Biomarkers for cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment response: Breast Cancer as a model
Keywords:
breast cancer, biomarkers, adjuvant chemotherapy, prognosis, predictive factors, Oncotype DX, molecular testingAbstract
Background: The management of invasive breast cancer presents significant challenges, particularly in determining which patients should receive adjuvant chemotherapy. Prognostic and predictive biomarkers play crucial roles in tailoring treatment decisions to individual patients. Aim: This article aims to explore the utility of both traditional and molecular biomarkers in optimizing therapeutic strategies for patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Methods: A comprehensive review was conducted to analyze traditional prognostic factors, including lymph node involvement, tumor size, and tumor grade, alongside emerging molecular biomarkers like Oncotype DX, MammaPrint, and others. Results: Traditional factors remain pivotal in breast cancer management, despite the emergence of molecular tests. Notably, lymph node status, tumor size, and tumor grade continue to correlate with patient outcomes. Investigational biomarkers, including circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA), are currently under evaluation for their prognostic capabilities. The Oncotype DX assay, which assesses gene expression to predict recurrence risk, has demonstrated substantial impact on clinical decision-making, leading to reduced chemotherapy use in specific patient populations. Conclusion: The integration of both traditional and molecular biomarkers is essential for personalized breast cancer management. Ongoing research is crucial for validating the clinical utility of newer biomarkers, ultimately enhancing treatment decision-making processes.
Downloads
References
Cianfrocca, M., & Goldstein, L. J. (2004). Prognostic and predictive factors in early-stage breast cancer. Oncologist, 9(6), 606-616. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.9-6-606 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.9-6-606
Donegan, W. L. (1997). Tumor-related prognostic factors for breast cancer. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, 47(1), 28-51. https://doi.org/10.3322/canjclin.47.1.28 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/canjclin.47.1.28
Carter, C. L., Allen, C., & Henson, D. E. (1989). Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer, 63(1), 181-187. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19890101)3:1<181::AID-CNCR2820630132>3.0.CO;2-B DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19890101)63:1<181::AID-CNCR2820630129>3.0.CO;2-H
Fung, F., Cornacchi, S. D., Vanniyasingam, T., Dao, D., Thabane, L., Simunovic, M., & et al. (2017). Predictors of 5-year local, regional, and distant recurrent events in a population-based cohort of breast cancer patients. American Journal of Surgery, 213(3), 418-425. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.09.004 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amjsurg.2016.03.016
Paoletti, C., & Hayes, D. F. (2014). Molecular testing in breast cancer. Annual Review of Medicine, 65, 95-110. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-med-012512-113317 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-med-070912-143853
Elston, E. W., & Ellis, I. O. (1993). Method for grading breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Pathology, 46(3), 189-190. https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.46.3.189 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/jcp.46.2.189-b
Pereira, H., Pinder, S. E., Sibbering, D. M., & et al. (1995). Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. IV: Should you be a typer or a grader? A comparative study of two histological prognostic features in operable breast carcinoma. Histopathology, 27(3), 219-226. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.1995.tb00565.x DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.1995.tb00213.x
Sundquist, M., Thorstenson, S., Brudin, L., & Nordenskjöld, B. (1999). Applying the Nottingham prognostic index to a Swedish breast cancer population. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 53(1), 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006052604545 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1006052115874
Rakha, E. A., El-Sayed, M. E., Menon, S., Green, A. R., Lee, A. H., & Ellis, I. O. (2008). Histologic grading is an independent prognostic factor in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 111(1), 121-127. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-007-9856-2 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-007-9768-4
Giuliano, A. E., Connolly, J. L., Edge, S. B., Mittendorf, E. A., Rugo, H. S., Solin, L. J., & et al. (2017). Breast cancer—major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21393 DOI: https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21393
Dalton, L. W., Page, D. L., & Dupont, W. D. (1994). Histologic grading of breast carcinoma: A reproducibility study. Cancer, 73(11), 2765-2770. https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19940601)73:11<2765::AID-CNCR2820731106>3.0.CO;2-X DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(19940601)73:11<2765::AID-CNCR2820731119>3.0.CO;2-K
