The DOI matches its Crossref record; 39 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Morphological and immunophenotypic analysis of breast carcinomas with basal and myoepithelial differentiation
Abstract
The aim of this study was to assess the morphological characteristics and immunohistochemical profile of breast carcinomas with basal and myoepithelial phenotypes to obtain a better understanding of their biological behaviour and nature. One thousand nine hundred and forty‐four invasive breast carcinomas were examined, using tissue microarray (TMA) technology and immunohistochemistry, to identify those tumours that showed basal and myoepithelial phenotypes, and their immunophenotype profile was characterized using a variety of markers. In addition, haematoxylin and eosin‐stained sections of these tumours were studied for several morphological parameters. The findings were correlated with patient and tumour characteristics and outcome data. Tumours were classified into two groups: (1) tumours with basal phenotype [expressing one or both basal markers (CK5/6 and/or CK14)] and (2) tumours with myoepithelial phenotype (expressing SMA and/or p63). Group 1 was further subdivided into two subgroups: (A) dominant basal pattern (more than 50% of cells positive) and (B) basal characteristics (10–50% of cells positive). Group 1 tumours constituted 18.6% (8.6% and 10% for groups 1A and 1B, respectively) and group 2 constituted 13.7% of the cases. In both groups, the most common histological types were ductal/no specific type, tubular mixed and medullary‐like carcinomas; the majority of these tumours were grade 3. There were positive associations with adenoid cystic growth pattern, loss of tubule formation, marked cellular pleomorphism, poorer Nottingham prognostic index, and development of distant metastasis. In addition, associations were found with loss of expression of steroid hormone receptors and FHIT proteins and positive expression of p53 and EGFR. The most common characteristics in group 1 were larger size, high‐grade comedo‐type necrosis, development of tumour recurrence, and absence of lymph node disease. Group 2 tumours were more common in younger patients and were associated with central acellular zones, basaloid change, and positive E‐cadherin protein expression. Group 1 characteristics were associated with both reduced overall survival (OS) [log rank (LR) = 22.5, p < 0.001] and reduced disease‐free interval (DFI) (LR = 30.1, p < 0.001), while group 2 characteristics showed an association with OS (LR = 5, p = 0.02) but not with DFI. Multivariate analysis showed that basal, but not myoepithelial, phenotype has an independent value in predicting outcome. Breast cancers with basal and myoepithelial phenotypes are distinct groups of tumours that share some common morphological features and an association with poor prognosis. The basal rather than the myoepithelial phenotype has the strongest relationship with patient outcome. Copyright © 2006 Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1992) · Springer Series in Statistics · doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-4380-9_25 · Cited by 45,181
Nonparametric Estimation from Incomplete Observations
Kaplan, E. L., & Meier, P. (1958) · Journal of the American Statistical Association · doi:10.1080/01621459.1958.10501452 · Cited by 39,158
Molecular portraits of human breast tumours
Perou, C. M., Sørlie, T., Eisen, M. B., van de Rijn, M., Jeffrey, S. S., Rees, C. A., Pollack, J. R., Ross, D. T., Johnsen, H., Akslen, L. A., et al. (2000) · Nature · doi:10.1038/35021093 · Cited by 16,261
Prospective identification of tumorigenic breast cancer cells
Al-Hajj, M., Wicha, M. S., Benito-Hernandez, A., Morrison, S. J., & Clarke, M. F. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0530291100 · Cited by 10,370
