MbrlCatalogueTitleDetail

Do you wish to reserve the book?
Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer
Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
Hey, we have placed the reservation for you!
By the way, why not check out events that you can attend while you pick your title.
You are currently in the queue to collect this book. You will be notified once it is your turn to collect the book.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place the reservation. Kindly try again later.
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Title added to your shelf!
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Do you wish to request the book?
Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer
Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer

Please be aware that the book you have requested cannot be checked out. If you would like to checkout this book, you can reserve another copy
How would you like to get it?
We have requested the book for you! Sorry the robot delivery is not available at the moment
We have requested the book for you!
We have requested the book for you!
Your request is successful and it will be processed during the Library working hours. Please check the status of your request in My Requests.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Looks like we were not able to place your request. Kindly try again later.
Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer
Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer
Journal Article

Combined quantitative measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 provide more prognostic information than categorical combinations in luminal breast cancer

2019
Request Book From Autostore and Choose the Collection Method
Overview
Although most women with luminal breast cancer do well on endocrine therapy alone, some will develop fatal recurrence thereby necessitating the need to prospectively determine those for whom additional cytotoxic therapy will be beneficial. Categorical combinations of immunohistochemical measures of ER, PR, HER2, and KI67 are traditionally used to classify patients into luminal A-like and B-like subtypes for chemotherapeutic reasons, but this may lead to the loss of prognostically relevant information. Here, we compared the prognostic value of quantitative measures of these markers, combined in the IHC4-score, to categorical combinations in subtypes. Using image analysis-based scores for all four markers, we computed the IHC4-score for 2498 patients with luminal breast cancer from two European study populations. We defined subtypes (A-like (ER + and PR + : and HER2- and low KI67) and B-like (ER + and/or PR + : and HER2 + or high KI67)) by combining binary categories of these markers. Hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals for associations with 10-year breast cancer-specific survival were estimated in Cox proportional-hazard models. We accounted for clinical prognostic factors, including grade, tumor size, lymph-nodal involvement, and age, by using the PREDICT-score. Overall, Subtypes [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) B-like vs. A-like = 1.64 (1.25–2.14); P -value < 0.001] and IHC4-score [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval)/1 standard deviation = 1.32 (1.20–1.44); P -value < 0.001] were prognostic in univariable models. However, IHC4-score [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval)/1 standard deviation = 1.24 (1.11–1.37); P -value < 0.001; likelihood ratio chi-square (LR χ 2 ) = 12.5] provided more prognostic information than Subtype [hazard ratio (95% confidence interval) B-like vs. A-like = 1.38 (1.02–1.88); P -value = 0.04; LR χ 2  = 4.3] in multivariable models. Further, higher values of the IHC4-score were associated with worse prognosis, regardless of subtype ( P -heterogeneity = 0.97). These findings enhance the value of the IHC4-score as an adjunct to clinical prognostication tools for aiding chemotherapy decision-making in luminal breast cancer patients, irrespective of subtype.