乳腺癌ER、PR、HER-2在原发灶及复发转移灶中表达变化

目的：探讨ER、PR及Her-2在乳腺癌原发和复发转移灶中的表达变化及其相关性。方法：免疫组化法检测45例乳腺癌原发及复发转移灶中的ER、PR及HER-2表达。结果：ER在原发灶和复发转移灶之间的变化率为66.67%（30/45）,PR总的变化率为17.78%,cerbB2癌基因蛋白总的变化率13.33%。结论：ER在乳腺癌原发灶和复发转移灶之间的表达的差异具有统计学意义（P〈0.05）。PR及cerbB2癌基因蛋白的表达在原发灶和复发转移灶之间差异无显著性（P〉0.05）。     

乳腺癌ER、PR、HER-2在原发灶及复发转移灶中表达变化

目的:探讨ER、PR及Her-2在乳腺癌原发和复发转移灶中的表达变化及其相关性。方法:免疫组化法检测45例乳腺癌原发及复发转移灶中的ER、PR及HER-2表达。结果:ER在原发灶和复发转移灶之间的变化率为66.67%(30/45),PR总的变化率为17.78%,cerbB2癌基因蛋白总的变化率13.33%。结论:ER在乳腺癌原发灶和复发转移灶之间的表达的差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05)。PR及cerbB2癌基因蛋白的表达在原发灶和复发转移灶之间差异无显著性(P>0.05)。     

激素受体及HER-2在乳腺癌原发灶及复发灶中表达差异及意义

目的探讨ER、PR及HER-2癌基因蛋白在乳腺癌原发灶及复发灶中的表达差异及其临床意义。方法采用免疫组织化学,检测30例乳腺癌原发灶及复发灶中ER、PR及HER2表达。结果 30例复发性乳腺癌患者中,ER由阳性转为阴性率为66.7%(n=12),阴性转为阳性率为41.7%(n=5),总的变化率为56.7%(17/30);PR由阳性转为阴性率为68.8%(n=11),阴性转为阳性率为28.6%(n=4),PR总的变化率为50.0%(15/30);HER-2由阳性转为阴性率为25.0%(n=2),阴性转为阳性率为13.3%(n=4),HER-2总的变化率为20.0%(n=6)。结论 ER、PR及HER-2癌基因蛋白在乳腺癌原发灶和复发灶中的表达存在差异。     

乳腺癌原发灶和淋巴结转移灶激素受体及HER-2与Ki-67表达相关性分析

目的:探讨雌激素受体(estrogen receptor,ER)和孕激素受体(progestin receptor,PR)与表皮生长因子受体(hu-man epidermal growth factor,HER-2)及Ki-67在乳腺癌原发灶与淋巴结转移灶组织的表达,及ER、PR、HER-2与Ki-67表达之间的相关性。方法:2012-01-2012-09在山东省肿瘤医院行手术治疗且术后病理确诊伴有同侧腋窝淋巴结转移的乳腺癌患者83例,采用免疫组织化学法同时检测原发灶和淋巴结转移灶ER、PR、HER-2与Ki-67的表达。结果:83例乳腺癌患者中,ER在原发灶与转移灶表达一致71例,一致率为85.5%,变化率为14.5%。ER在原发灶与转移灶之间的表达差异有统计学意义,P=0.039。PR在原发灶与转移灶表达一致75例,一致率为90.4%,变化率为9.6%。PR在原发灶与转移灶之间的表达差异无统计学意义,P=0.289。HER-2在原发灶与转移灶表达一致74例,一致率为89.2%,变化率为10.8%。HER-2在原发灶与转移灶之间的表达差异无统计学意义,P=0.180。原发灶Ki-67高表达和转移灶Ki-67低表达与ER表达相关,P=0.031;Ki-67在原发灶与转移灶的表达水平与PR和HER-2表达无关,P>0.05。结论:乳腺癌原发灶Ki-67高表达和转移灶Ki-67低表达与ER表达相关。尽管原发灶与淋巴结转移灶具有较高一致性,但是仍有约10%的患者表达存在差异。有必要同时检测乳腺癌患者原发灶和淋巴结转移灶,为部分患者提供新的治疗思路。     

