, Cheang MC, Nielsen TO, Moorman PG, Earp HS, Millikan RC (2006) Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA 295:2492–2502

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kurebayashi J (2009) Possible treatment strategies for triplenegative breast cancer on the basis of molecular characteristics. Breast Cancer 16:275–280

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Kuroda N, Ohara M, Inoue K, Mizuno K, Fujishima N, Hamaguchi N, Lee GH (2009) The majority of triple-negative breast cancer may correspond to basal-like carcinoma, but triple-negative breast cancer is not identical to basal-like carcinoma. Med Mol Morphol 42:128–131

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kurebayashi J, Moriya T, Ishida T, Hirakawa H, Kurosumi M, Akiyama F, Kinoshita T, Takei H, Takahashi K, Ikeda M, Nakashima K (2007) The prevalence of intrinsic subtypes and prognosis in breast cancer patients of different races. Breast 16(suppl 2):S72–S77

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Iwase H, Kurebayashi J, Tsuda H, Ohta T, Kurosumi M, Miyamoto K, Yamamoto Y, Iwase T (2010) Clinicopathological analyses of triple negative breast cancer using surveillance data from the Registration Committee of the Japanese Breast Cancer Society. Breast Cancer 17:118–124

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Viale G, Bottiglieri L (2009) Pathological definition of triple negative breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 45(suppl 1):5–10

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tang P, Skinner KA, Hicks DG (2009) Molecular classification of breast carcinomas by immunohistochemical analysis. Are we ready? Diagn Mol Pathol 18:125–132.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rakha E, Reis-Filio JS (2009) Basal-like breast carcinoma. From expression profiling to routine practice. Arch Pathol Lab Med 133:860–868

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lerma E, Barnadas A, Prat J (2009) Triple negative breast carcinomas. Similarities and differences with basal like carcinomas. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol 17:483–494

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Oluwole F, I-Tien Y (2007) Basal-like breast cancers. Pathol Case Rev 12:143–153

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Kuroda N, Fujishima N, Inoue K, Ohara M, Hirouchi T, Mizuno K, Hayashi Y, Lee GH (2008) Basal-like carcinoma of the breast: further evidence of the possibility that most metaplastic carcinomas may be actually basal-like carcinomas. Med Mol Morphol 41:117–120

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Chen MH, Yip GW, Tse GM, Moriya T, Lui PC, Zin ML, Bay BH, Tan PH (2008) Expression of basal keratins and vimentin in breast cancers of young women correlates with adverse pathologic parameters. Mod Pathol 21:1183–1191

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Yamamoto Y, Ibusuki M, Nakano M, Kawasoe T, Hiki R, Iwase H (2009) Clinical significance of basal-like subtype in triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer 16:260–267

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Dawson SJ, Provenzano E, Caldas C (2009) Triple negative breast cancers: clinical and prognostic implications. Eur J Cancer 45(suppl 1):27–40

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. James CR, Quinn JE, Mullan PB, Johnston PG, Harkin DP (2007) BRCA1, a potential predictive biomarker in the treatment of breast cancer. Oncologist 12:142–150

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Raica M, Jung I, Cîmpean AM, Suciu C, Mureşan AM (2009) From conventional pathologic diagnosis to the molecular classification of breast carcinoma: are we ready for the change? Rom J Morphol Embryol 50:5–13

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Nishimura R, Arima N (2008) Is triple negative a prognostic factor in breast cancer? Breast Cancer 15:303–308

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Boecker W, Moll R, Dervan P, Buerger H, Poremba C, Diallo RI, Herbst H, Schmidt A, Lench MM, Buchwalow IB (2002) Usual ductal hyperplasia of the breast is a committed stem (progenitor) cell lesion distinct from atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ. J Pathol 198:458–467

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Tan PH, Aw MY, Yip G, Bay BH, Sii LH, Murugaya S, Tse GM (2005) Cytokeratins in papillary lesions of the breast. Is there a role in distinguishing intraductal papilloma from papillary ductal carcinoma in situ? Am J Surg Pathol 29:625–632

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Moriya T, Kasajima A, Ishida K, Kariya Y, Akahira J, Endoh M, Watanabe M, Sasano H (2006) New trends of immunohistochemistry for making differential diagnosis of breast lesions. Med Mol Morphol 39:8–13

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Moriya T, Kozuka Y, Kanomata N, Tse GM, Tan PH (2009) The role of immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of breast lesions. Pathology 41:68–76

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Moriya T, Silverberg SG (1994) Intraductal carcinoma (ductal carcinoma in situ) of the breast. A comparison of pure noninvasive tumors with those including different proportions of infiltrating carcinoma. Cancer (Phila) 74:2972–2978

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Brandt SM, Young GQ, Hoda SA (2008) The “Rosen Triad”: tubular carcinoma, lobular carcinoma in situ, and columnar cell lesions. Adv Anat Pathol 15:140–146

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, Kawasaki Medical School, 577 Matsushima, Kurashiki, 701-0192, Japan

    Takuya Moriya, Naoki Kanomata & Yuji Kozuka

  2. Department of Surgery, Tohoku Kousai Hospital, Sendai, Japan

    Hisashi Hirakawa

  3. Department of Surgery, Kita-Fukushima Medical Center, Date, Japan

    Izo Kimijima

  4. Izumi Chuo Breast Clinic, Sendai, Japan

    Michio Kimura

  5. Department of Pathology, Tohoku University Hospital, Sendai, Japan

    Mika Watanabe & Hironobu Sasano

  6. Department of Surgery, Tohoku University Hospital, Sendai, Japan

    Takanori Ishida & Noriaki Ohuchi

  7. Department of Breast and Thyroid Surgery, Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Japan

    Jun-ichi Kurebayashi & Hiroshi Sonoo

Authors
  1. Takuya Moriya
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Naoki Kanomata
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yuji Kozuka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hisashi Hirakawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Izo Kimijima
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Michio Kimura
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Mika Watanabe
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Hironobu Sasano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Takanori Ishida
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Noriaki Ohuchi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Jun-ichi Kurebayashi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Hiroshi Sonoo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Takuya Moriya.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Moriya, T., Kanomata, N., Kozuka, Y. et al. Molecular morphological approach to the pathological study of development and advancement of human breast cancer. Med Mol Morphol 43, 67–73 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00795-010-0504-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00795-010-0504-5

Key words

Search

Navigation