Molecular subtypes of breast cancer: prognostic implications and clinical and immunohistochemical characteristics
Keywords:
Cáncer de mama. Subtipos moleculares. Inmunohistoquímica.Abstract
Background. Breast carcinomas are a heterogeneous group of tumours, in both their clinical behavior and their prognosis. The aim of this article is to classify breast carcinomas according to molecular subtypes by means of immunohistochemical markers and to analyse the clinicopathological and immunohistochemical characteristics and the patterns of survival and relapse of the different subtypes. Methods. Two hundred and seventy-two patients diagnosed with breast cancer were classified into five subtypes: breast carcinomas of the basal type, HER2 type, luminal A type, luminal B type and normal. Results. The most frequent breast carcinomas were: luminal A type carcinomas (62.5%), luminal B type carcinomas (18%), HER2 type carcinomas (9.9%), basal type carcinomas (8.4%) and normal phenotype carcinomas (1.4%). Significantly and with greater frequency, the luminal type breast carcinomas proved to be well differentiated tumours, of small tumoral size, with negative axillary ganglions, at an early stage at the time of diagnosis, with high levels of BCL-2 and a low Ki-67 proliferation index. On the contrary, the basal type and HER2 carcinomas presented larger tumours, poorly differentiated, greater ganglionar involvement and more advanced stages at the time of diagnosis. They expressed high Ki-67 proliferation indexes with greater frequency and were the subtypes that showed a worse prognosis on global survival and progression-free survival curves. Conclusion. Breast cancer classification based on immunohistochemical (IHC) parameters makes a better prognostic definition possible. Both the basal type and the HER2 type breast carcinomas present more unfavourable histopathological and IHC characteristics, as well as a worse survival and less relapse time, while the luminal type breast carcinomas show more benign characteristics and a better prognosis.Downloads
References
1. COIERA E. Four rules for the reinvention of health care. Br Med J 2004; 328: 1197-1199.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.328.7449.1197
2. BASHSHUR RL, REARDON TG, SHANNON GW. Telemedicine: A new health care delivery system. Annu Rev Public Health 2000; 21: 613-637.
https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.publhealth.21.1.613
3. FINCH T, MAY C, MAIR F, MORT M, GASK L. Integrating service development with evaluation in telehealthcare: an ethnographic study. Br Med J 2003; 327: 1205-1209.
https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.327.7425.1205
4. ROIG F, SAIGÍ F. Dificultades para la incorporar la telemedicina en las organizaciones sanitarias: perspectivas analíticas. Gac Sanit 2009; 23: 147.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2008.05.009
5. OBSTFELDER A, ENGESETH KH, WYNN R. Characteristics of succesfully implemented telemedical applications. Implement Sci 2007; 2: 25.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-2-25
6. NICOLINI D. The work to make telemedicine work: A social and articulative view. Soc Sci Med 2006; 62: 2754-2767.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2005.11.001
7. LEROUGE C, TULU B, FORDUCEY P. The Business of Telemedicine: strategy primer. Telemed J e-Health 2010; 16: 898-908.
https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2009.0178
8. ROIG F, SAIGÍ F. Barreras para la normalización de la Telemedicina en un sistema de salud basado en la concertación de servicios. Un estudio cualitativo. [En prensa] Gac Sanit.
9. MARCH JC, PRIETO MA, HERNÁN M, SOLAS O. Técnicas cualitativas para la investigación en salud pública y gestión de servicios de salud: algo más que otro tipo de técnicas. Gac Sanit 1999; 13: 312-319.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0213-9111(99)71373-7
10. HUBERMAN AM, MILES MB. Métodos para el manejo y el análisis de datos. En: Denman CA, Haro JA editores. Por los rincones. Antología de métodos cualitativos en la investigación social. Hermosillo, México: El Colegio de Sonora 2000; 253-300.
11. CHUGANI V, MARTÍN RL, SOTO E, YANES V, SERRANO P. Implantación de programas de telemedicina en la sanidad pública de España: experiencia desde la perspectiva de clínicos y decisores. Gac Sanit 2009; 23: 223-229.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gaceta.2008.06.005
12. GAGNON MP, DUPLANTIE J, FORTIN JP, LANDRY R. Implementing telehealth to support medical practice in rural/remote regions: what are the conditions for success? Implement Sc 2006; 24: 1-18.
https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-1-18
13. LAM DM, MACKENZIE C. Human and organizational factors affecting telemedicine utilization within U.S. military forces in Europe. Telemed J e-Health 2005; 11: 70-78.
https://doi.org/10.1089/tmj.2005.11.70
14. WHITTEN P, ALLEN A. Analysis of Telemedicine from an organizacional perspective. Telemed J 1995; 1: 203-213.
Downloads
Additional Files
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2011 Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
La revista Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra es publicada por el Departamento de Salud del Gobierno de Navarra (España), quien conserva los derechos patrimoniales (copyright ) sobre el artículo publicado y favorece y permite la difusión del mismo bajo licencia Creative Commons Reconocimiento-CompartirIgual 4.0 Internacional (CC BY-SA 4.0). Esta licencia permite copiar, usar, difundir, transmitir y exponer públicamente el artículo, siempre que siempre que se cite la autoría y la publicación inicial en Anales del Sistema Sanitario de Navarra, y se distinga la existencia de esta licencia de uso.


