ERC
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Endocrine-Related Cancer 11 (1) 85-96    DOI: 10.1677/erc.0.0110085
Copyright © 2004 by the Society for Endocrinology.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barnes, D.
Right arrow Articles by Rubens, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Barnes, D.
Right arrow Articles by Rubens, R.
Endocrine Related Cancer, Vol 11, Issue 1, 85-96
Copyright © 2004 by Society for Endocrinology


Articles

The interaction of oestrogen receptor status and pathological features with adjuvant treatment in relation to survival in patients with operable breast cancer: a retrospective study of 2660 patients

DM Barnes, RR Millis, CE Gillett, K Ryder, D Skilton, IS Fentiman, and RD Rubens


The oestrogen receptor (ER) status of 2660 patients with primary breast cancer has been related to the effect of different adjuvant systemic therapies on survival. However, as patients in the various treatment groups also had different prognostic features comparison between treatments was difficult. Over 90% of patients receiving tamoxifen (Tam) were postmenopausal compared with <20% of those receiving chemotherapy (CT). The latter had more positive nodes (85% vs 54%) and grade III tumours (54% vs 30%) than the Tam group. The combined CT and Tam group had similar characteristics to the CT alone group. The current reported increase in the proportion of women with ER+ tumours is explained by immunohistochemical analysis of ER and screening programmes. ER status was unrelated to survival in patients with small, low grade, node-negative tumours which was no different from that expected for age-matched women taken from the general population. The value of adjuvant treatment in these patients is therefore questionable. In those given any adjuvant treatment, survival of women with ER+ tumours was prolonged, with the greatest effect being seen in those receiving Tam. Patients with ER- tumours benefited from CT but the addition of Tam to CT improved survival only in those with ER+ tumours. ER status is now established as a major predictive factor for treatment selection in primary disease. Studies of prognostic and predictive markers may be invalidated by use of adjuvant therapy and selection criteria for different treatments. Survival will be influenced by both tumour biology and therapy. This important consideration must be remembered when analysing new markers, particularly in small studies.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
The OncologistHome page
W. R. Miller, J. Bartlett, A. M. H. Brodie, R. W. Brueggemeier, E. di Salle, P. E. Lonning, A. Llombart, N. Maass, T. Maudelonde, H. Sasano, et al.
Aromatase Inhibitors: Are There Differences Between Steroidal and Nonsteroidal Aromatase Inhibitors and Do They Matter?
Oncologist, August 1, 2008; 13(8): 829 - 837.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
J. M.S. Bartlett, I. O. Ellis, M. Dowsett, E. A. Mallon, D. A. Cameron, S. Johnston, E. Hall, R. A'Hern, C. Peckitt, J. M. Bliss, et al.
In Reply
J. Clin. Oncol., April 1, 2008; 26(10): 1769 - 1771.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Clin. Pathol.Home page
F Farabegoli, C Ceccarelli, D Santini, and M Taffurelli
Suppressor of cytokine signalling 2 (SOCS-2) expression in breast carcinoma
J. Clin. Pathol., October 1, 2005; 58(10): 1046 - 1050.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 by the Society for Endocrinology.