Frierson Jr, H. F., Wolber, R. A., & Berean, K. W. (1995). Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. American Journal of Clinical Pathology, 103(2), 195-198. https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/103.2.195 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/ajcp/103.2.195
Robbins, P., Pinder, S., & de Klerk, N. (1995). Histological grading of breast carcinomas: A study of interobserver agreement. Human Pathology, 6(7), 873-879. https://doi.org/10.1016/0046-8177(95)90200-4 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/0046-8177(95)90010-1
Metzger Filho, O., Ignatiadis, M., & Sotiriou, C. (2011). Genomic grade index: An important tool for assessing breast cancer tumor grade and prognosis. Critical Reviews in Oncology/Hematology, 77(1), 20-29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2010.02.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.critrevonc.2010.01.011
Duffy, M. J., O’Donovan, N., McDermott, E., & Crown, J. (2016). Validated biomarkers: The key to precision treatment in patients with breast cancer. Breast, 29, 192-201. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2016.01.003 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2016.07.009
Duffy, M. J., McDermott, E., & Crown, J. (2017). Use of multiparameter tests for identifying women with early breast cancer who do not need adjuvant chemotherapy. Clinical Chemistry, 63(5), 804-806. https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2017.263924 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2016.267161
Harris, L. N., Ismaila, N., McShane, L. M., Andre, F., Collyar, D. E., Gonzalez-Angulo, A. M., & et al. (2016). American Society of Clinical Oncology: Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early-stage invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 34(10), 1134-1150. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.65.4656 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.65.2289
NCCN Guidelines. (2017). Breast cancer (Version 2). Retrieved April 9, 2017, from https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf
Duffy, M. J., Harbeck, N., Nap, M., Molina, R., Nicolini, A., Senkus, E., & et al. (2017). Clinical use of biomarkers in breast cancer: Updated guidelines from the European group on tumor markers (EGTM). European Journal of Cancer, 75, 284-298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.02.007 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2017.01.017
Senkus, E., Kyriakides, S., Ohno, S., Penault-Llorca, F., Poortmans, P., Rutgers, E., & et al. (2015). Primary breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment, and follow-up. Annals of Oncology, 26(5), v8-v30. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv203 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdv298
Paik, S., Shak, S., Tang, G., Kim, C., Baker, J., Cronin, M., & et al. (2005). A multi-gene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated node-negative breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 347(25), 2817-2826. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa051319 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa041588
Markopoulos, C., van de Velde, C., Zarca, D., Ozmen, V., & Masetti, R. (2016). Clinical evidence supporting genomic tests in early breast cancer: Do all genomic tests provide the same information? European Journal of Surgical Oncology, 16(3), 30857-30865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2016.01.028
Sparano, J. A., Gray, R. J., Makower, D. F., Pritchard, K. I., Albain, K. S., Hayes, D. F., & et al. (2015). Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 373(21), 2005-2014. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1512014 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1510764
Gluz, O., Nitz, U., Christgen, M., Kates, R. E., Shak, S., Clemens, M., & et al. (2016). The WSG-ADAPT trial: A biomarker-driven clinical trial with the aim to optimize treatment of patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. Clinical Breast Cancer, 16(5), 337-348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2016.07.001 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2016.07.001
Polley, M. Y., Maughan, N. J., & et al. (2015). An independent study of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 33(14), 1555-1560. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.60.2563
Albain, K. S., Barlow, W. E., Shak, S., Hortobagyi, G. N., Livingston, R. B., Yeh, I. T., ... & Barlow, W. E. (2016). Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, estrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: A retrospective analysis of a randomized trial. Lancet Oncology, 201(11), 55-65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(09)70314-6
Rouzier, R., Pronzato, P., Chéreau, E., Carlson, J., Hunt, B., & Valentine, W. J. (2013). Multigene assays and molecular markers in breast cancer: Systematic review of health economic analyses. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 139, 621-637. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2559-1
Albanell, J., Svedman, C., Gligorov, J., Holt, S. D., Bertelli, G., Blohmer, J. U., ... & Svedman, C. (2016). Pooled analysis of prospective European studies assessing the impact of using the 21-gene Recurrence Score assay on clinical decision making in women with estrogen receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative early-stage breast cancer. European Journal of Cancer, 66, 104-113. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2016.06.027
van de Vijver, M. J., He, Y. D., van’t Veer, L. J., Dai, H., Hart, A. A., Voskouil, D. W., ... & van de Vijver, M. J. (2002). A gene expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 347, 1999-2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa021967
Buyse, M., Loi, S., van't Veer, L., Viale, G., Delorenzi, M., Glas, A. M., ... & Loi, S. (2006). Validation and clinical utility of a 70-gene prognostic signature for women with node-negative breast cancer. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 98, 1183-1192. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djj329
Bueno-de-Mesquita, J. M., van Harten, W. H., Retel, V. P., van’t Veer, L. J., van Dam, F. S., Karsenberg, K., ... & van Harten, W. H. (2007). Use of 70-gene signature to predict prognosis of patients with node-negative breast cancer: A prospective community-based feasibility study (RASTER). Lancet Oncology, 8(12), 1079-1087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70346-7
Mook, S., Schmidt, M. K., Viale, G., Pruneri, G., Eekhout, I., Floore, A., ... & van't Veer, L. J. (2009). The 70-gene prognosis-signature predicts disease outcome in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes in an independent validation study. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 116, 295-302. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-008-0130-2
Drukker, C. A., Bueno-de-Mesquita, J. M., Retèl, V. P., van Harten, W. H., van Tinteren, H., Wesseling, J., ... & van der Vijver, M. J. (2013). A prospective evaluation of a breast cancer prognosis signature in the observational RASTER study. International Journal of Cancer, 133, 929-936. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.28082
Knauer, M., Mook, S., Rutgers, E. J., ... & Rutgers, E. J. (2010). The predictive value of the 70-gene signature for adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 120, 655-661. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-010-0814-2
Cardoso, F., van’t Veer, L. J., Bogaert, J., Slaets, L., Viale, G., Delalog, S., ... & Cardoso, F. (2016). On behalf of the European Commission supported TRANSBIG consortium and MINDACT investigators: The 70-gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early breast cancer. New England Journal of Medicine, 375, 717-729. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1602253
Exner, R., Bago-Horvath, Z., Bartsch, R., Mittlboeck, M., Retèl, V. P., Fitzal, F., ... & Bartsch, R. (2014). The multigene signature MammaPrint impacts on multidisciplinary team decisions in ER+, HER2- early breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer, 111, 837-845. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2014.339
Seguí, M. Á., Crespo, C., Cortés, J., Lluch, A., Brosa, M., Becerra, V., ... & Crespo, C. (2014). Genomic profile of breast cancer: Cost-effectiveness analysis from the Spanish national healthcare system perspective. Expert Review of Pharmacoeconomics & Outcomes Research, 14, 889-899. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1586/14737167.2014.957185
Pohl, H., Kotze, M. J., Grant, K. A., van der Merwe, L., Pienaar, F. M., Apffelstaedt, J. P., ... & Pohl, H. (2016). Impact of MammaPrint on clinical decision-making in South African patients with early-stage breast cancer. Breast Journal, 22, 442-446. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12605
Kuijer, A., Straver, M., den Dekker, B., Bommel, A. C. M., Elias, S. G., Smorenburg, C. H., ... & Kuijer, A. (2017). Impact of 70-gene signature use on adjuvant chemotherapy decisions in patients with estrogen receptor-positive early breast cancer: Results of a prospective cohort study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 35(13), JCO-2016, 10.1200/JCO.2016.70.3959. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.70.3959
Duffy, M. J., McGowan, P. M., Harbeck, N., Thomssen, C., & Schmitt, M. (2014). uPA and PAI-1 as biomarkers in breast cancer: Validated for clinical use in Level-of-Evidence-1 studies. Breast Cancer Research, 16, 428-438. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13058-014-0428-4
Janicke, F., Prechtl, A., Thomssen, C., Harbeck, N., Meisner, C., Untch, M., ... & Janicke, F. (2001). Randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial in high-risk node-negative breast cancer patients identified by urokinase-type plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 93, 913-920. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/93.12.913
Harbeck, N., Schmitt, M., Meisner, C., Friedel, C., Untch, M., Schmidt, M., ... & Harbeck, N. (2013). Ten-year analysis of the prospective multicenter Chemo-N0 trial validates American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)-recommended biomarkers uPA and PAI-1 for therapy decision making in node-negative breast cancer patients. European Journal of Cancer, 49, 1825-1835. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2013.01.007
Look, M. P., van Putten, W. L. J., Duffy, M. J., Harbeck, N., Christensen, I. J., Thomssen, C., ... & Look, M. P. (2002). Pooled analysis of prognostic impact of tumor biological factors uPA and PAI-1 in 8377 breast cancer patients. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 94, 116-128. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/94.2.116
Jacobs, V. R., Kates, R. E., Kantelhardt, E., Vetter, M., Wuerstlein, R., Fischer, T., ... & Jacobs, V. R. (2013). Health economic impact of risk group selection according to ASCO-recommended biomarkers uPA/PAI-1 in node-negative primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 138, 839-850. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2496-z
Petrelli, F., Viale, G., Cabiddu, M., & Barni, S. (2015). Prognostic value of different cut-off levels of Ki-67 in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis of 64,196 patients. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 153, 477-491. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3559-0
Penault-Llorca, F., & Radosevic-Robin, N. (2017). Ki67 assessment in breast cancer: An update. Pathology, 49, 166-171. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2016.11.006
Cuzick, J., Dowsett, M., Pineda, S., Wale, C., Salter, J., Quinn, E., ... & Cuzick, J. (2011). Prognostic value of a combined estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, Ki-67, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 immunohistochemical score and comparison with the Genomic Health recurrence score in early breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 29, 4273-4278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.31.2835
Yeo, B., Zabaglo, L., Hills, M., Dodson, A., Smith, I., & Dowsett, M. (2015). Clinical utility of the IHC4 + score as a predictor of outcome in estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 152, 113-121. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2015.222
Dowsett, M., & Cuzick, J. (2012). The role of Ki67 in breast cancer: The evidence and clinical implications. British Journal of Cancer, 106, 1496-1502.
Liu, Y., Zhang, Y., Hu, H., Huang, Y., & Huang, L. (2022). Prognostic value of combined biomarker assessment of ER, PR, HER2, and Ki-67 in breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Oncotarget, 13, 211-225.
Klein, M. E., Dabbs, D. J., Shuai, Y., Brufsky, A. M., Jankowitz, R., Puhalla, S. L., et al. (2013). Prediction of the Oncotype DX recurrence score: Use of pathology-generated equations derived by linear regression analysis. Modern Pathology, 26, 658–664. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2013.36
Shering, S., Sherry, F., McDermott, E., O’Higgins, N., & Duffy, M. J. (1998). Preoperative CA 15-3 concentrations predict outcome in breast cancer. Cancer, 83, 2521–2527. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19981215)83:12<2521::AID-CNCR17>3.0.CO;2-A
Molina, R., Jo, J., Filella, X., Zamon, G., Palisa, J., Muñoz, M., et al. (1998). c-erbB-2 oncoprotein, CEA and CA 15-3 in patients with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 51, 109–119. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1005734429304
Ebeling, F. G., Stieber, P., Untch, M., Nagel, D., Konecny, G. E., Schmitt, U. M., et al. (2002). Serum CEA and CA 15-3 as prognostic factors in primary breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer, 22, 1217–1222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6600248
Duffy, M. J., Duggan, C., Keane, R., Hill, A. D. K., McDermott, E., & Crown, J. (2004). High preoperative CA 15-3 concentrations predict adverse outcome in node-negative and node-positive breast cancer: Study of 600 patients with histologically confirmed breast cancer. Clinical Chemistry, 50, 559–563. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2003.025288
Molina, R., Auge, J. M., Farrus, B., Zanón, G., Pahisa, J., Muñoz, M., et al. (2010). Prospective evaluation of carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and carbohydrate antigen 15.3 (CA 15.3) in patients with primary locoregional breast cancer. Clinical Chemistry, 56, 1148–1157. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1373/clinchem.2009.135566
Ahn, S. K., Moon, H. G., Ko, E., Kim, H. S., Shin, H. C., Kim, J., et al. (2013). Preoperative serum tissue polypeptide-specific antigen is a valuable prognostic marker in breast cancer. International Journal of Cancer, 132, 875–881. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.27727
Barak, V., Goike, H., Panaretakis, K. W., & Einarsson, R. (2004). Clinical utility of cytokeratins as tumor markers. Clinical Biochemistry, 37, 529–540. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clinbiochem.2004.05.009
Colleoni, M., & Montagna, E. (2012). Neoadjuvant therapy for ER-positive breast cancers. Annals of Oncology, 23(Suppl. 10), x243–x248. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mds305
Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Davies, C., Godwin, J., Gray, R., Clarke, M., Cutter, D., Darby, S., et al. (2011). Relevance of breast cancer hormone receptors and other factors to the efficacy of adjuvant tamoxifen: Patient-level meta-analysis of randomised trials. Lancet, 378, 771–784. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60993-8
McGuire, W. L., Carbone, P. P., Sears, M. E., & Escher, G. C. (1975). Estrogen receptors in human breast cancer: An overview. In W. L. McGuire, P. P. Carbone, & E. P. Vollner (Eds.), Estrogen receptors in human breast cancer (pp. 1–8). Raven Press.
