免疫组织化学诊断标准对基底细胞样型乳腺癌预后分析的影响

目的 探讨不同的免疫组织化学(IHC)诊断标准对基底细胞样型乳腺癌(BLBC)预后分析的影响及意义.方法 收集1996-2002年并有5年以上随访资料的浸润性乳腺癌284例,IHC检测ER、PR、HER2、CK5/6、CK14、表皮生长因子受体(EGFR)的表达,按照Nielsen标准ER-/HER2-,CK5/6+和(或)EGFR+]、Kim标准ER-/PR-/HER2-,CK5/6+和(或)CK14+和(或)EGFR+]、基底样CK标准CK5/6+和(或)CK14+]、三阴性标准ER-/PR-/HER2-]标准分型并比较其5年生存率.结果 在4种标准下,284例浸润性乳腺癌中BLBC的发病率分别为15.5%(44例)、14.8%(42例)、43.3%(123例)、21.1%(60例);复发率分别为18.2%(8/44)、21.4%(9/42)、10.6%(13/123)、11.7%(7/60),均明显高于其他亚型,但仅在Nielsen和Kim标准中之BLBC型的复发率与其他型差异有统计学意义.Nielsen和三阴性标准中BLBC型之5年无病生存率(均P<0.01)和5年总生存率(P<0.05和0.01)显著低于腺腔A型;Kim标准中BLBC型5年无病生存率显著低于腺腔A型(P<0.01),但5年总生存率与其他分型差异无统计学意义;基底样CK标准的BLBC型与非BLBC型之5年生存率差异无统计学意义.结论 在不同的IHC诊断标准下BLBC均呈高复发和预后差的趋势,但不同的分型标准影响其预后分析结果 ,相对完善、统一的诊断标准是亟待解决的问题.

Roles of immunohistochemistry In prognostic assessment of basal-like breast cancer

Objectives Basal cell-like breast cancer is one of the subtypes using molecular typing, and this subtype attracted a wide spread attention. Currently, no uniform diagnostic criteria are available. Most studies demonstrated poor outcomes, but contradictory conclusions appeared recently. The prognosis of basal cell-like breast cancer using different immunohistochemical criteria were analysed. Methods Two hundred and eighty-four invasive breast cancers with a follow-up information over 5 years were evaluated for ER, PR, HER2, CK5/6, CK14, EGFR expression on tissue microarray immunohistochemically. Based on the results, these cases using four different diagnostic criteria were categorized, namely: Nielsen (ER-/HER2-, CK5/6+ and/or EGFR+), Kim (ER-/PR-/HER2-, CK5/6+ and/or CK14+ and/or EGFR+), Triple-negative (ER-/PR-/HER2-), and basal-CK (CK5/6+ and/or CK14+ ). 5-year survival information was compared between groups. Results The prevalence of basal cell-like breast cancer by Nielsen, Kim, Triple-negative and basal-CK were 15.5% ( 44/284 ), 14.8% ( 42/284 ), 43.3% (123/284) and 21.1% (60/284) respectively; the recurrence rates were 18.2% (8/44), 21.4% (9/42), 10.6% (13/123) and 11.7% (7/60) respectively. These were higher than recurrence rates for other subtypes, but only the differences by Nielsen's and Kim's criteria were significant. Using Nielsen's and Triple-negative's criteria, basal-like tumors showed shorter 5-year disease-free survival ( beth P<0.01) and overall survival (P <0.05 and 0.01) than luminal A subtype, using Kim's criteria, basal-like tumors showed a lower 5-year disease-free but not overall survival than luminal A subtype ( P<0.01 ) ; no significant difference was found on 5-year survival between basal-like and non-basal-like tumors when typed by basal-CK. Conclusion Basal cell-like breast cancers are more likely to show more recurrence and worse outcome, but different immunohistochemicai diagnostic criteria have an influence on their prognostic analysis, so a uniform diagnostic criteria is essential for the further study of basal-like breast cancers.