乳腺癌原发灶与复发转移灶中 ER、PR、HER-2的表达变化

目的:探讨乳腺癌原发灶与复发转移灶中雌激素受体（ER）、孕激素受体（PR）、人类表皮生长因子受体2（HER-2）的表达变化。方法:采用免疫组化EnVision两步法检测68例乳腺癌原发灶与对应的复发转移灶中ER、PR、HER-2的表达。结果:ER、PR、HER-2在复发转移灶中的阳性率分别为26.47%、39.71%、33.82%,较原发灶中(58.82%、55.88%、36.76%)明显降低。其中ER的变化有统计学差异（P<0.05）,PR、HER-2的变化无统计学差异（P>0.05）。结论:乳腺癌复发转移灶中ER、PR、HER-2的表达均降低。对于复发转移的乳腺癌患者应重新检测ER、PR、HER-2。     

乳腺癌原发灶与复发转移灶间ER、PR、HER-2、COX-2表达差异分析

[目的]回顾性分析乳腺癌原发灶与转移灶中ER、PR、HER-2、COX-2表达的情况及临床意义。[方法]应用免疫组化的方法,检测了50例乳腺癌转移患者的ER、PR、HER-2、COX-2在原发灶与复发转移灶中的表达。[结果]乳腺癌原发灶与复发转移灶中ER阳性表达分别为70%和38%,有显著性差异(P=0.002)。PR、HER-2、COX-2在乳腺癌原发灶与复发转移灶中的表达差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。原发灶与转移灶中HER-2与COX-2表达呈相关性(P<0.05)。[结论]乳腺癌原发灶和转移灶中ER、PR、HER-2、COX-2表达不一致,需根据转移灶受体的表达情况决定治疗方案。     

乳腺癌原发灶与腋淋巴结转移灶ER和PR及c-erbB-2表达的对照研究

目的:研究雌激素受体(ER)、孕激素受体(PR)和c-erbB-2在乳腺癌原发灶和同期腋淋巴结转移灶之间的表达差异。方法:免疫组织化学方法检测60例初治单侧乳腺癌同期腋窝淋巴结转移手术治疗患者ER、PR和c-erbB-2在原发灶及腋淋巴结转移灶的表达差异。结果:ER在乳腺癌原发灶中的阳性率为56.7%(34/60),腋淋巴结转移灶中为48.3%(29/60);PR在乳腺癌原发灶中的阳性率为55.0%(33/60),腋淋巴结转移灶为48.3%(29/60);c-erbB-2在乳腺癌原发灶中的阳性率为26.7%(16/60),腋淋巴结转移灶为28.3%(17/60);ER、PR和c-erbB-2的阳性率在两者之间的差异均无统计学意义。ER在原发灶和腋窝淋巴结转移灶之间总的变化率为21.7%(13/60),PR为16.7%(10/60),c-erbB-2为15.0%(9/60)。结论:ER、PR和c-erbB-2的表达在乳腺癌原发灶和腋窝淋巴结转移灶之间存在不一致现象,但无统计学意义。判断乳腺癌的预后要综合考虑其原发灶和转移灶的生物学特性。     

乳腺癌患者原发灶与复发转移灶中ER、PR、HER-2及Ki-67表达异质性的回顾性分析

目的:探讨ER、PR、HER-2及Ki-67在乳腺癌患者原发灶及复发转移灶中的表达差异,并分析其对乳腺癌患者预后的影响。方法:统计2012年01月01日2021年12月31日我院肿瘤科收治的复发转移性乳腺癌患者,除外病理及临床资料缺失的患者后,共计89例患者纳入本研究。采用回顾性队列研究方法,比较乳腺癌原发灶及复发转移灶中ER、PR、HER-2及Ki-67的表达差异。结果:本研究纳入患者的平均年龄为53.14岁(20~84岁)。其中有34例患者接受术前新辅助治疗,所有患者均行乳腺癌根治术或改良根治术,并进行了相应的术后辅助治疗。乳腺癌原发灶中ER及PR阳性表达率均高于转移灶;而HER-2阳性及Ki-67高表达的情况在转移灶中更常见。乳腺癌原发灶与复发转移灶中ER、PR、HER-2、Ki-67表达差异比例分别为:24.72%、42.70%、11.24%、13.48%。乳腺癌原发灶及转移灶中ER、PR表达的异质性与患者无病生存期相关。结论:乳腺癌患者的ER、PR、HER-2和Ki-67表达状态在原发灶与复发转移灶中存在一定的异质性,进而影响患者的治疗策略及预后。     

