Download PDF
CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · South Asian J Cancer 2021; 10(04): 220-224
DOI: 10.1055/s-0041-1731905
Original Article: Breast Cancer

Prevalence of Molecular Subtypes of Breast Carcinoma and Its Comparison between Two Different Age Groups: A Retrospective Study from a Tertiary Care Center of Northeast India

Jagannath Dev Sharma
1   Department of Pathology, BBCI, Guwahati, India
,
Sachin Khanna
2   Department of Surgical Oncology, BBCI, Guwahati, India
,
Shubhra Ramchandani
3   Department of Pathology, GNRC, North Guwahati, India
,
Lopa Mudra Kakoti
1   Department of Pathology, BBCI, Guwahati, India
,
Argha Baruah
1   Department of Pathology, BBCI, Guwahati, India
,
Vinay Mamidala
2   Department of Surgical Oncology, BBCI, Guwahati, India
› Author Affiliations Funding None.
› Further Information
   Permissions and Reprints

Abstract

Objective The aim of the study is to see the prevalence of different molecular subtypes in breast cancer patients among two different age groups: ≤40 years and >40 years.

Materials and Methods Retrospective study was conducted from January 2019 to December 2019. We studied 568 cases of breast carcinoma and classified them into four molecular subtypes—luminal A, luminal B, human epidermal growth factor-2 (HER 2), and triple negative. Cases were divided into two different groups: (1) ≤40 years and (2) >40 years.

Statistical Analysis was done by using SPSS software version 20.0.

Results Out of 568 cases, 151 (26.6%) were ≤40 years of age and 417 (73.4%) were >40 years of age. The most common histological subtype of breast cancer was ductal carcinoma in 548 cases and the most common grade was grade III. Immunohistochemistry was done in 432 patients. In younger age group, the most common molecular subtype was luminal B (31%) followed by triple negative (20%), luminal A (14%), and then HER 2 (5.3%), while in the older age group most common molecular subtype was luminal B (27.8%) followed by triple negative (14%), HER 2 (12.2%), and then luminal A (12%).

Conclusion Luminal B is found to be the most common subtype in Northeast Indian women with breast cancer, as compared with other studies in which luminal A was the most common subtype. This could be due to the reason that Ki-67 was not done in most of the other studies.

Keywords

estrogen receptor - progesterone receptor - human epidermal growth factor - luminal A - luminal B - triple negative


Publication History

Article published online:
31 December 2021

© 2021. MedIntel Services Pvt Ltd. This is an open access article published by Thieme under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonDerivative-NonCommercial-License, permitting copying and reproduction so long as the original work is given appropriate credit. Contents may not be used for commercial purposes, or adapted, remixed, transformed or built upon. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

Thieme Medical and Scientific Publishers Private Ltd
A-12, Second Floor, Sector -2, NOIDA -201301, India

 

  • References

  • 1 Gupta P, Rai NN, Agarwal L, Namdev S. Comparison of molecular subtypes of carcinoma of the breast in two different age groups: a single institution experience. Cureus 2018; 10 (06) e2834
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 2 Sun YS, Zhao Z, Yang ZN. et al Risk factors and preventions of breast cancer. Int J Biol Sci 2017; 13 (11) 1387-1397
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 3 Lin CH, Liau JY, Lu YS. et al Molecular subtypes of breast cancer emerging in young women in Taiwan: evidence for more than just westernization as a reason for the disease in Asia. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2009; 18 (06) 1807-1814
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 4 AlZaman AS, Mughal SA, AlZaman YS, AlZaman ES. Correlation between hormone receptor status and age, and its prognostic implications in breast cancer patients in Bahrain. Saudi Med J 2016; 37 (01) 37-42
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 5 Lee MK, Varzi LA, Chung DU. et al The effect of young age in hormone receptor positive breast cancer. BioMed Res Int 2015; 2015: 325715
    PubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 6 Engstrøm MJ, Opdahl S, Hagen AI. et al Molecular subtypes, histopathological grade and survival in a historic cohort of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013; 140 (03) 463-473
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 7 Alnegheimish NA, Alshatwi RA, Alhefdhi RM, Arafah MM, AlRikabi AC, Husain S. Molecular subtypes of breast carcinoma in Saudi Arabia. A retrospective study. Saudi Med J 2016; 37 (05) 506-512
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 8 Kumar N, Patni P, Agarwal A, Khan MA, Parashar N. Prevalence of molecular subtypes of invasive breast cancer: a retrospective study. Med J Armed Forces India 2015; 71 (03) 254-258
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 9 Rouzier R, Perou CM, Symmans WF. et al Breast cancer molecular subtypes respond differently to preoperative chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res 2005; 11 (16) 5678-5685
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 10 Marra A, Viale G, Curigliano G. Recent advances in triple negative breast cancer: the immunotherapy era. BMC Med 2019; 17 (01) 90
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 11 Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M. et al American Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28 (16) 2784-2795
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 12 Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN. et al American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2007; 131 (01) 18-43
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  • 13 Goksu SS, Tastekin D, Arslan D. et al Clinicopathologic features and molecular subtypes of breast cancer in young women (age ≤35). Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2014; 15 (16) 6665-6668
    CrossrefPubMedGoogle Scholar