首页> 外文期刊>The oncologist >Discordance in hormone receptor status among primary, metastatic, and second primary breast cancers: Biological difference or misclassification?
【24h】

Discordance in hormone receptor status among primary, metastatic, and second primary breast cancers: Biological difference or misclassification?

机译:原发性,转移性和继发性原发性乳腺癌中激素受体状态的不一致:生物学差异还是分类错误?

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

Introduction. Discordance in hormone receptor status has been observed between two breast tumors of the same patients; however, the degree of heterogeneity is debatable with regard to whether it reflects true biological difference or the limited accuracy of receptor assays. Methods. A Bayesian misclassification correction method was applied to data on hormone receptor status of two primary breast cancers from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database between 1990 and 2010 and to data on primary breast cancerand paired recurrent/metastatic disease assembled from a meta-analysis of the literature published between 1979 and 2014. Results. The sensitivity and specificity of the estrogen receptor (ER) assay were estimated to be 0.971 and 0.920, respectively. After correcting for misclassification, the discordance in ER between two primary breast cancers was estimated to be 1.2% for synchronous ipsilateral pairs, 5.0% for synchronous contralateral pairs, 14.6% for metachronous ipsilateral pairs, and 25.0% for metachronous contralateral pairs. Technical misclassification accounted for 53%-83% of the ER discordance between synchronous primary cancers and 11%-25% of the ER discordance between metachronous cancers. The corrected discordance in ER between primary tumors and recurrent or metastatic lesions was 12.4%, and there were more positive-to-negative changes (10.1%) than negative-topositive changes (2.3%). Similar patterns were observed for progesterone receptor (PR), although the overall discordance in PR was higher. Conclusion. A considerable proportion of discordance in hormone receptor status can be attributed to misclassification in receptor assessment, although the accuracy of receptor assays was excellent. Biopsy of recurrent tumors for receptor retesting should be conducted after considering feasibility, cost, and previous ER/PR status.
机译:介绍。在同一患者的两个乳腺肿瘤之间,激素受体状态不一致。然而,关于异质性的程度是否反映出真正的生物学差异或受体测定的准确性有限,仍有待商de。方法。贝叶斯错误分类校正方法应用于1990年至2010年间来自监测,流行病学和最终结果数据库的两种原发性乳腺癌激素受体状态数据,以及根据荟萃分析汇总的原发性乳腺癌和配对的复发/转移性疾病数据1979年至2014年之间发表的文献。结果。雌激素受体(ER)分析的灵敏度和特异性分别估计为0.971和0.920。纠正错误分类后,估计两个原发性乳腺癌在同步同侧对中的ER差异为1.2%,同步对侧对为5.0%,同步对侧对为14.6%,异时对侧对为25.0%。技术错误分类占同期原发癌之间ER不一致性的53%-83%和异时癌之间ER不一致性的11%-25%。原发性肿瘤与复发或转移性病变之间的ER校正偏差为12.4%,正负变化(2.3%)比正负变化(10.1%)多。尽管孕酮的总体不一致性更高,但孕激素受体(PR)的情况也相似。结论。尽管受体测定的准确性非常好,但激素受体状态的很大一部分不一致可归因于受体评估中的错误分类。在考虑可行性,成本和先前的ER / PR状态后,应进行复发性肿瘤的活检以进行受体重新测试。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号