Prognostic Factors in Breast Cancer

Author:

Fitzgibbons Patrick L.12,Page David L.2,Weaver Donald2,Thor Ann D.2,Allred D. Craig2,Clark Gary M.2,Ruby Stephen G.2,O'Malley Frances2,Simpson Jean F.2,Connolly James L.2,Hayes Daniel F.2,Edge Stephen B.2,Lichter Allen2,Schnitt Stuart J.2

Affiliation:

1. Reprints: Patrick L. Fitzgibbons, MD, Department of Pathology, Good Samaritan Hospital, 1225 Wilshire Blvd, Los Angeles, CA 90017.

2. From Good Samaritan Hospital, Los Angeles, Calif (Dr Fitzgibbons); Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, Tenn (Drs Page and Simpson); University of Vermont Medical Center, Burlington, Vt (Dr Weaver); Evanston Hospital, Evanston, Ill (Dr Thor); Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Tex (Drs Allred and Clark); Palos Community Hospital, Palos Heights, Ill (Dr Ruby); Mount Sinai Hospital, T

Abstract

Abstract Background.—Under the auspices of the College of American Pathologists, a multidisciplinary group of clinicians, pathologists, and statisticians considered prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer and stratified them into categories reflecting the strength of published evidence. Materials and Methods.—Factors were ranked according to previously established College of American Pathologists categorical rankings: category I, factors proven to be of prognostic import and useful in clinical patient management; category II, factors that had been extensively studied biologically and clinically, but whose import remains to be validated in statistically robust studies; and category III, all other factors not sufficiently studied to demonstrate their prognostic value. Factors in categories I and II were considered with respect to variations in methods of analysis, interpretation of findings, reporting of data, and statistical evaluation. For each factor, detailed recommendations for improvement were made. Recommendations were based on the following aims: (1) increasing uniformity and completeness of pathologic evaluation of tumor specimens, (2) enhancing the quality of data collected about existing prognostic factors, and (3) improving patient care. Results and Conclusions.—Factors ranked in category I included TNM staging information, histologic grade, histologic type, mitotic figure counts, and hormone receptor status. Category II factors included c-erbB-2 (Her2-neu), proliferation markers, lymphatic and vascular channel invasion, and p53. Factors in category III included DNA ploidy analysis, microvessel density, epidermal growth factor receptor, transforming growth factor-α, bcl-2, pS2, and cathepsin D. This report constitutes a detailed outline of the findings and recommendations of the consensus conference group, organized according to structural guidelines as defined.

Publisher

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Subject

Medical Laboratory Technology,General Medicine,Pathology and Forensic Medicine

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3