Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2018; 78(10): 252-253
DOI: 10.1055/s-0038-1671526
Poster
Freitag, 02.11.2018
Senologie III
Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Clinical and histopathological differences between premenopausal and postmenopausal ER+ breast cancer

HG Hass
1  Paracelsus-Klinik, Scheidegg, Deutschland
2  Praxis für Onkologie und Hämatologie Westallgäu, Scheidegg, Deutschland
,
M Seywald
1  Paracelsus-Klinik, Scheidegg, Deutschland
,
A Wöckel
3  Frauenklinik Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland
,
M Flentje
4  Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie, Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland
,
M Weigel
5  Frauenklinik Leopoldina, Schweinfurt, Deutschland
,
MW Beckmann
6  Frauenklinik Universität Erlangen, Erlangen, Deutschland
,
V Kunzmann
7  Medizinische Klinik und Poliklinik 2, Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Deutschland
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
20 September 2018 (online)

 

Introduction:

In comparison to postmenopausal women (postM), breast cancer in premenopausal women (preM) is frequently associated with worse prognosis and there is evidence that preM estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) tumors may respond poorly to endocrine therapy. Aim of this retrospective study was to analyze histopathological and clinical characteristics in preM and postM ER+ breast cancer patients.

Methods:

Between 2012 and 2017 clinical and pathological data of 4940 patients with ER+ breast cancer (1890 preM, 46.7 ± 5.3y; 3050 postM, 61.4 ± 8y) were documented during oncologic indoor-rehabilitation in the Paracelsus Hospital in Scheidegg.

Results:

In 4606 cases (93.2%) tumor stage aT1/2 were noted, whereas in 334 cases (6.8%) an advanced tumor stage (T3/4) was documented. PreM ER+ breast cancer was significantly more often associated with Her2neu positive receptor status (17.4 vs. 13.2%; P < 0.0001), higher proliferative capacity (Ki67 23.4 ± 19.3 vs. 15.6 ± 16.6; P < 0.0001), positive lymph node involvement (N+ 40.0 vs. 31.3%; P < 0.0001) and more often a poor tumor differentiation (G3 27.7 vs. 21.3%; P < 0.0001). In ER+ preM, double cancer occurs more frequently (P = 0.01) whereas histological subtype of lobular carcinoma (12.9 vs. 17.9%; P < 0.0001) was less common and treatment with chemotherapy (61.3 vs. 37.7%; P < 0.0001) and mastectomy (27 vs. 20.6%; P < 0.0001) was performed more often.

Conclusions:

In comparison to postM ER+ breast cancer tumors in preM showed more aggressive tumor biology and advanced tumor stage. Additionally studies are needed to elucidate the distinct molecular pathways in preM and postM ER+ breast cancer.