ELSTON, C. W., & ELLIS, I. O. (1991) · Histopathology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2559.1991.tb00229.x · Cited by 6,175
Self-citationRepeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets
Sørlie, T., Tibshirani, R., Parker, J., Hastie, T., Marron, J. S., Nobel, A., Deng, S., Johnsen, H., Pesich, R., Geisler, S., et al. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0932692100 · Cited by 5,429
Tissue microarrays for high-throughput molecular profiling of tumor specimens
Kononen, J., Bubendorf, L., Kallionimeni, A., Bärlund, M., Schraml, P., Leighton, S., Torhorst, J., Mihatsch, M. J., Sauter, G., & Kallionimeni, O.-P. (1998) · Nature Medicine · doi:10.1038/nm0798-844 · Cited by 4,099
A SIMPLE INDEX OF CROHN'S-DISEASE ACTIVITY
Harvey, R. F., & Bradshaw, J. M. (1980) · The Lancet · doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(80)92767-1 · Cited by 2,959
Nielsen, T. O., Hsu, F. D., Jensen, K., Cheang, M., Karaca, G., Hu, Z., Hernandez-Boussard, T., Livasy, C., Cowan, D., Dressler, L., et al. (2004) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-04-0220 · Cited by 2,663
The Nottingham prognostic index in primary breast cancer
Galea, M. H., Blamey, R. W., Elston, C. E., & Ellis, I. O. (1992) · Breast Cancer Research and Treatment · doi:10.1007/bf01840834 · Cited by 1,070
Self-citation
Cited by
Tumor-Infiltrating CD8+Lymphocytes Predict Clinical Outcome in Breast Cancer
Mahmoud, S. M. A., Paish, E. C., Powe, D. G., Macmillan, R. D., Grainge, M. J., Lee, A. H. S., Ellis, I. O., & Green, A. R. (2011) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2010.30.5037 · Cited by 1,367
Self-citationAn overview of triple-negative breast cancer
Kumar, P., & Aggarwal, R. (2016) · Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics · doi:10.1007/s00404-015-3859-y · Cited by 771
Histological types of breast cancer: How special are they?
Weigelt, B., Geyer, F. C., & Reis-Filho, J. S. (2010) · Molecular Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.molonc.2010.04.004 · Cited by 572
Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Distinguishing between Basal and Nonbasal Subtypes
Rakha, E. A., Elsheikh, S. E., Aleskandarany, M. A., Habashi, H. O., Green, A. R., Powe, D. G., El-Sayed, M. E., Benhasouna, A., Brunet, J.-S., Akslen, L. A., et al. (2009) · Clinical Cancer Research · doi:10.1158/1078-0432.ccr-08-2132 · Cited by 489
Self-citationUse of immunohistochemical markers can refine prognosis in triple negative breast cancer
Tischkowitz, M., Brunet, J.-S., Bégin, L. R., Huntsman, D. G., Cheang, M. C., Akslen, L. A., Nielsen, T. O., & Foulkes, W. D. (2007) · BMC Cancer · doi:10.1186/1471-2407-7-134 · Cited by 365
Triple‐negative breast cancer: Present challenges and new perspectives
Podo, F., Buydens, L. M. C., Degani, H., Hilhorst, R., Klipp, E., Gribbestad, I. S., Van Huffel, S., W.M. van Laarhoven, H., Luts, J., Monleon, D., et al. (2010) · Molecular Oncology · doi:10.1016/j.molonc.2010.04.006 · Cited by 299
The prognostic significance of lymphovascular invasion in invasive breast carcinoma
Rakha, E. A., Martin, S., Lee, A. H. S., Morgan, D., Pharoah, P. D. P., Hodi, Z., MacMillan, D., & Ellis, I. O. (2012) · Cancer · doi:10.1002/cncr.26711 · Cited by 271
Self-citationMohammed, R. A. A., Ellis, I. O., Mahmmod, A. M., Hawkes, E. C., Green, A. R., Rakha, E. A., & Martin, S. G. (2011) · Modern Pathology · doi:10.1038/modpathol.2011.4 · Cited by 145
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Rakha, E., Putti, T., Abd El‐Rehim, D., Paish, C., Green, A., Powe, D., Lee, A., Robertson, J., & Ellis, I.
- Venue
- The Journal of Pathology
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2006-01-20
- Volume
- 208
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 495-506
- ISSN
- 0022-3417 (ISSN-L)
- 1096-9896
- OpenAlex
- W1976279830
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 39
- FWCI
- 13.04
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.