乳腺癌原发灶与转移灶内ER、PR、Her-2表达的差异及其对治疗的影响

目的:探索ER、PR、Her-2在乳腺癌原发灶及转移灶内表达的差异,及其对治疗的影响。方法:用IHC方法对44例有淋巴结或者远处转移灶或者局部复发的乳腺癌患者原发灶及转移灶标本配对进行ER、PR、Her-2检测,然后分别计算二者表型的表达率以及变化率,并根据原发灶及转移灶ER、PR、Her-2表达的情况调整治疗方案用于临床治疗。结果:44例乳腺癌组织的ER、PR、Her-2在原发灶的阳性表达率分别为68.2%、61.4%、18.2%,而在转移灶中的阳性表达率分别为65.9%、63.6%、9.1%,三者在原发灶及转移灶中的阳性表达率差异均无显著统计学意义。 ER、PR、Her-2在原发灶与转移灶间的总变化率分别为:25.0%（11例）、27.3%（12例）、9.1%（4例）。44例乳腺癌患者中,内分泌治疗增加12例,占比27.3%。结论:由于ER、PR、Her-2在乳腺癌原发灶与转移灶间的表达存在一定的差异,因此,对复发转移灶的受体再检查是必要的,并根据原发灶及转移灶的受体表达情况综合考虑治疗方案。     

乳腺癌原发灶与转移灶分子分型指标表达差异的研究

目的 乳腺癌患者激素受体(hormone receptor,HR)、人类表皮生长因子受体2(human epidermal growth factor receptor 2,HER2)和增殖细胞核抗原Ki-67的表达状态直接影响治疗方案的制订.本研究通过比较可手术乳腺癌原发灶与腋窝淋巴结转移灶及治疗后远处转移灶之间HR、HER2和Ki-67表达状况,探讨其表达的一致性,以期为乳腺癌患者综合治疗方案的制订提供参考.方法 选取2015-03-01-2016-04-30就诊于山东大学附属山东省肿瘤医院(162例)和梁山县人民医院(23例)的185例乳腺癌患者作为研究对象.患者均为女性,年龄24～79岁,中位年龄49岁.浸润性导管癌171例,浸润性小叶癌14例.初治直接接受手术治疗患者110例,其中有腋窝淋巴结转移77例;复发转移患者接受转移灶穿刺患者75例,其中肝脏转移43例,肺脏转移32例.所有标本均检测ER、PR、HER2和Ki-67表达,比较原发灶与腋窝淋巴结及远处转移灶的表达情况.结果 原发灶与腋窝淋巴结转移灶ER、PR、HER2和Ki-67表达差异均无统计学意义(均P＞0.05),ER变化率为3.9％,PR为7.8％,HER2为11.7％,Ki-67为20.8％.原发灶与远处转移灶比较,PR和Ki-67表达差异有统计学意义(均P值＜0.05),而ER和HER2表达差异无统计学意义(均P＞0.05),ER变化率为21.3％,PR为29.3％,HER2为18.7％,Ki-67为29.3％.结论 乳腺癌原发灶与转移腋窝淋巴结ER、PR、HER2和Ki-67表达状况一致性较高;原发灶与远处转移灶PR和Ki-67的表达存在差异,ER和HER2的表达无差异,这可能受多种因素的影响,建议对原发灶及转移灶同时进行生物学信息的检测,为患者制订治疗方案提供可靠的生物学信息.     

细针穿刺检测乳腺癌原发灶和转移灶ER、PR及C-erbB-2受体表达差异的意义

目的 探讨细针穿刺检测乳腺癌原发灶和转移灶雌激素受体(ER)、孕激素受体(PR)及C-erbB-2受体表达差异的意义.方法用细针穿刺检测60例乳腺癌原发灶和转移灶ER、PR及C-erbB-2受体表达情况,同时对其中28例乳腺癌原发灶ER、PR及CerbB-2受体表达的术后检测结果进行了对照分析.结果28例乳腺癌原发灶的...     

