• Users Online: 319
  • Home
  • Print this page
  • Email this page
Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contacts Login 
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Year : 2018  |  Volume : 38  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 54-61

Prognostic role of lymphovascular invasion and lymph node status among breast cancer subtypes


1 Department of Surgery, Division of General Surgery, National Defense Medical Center, Tri-Services General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
2 National Defense Medical Center, School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
3 Surgical Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
4 Division of Hematology and Oncology, National Defense Medical Center, Tri-Service General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China
5 Department of Radiology, Tri-Services General Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan, Republic of China

Correspondence Address:
Jyh-Cherng Yu
No 325, Sec. 2, Cheng-Kung Rd, Nei-Hu 114, Taipei, Taiwan
USA
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/jmedsci.jmedsci_105_17

Rights and Permissions

Context: Breast cancer subtype (BCS) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) have both been independently demonstrated as prognostic factors. Aims: The objective of this investigation was to evaluate the prognostic power of LVI among BCSs. Settings and Design: From an institutional database, 2017 women with a histopathologically confirmed the diagnosis of breast cancer treated between January 2006 and December 2014 were consecutively selected. Subjects and Methods: Information recorded for each patient included age at diagnosis, year of diagnosis, and date of death or last contact. Total incidences of recurrence or death from breast cancer were ascertained from follow-up lasting until 31 June 2013. Institutional review board approval was obtained through our institution's human investigations committee. Statistical Analysis Used: Univariate and multivariate survival analysis were performed using the Kaplan–Meier analysis and Cox proportional hazards model with a stepwise backward elimination to derive a final model of variables with a significant independent relationship with overall survival (OS) and recurrent-free survival (RFS). All statistical analyses were two-sided with significance defined as P < 0.05. Results: For the entire cohort, the median follow-up OS period was 43.2 months. Tumor size, LVI, lymph node status, and treatment factors (operation type, chemotherapy, and hormone therapy) differed among subtypes with respect to OS and RFS. The highest incidence of LVI positivity (26.4% vs. 26.9%, respectively) and lymph node involvement (39.7% vs. 36.4%, respectively) occurred in the luminal B and luminal HER2 subtypes. There were significant differences in the OS and RFS rates according the LVI among the BCS. On multivariate analysis, there were significant differences in OS according to the status of lymph node-negative and LVI-positive in the luminal HER2 subtype, as well as lymph node-positive and LVI-positive in the triple negative (TN) subtype. There were also significant differences in RFS according to the status of lymph node-negative and LVI-positive in the luminal A subgroup. Conclusions: LVI in BCS was an important prognostic factor for OS and RFS. LVI and lymph node status were important prognostic factor for OS and RFS among BCSs. There were significant differences in OS according to the lymph node-negative and LVI-positive in the distribution of luminal HER2, the lymph node-positive, and LVI-positive in the distribution of TN. There were also significant differences in the RFS according to the lymph node-negative and LVI-positive in the luminal A.


[FULL TEXT] [PDF]*
Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)
 

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed139    
    Printed4    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded26    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal