Abstract

Background and Aims: Breast cancer with morphological classification has limitation with similar clinical and histological features behave differently regarding prognosis and therapy response. Hence the molecular classification has been introduced to predict the clinical outcome. The aim of this study were to classify breast cancer into various molecular subtypes using surrogate IHC biomarkers such as ER, PR, Her2/neu and to find the correlation of each subtype with clinicopathological features.

Materials and Methods: A total one hundred and twelve cases were enrolled in the study. The surgical specimens were evaluated histopathologycally; Suitable block was subjected for immunostain (ER, PR and Her2/neu). Based on their expression status molecular phenotyping was done.

Statistical Analysis Used: All the data were analysed with chi square test by SPSS Statistics Version 23.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp software.

Results: The mean age of the patient was 51.11 ± 12 years. Most common histological type was invasive ductal carcinoma, no special type (84.8%). Tumor size with <5 cm (68%) and left laterality (60%) being the most prevalent. Majority of cases were in Grade II and pT2 category. Molecular subtypes had following distribution: Basal like and luminal B were accounted 30% each, while luminal A and Her2/neu enriched were 20% each respectively. There was an association between tumour grade with molecular subtypes and ER, PR receptor expression status with significant p-value.

Conclusions: Incorporation of molecular subtyping into traditional histopathological reporting help in better therapeutic management and increases prognostic accuracy. In the current study Basal like presented in advanced stage of their disease.

• 1.   Eliyatkin N, Yalcin E, Zengek B, et al. (2015). Molecular classification of breast carcinoma: From traditional old fashioned way to a new age and a new way. Journal of Breast Health, 11:59–66.
• 2.   Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, et al. (2012). WHO classification of Tumours of the Breast. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. 4th ed. Lyon: IARC Press, 13–23.
• 3.   Leong S, Shen ZZ, Liu TJ, et al. (2010). Is Breast Cancer the Same Disease in Asian and Western Countries. World Journal of Surgery, 34:2308–24.
• 4.   Tiwari V, Shukla P, Gupta G. (2014). Changing trends of breast cancer awareness in young females of north India: A pilot study from a rural cancer hospital. International Journal of Medicine and Public Health, 4:62–8.
• 5.   Sinn HP, Kreipe H. (2013). A Brief Overview of the WHO Classification of Breast Tumors, 4th Edition, Focusing on Issues and Updates from the 3rd Edition. Breast Care, 8:149–54.
• 6.   Tang P, Tse GM. (2016). Immunohistochemical surrogates for molecular classification of breast carcinoma: A 2015 update. Archives of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine, 140:806–13.
• 7.   Perou CM, Sorlie T, Eisen MB. (2000). Molecular portrait of human breast tumours. Nature, 406:747–52.
• 8.   Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R. (2001). Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 98:10869–74.
• 9.   Sorlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J. (2003). Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 100:8418–23.
• 10.   Shawarby MA, Al-Tamimi DM, Ahmed A. (2013). Molecular classification of breast cancer: An overview with emphasis on ethnic variations and future perspectives. Saudi Journal of Medicine & Medical Sciences, 1.
• 11.   Akbar M, Akbar K, Naveed D. (2014). Frequency and correlation of molecular subtypes of breast cancer with clinicopathological features. Journal of Ayub Medical College Abbottabad, 26:290.
• 12.   Tiwari S, Malika R, Trichal VK, et al. (2015). Breast Cancer: Correlation of Molecular Classification with Clinicohistopathology. Scholars Journal of Applied Medical Sciences, 3:1018–26.
• 13.   Andrade AC, Junior CA, Guimaraes BD, et al. (2014). Molecular breast cancer subtypes and therapies in a public hospital of Northeastern Brazil. BMC Women’s Health, 14:110.
• 14.   Kanakarajan A, Sundaram S, et al. (2015). Clinicopathological profile and molecular classification of breast cancer: A correlative study. International Journal of Recent Trends in Science And Technology, 14:704–8.
• 15.   Nikhra P, Patel S, Taviad D, et al. (2014). Study of ER (Estrogen Receptor), PR (Progesterone Receptor) & HER-2/NEU (Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor) expression by immunohistochemistry in breast carcinoma. International Journal of Biomedical and Advance Research, 05:276–8.
• 16.   Rao C, Kishan Prasad H, Shetty J. (2013). Morphological profile and receptor status in breast carcinoma: An institutional study. Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics, 9:44.
• 17.   Widodo I, Dwianingsih E, Triningsih E, et al. (2014). Clinicopathological Features of Indonesian Breast Cancers with Different Molecular Subtypes. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 15:6109–13.
• 18.   Ambroise M, Ghosh M, Mallikarjuna VS, et al. (2011). Immunohistochemical profile of breast cancer patients at a tertiary care hospital in South India. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 12:625–9.
• 19.   Nisa A, Bhurgri Y, Raza F, et al. (2008). Comparison of ER, PR & HER-2/neu (C-erb B 2) Reactivity Pattern with Histologic Grade, Tumor Size and Lymph Node Status in Breast Cancer. Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, 9:553–6.
• 20.   Spitale A, Mazzola P, Soldini D, et al. (2009). Breast cancer classification according to immunohistochemical markers: Clinicopathologic features and short-term survival analysis in a population-based study from the South of Switzerland. Annals of Oncology, 20:628–35.