Carroll, J. S. (2016). Mechanisms of oestrogen receptor (ER) gene regulation in breast cancer. European Journal of Endocrinology, 175, R41–R49. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1530/EJE-16-0124
Horwitz, K. B., & McGuire, W. L. (1975). Predicting response to endocrine therapy in human breast cancer: A hypothesis. Science, 189, 726–727. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.168640
Mohammed, H., Russell, I. A., Stark, R., Rueda, O. M., Hickey, T. E., Tarulli, G. A., et al. (2015). Progesterone receptor modulates ERα action in breast cancer. Nature, 523, 313–317. Erratum in: Nature, 526, 144. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nature14583
Carroll, J. S., Hickey, T. E., Tarulli, G. A., Williams, M., & Tilley, W. D. (2017). Deciphering the divergent roles of progestogens in breast cancer. Nature Reviews Cancer, 17, 54–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc.2016.116
Ravdin, P. M., Green, S., Dorr, T. M. T., McGuire, W. L., Fabian, C., Pugh, R. P., et al. (1992). Prognostic metastatic breast cancer treated with tamoxifen: Results of a prospective Southwest oncology group study. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 10, 1284–1291. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1992.10.8.1284
Nordenskjöld, A., Fohlin, H., Fornander, T., Löfdahl, B., Skoog, L., & Stål, O. (2016). Progesterone receptor positivity is a predictor of long-term benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen treatment of estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 160, 313–322. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-4007-5
Stendahl, M., Rydén, L., Nordenskjöld, B., Jönsson, P. E., Landberg, G., & Jirström, K. (2006). High progesterone receptor expression correlates to the effect of adjuvant tamoxifen in premenopausal breast cancer patients. Clinical Cancer Research, 12, 4614–4618. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0248
Bardou, V. J., Arpino, G., Elledge, R. M., Osborne, C. K., & Clark, G. M. (2003). Progesterone receptor status significantly improves outcome prediction over estrogen receptor status alone for adjuvant endocrine therapy in two large breast cancer databases. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 21, 1973–1979. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2003.09.099
Dowsett, M., Houghton, J., Iden, C., Salter, J., Farndon, J., A’Hern, R., et al. (2006). Benefit from adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in primary breast cancer patients according to oestrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, EGF receptor, and HER2 status. Annals of Oncology, 17, 818–826. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdl016
Liu, S., Chia, S., Mehl, E., Leung, S., Rajput, A., Cheang, M. C., et al. (2010). Progesterone receptor is a significant factor associated with clinical outcome and effect of adjuvant tamoxifen therapy in breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, 119, 53–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-009-0318-0
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2018 International journal of health sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS) are available under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Authors retain copyright in their work and grant IJHS right of first publication under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles in this journal, and to use them for any other lawful purpose.
Articles published in IJHS can be copied, communicated and shared in their published form for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given to the author and the journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
This copyright notice applies to articles published in IJHS volumes 4 onwards. Please read about the copyright notices for previous volumes under Journal History.