The Case to Case Comparison of Hormone Receptors and HER2 Status between Primary Breast Cancer and Synchronous Axillary Lymph Node Metastasis

Background: Nowadays, the adjuvant treatment for breast cancer patients chosen depends on immunohistochemical pattern of Estrogen receptor(ER), Progesterone receptor(PR) and HER2 status of primary breast tumor. Several retrospective studies showed significant discordance in receptor expression between primary and metastatic tumors. The objective of this research was to determine discordant rate of ER, PR and HER2 status between primary breast cancer and synchronous axillary lymph node metastasis of individual breast cancer patients in Thammasat University Hospital. Methods: A prospective observational study of all breast cancer patients who have axillary metastasis and underwent surgery at Thammasat Hospital between January 2011 to December 2015. Tumor staging, ER, PR, and HER2 status on primary breast tumor were recorded. Synchronous axillary lymph node metastasis was evaluated with immunohistochemistry for ER, PR, and HER2. Results: The ER-positive rate from primary tumor to synchronous axillary lymph node metastasis decreased from 74.7% to 71.7%; the HER2 overexpression rate was decreased from 26% to 24%. In contrast, PR positive rate were 71% in both primary tumor and synchronous axillary lymph node metastasis. In case to case comparison, discordance rate of ER, PR and HER2 status between primary breast cancer and synchronous axillary lymph node metastasis were 11.1%, 20.2% and 10.1%, respectively. Furthermore, the tumor staging was not significant associated with discordance of ER, PR and HER2. Conclusion: ER, PR and HER 2 biomarkers showed significant concordance between primary tumor and synchronous axillary lymph node metastasis. Hence, if we cannot assess the ER, PR and HER2 status in primary tumor, then synchronous axillary lymph node metastasis can be studied instead. However, the repeat of biomarker testing in node-positive breast cancer patients may be beneficial for tailored adjuvant therapy, especially for patients with negative hormone receptor and/or HER2 profile on primary tumor.     

Impact of metastatic estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor status on survival

Summary Hormone responsive breast cancer is usually determined by the presence of estrogen receptors (ER) or progesterone receptors (PR) on primary invasive breast cancers. Adjuvant and metastatic hormone therapy are recommended based on primary ER and PR determination. Little information is available to determine if primary hormone receptors correlate with metastatic disease and if survival is influenced by metastatic receptor status. We retrospectively compared primary to metastatic tumor ER and PR content from 200 metastatic breast cancer patients. ER and PR analyses were available in both primary and metastatic disease in 200 and 173 patients, respectively. There was a correlation between both the ER and PR in the primary and metastatic lesion (p < 0.001). However, in 60 of 200 (30%) patients, discordance between primary and metastatic ER was noted. Tumors from 68 of 173 (39.3%) showed discordance for PR. In 39 (19.5%) patients, the ER primary status was positive and metastatic status was negative and in 21 (10.5%) patients, the primary status was negative and metastatic status was positive. Survival from the time of metastatic diagnosis was calculated. Those patients with ER positive primary and metastatic tumors (Positive/Positive) or only the metastatic lesion (Negative/Positive) had similar median survival (1131 and 1111 days, respectively). However, patients with tumors that changed from positive primary to negative metastasis (Positive/Negative) experienced significantly shorter median survival (669 days, p < 0.05). Likewise, median survival (580 days) was significantly shorter for patients with primary and metastasis ER negative (Negative/Negative, p < 0.001) compared to Positive/Positive (p < 0.001) or compared to Negative/Positive (p < 0.02). The changes in PR status were not associated with a change in survival. We found a significant discordance between hormone receptor content of primary versus metastatic breast cancer. The ER status of the metastatic lesion was a better predictor of survival. Therefore, optimal metastatic treatment cannot be determined solely on primary ER and PR analysis.     

Comparative study of the immunohistochemical detection of hormone receptor status and HER-2 expression in primary and paired recurrent/metastatic lesions of patients with breast cancer

Recent studies have shown some degrees of discordance in ER, PR and HER-2 immunohistochemical expression between primary and recurrent/metastatic lesions (RML). Analysis was made on 78 patients with MBC whose ER, PR and/or HER-2 status were known both on the tissue samples of primary and RML. Among the RML sites, 29.5% were locoregional, 70.5% were distant metastatic sites. Among 75 patients with known ER expression on both primary and RML, 36% (n = 27) showed discordance on ER expression. Among 72 patients with known PR expression on both primary and RML, 54.2% (n = 39) showed discordance on PR expression. Among 61 patients with known HER-2 expression on both primary and RML, 14.7% (n = 9) showed discordance on HER-2 expression. No differences were observed when we compared patients who have discordant ER and HER-2 status with patients who have concordant results between the primary tumor and paired RML with respect to site of biopsy (locoregional vs distant metastasis) and prior therapies (chemotherapy and endocrine therapy). As these discordant results make changes in treatment decision, a biopsy of the metastatic lesion could be recommended in patients with MBC when feasible. Larger series are needed to identify the potential effect of prior therapies and site of metastasis on discordant results.