Invasive Lobular Carcinoma Has Worse Outcome Compared with Invasive Ductal Carcinoma in Stage IV Breast Cancer with Bone-Only Metastasis.

Breast care (Basel, Switzerland) Pub Date : 2022-06-01 Epub Date: 2021-11-26 DOI:10.1159/000521097
Yunbo Luo, Aimin Ma, Shengkai Huang, Yinghua Yu
{"title":"Invasive Lobular Carcinoma Has Worse Outcome Compared with Invasive Ductal Carcinoma in Stage IV Breast Cancer with Bone-Only Metastasis.","authors":"Yunbo Luo,&nbsp;Aimin Ma,&nbsp;Shengkai Huang,&nbsp;Yinghua Yu","doi":"10.1159/000521097","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is more likely to have bone metastasis than invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). However, the prognosis for bone metastasis in ILC and IDC is barely known. So, the aim of this study was to investigate the difference of prognosis between ILC and IDC accompanied by bone metastasis.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We evaluated the women with bone-only metastasis of defined IDC or ILC reported to the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program from 2010 to 2016. Pearson's χ<sup>2</sup> test was used to compare the differences of clinicopathologic factors between IDC and ILC. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to verify the effects of histological types (IDC and ILC) and other clinicopathologic factors on the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Overall, 3,647 patients with IDC and 945 patients with ILC met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed in our study. The patients with ILC were more likely to be older and to have lower histological grade and a higher proportion of the HR*/HER2- subtype. However, less treatment was administered to ILC than IDC, such as surgery of the breast, radiation, and chemotherapy. Compared to patients with IDC, patients with ILC showed worse OS (median OS, 36 and 42 months, respectively, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and CSS (median CSS, 39 and 45 months, respectively, <i>p</i> < 0.001), especially in subgroups with HR*/HER2- subtype (OS, hazard ratio: 1.501, 95% CI 1.270-1.773, <i>p</i> < 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.529, 95% CI 1.281-1.825, <i>p</i> < 0.001), lower histological grade (I-II) (OS, hazard ratio: 1.411, 95% CI 1.184-1.683, <i>p</i> < 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.488, 95% CI 1.235-1.791, <i>p</i> < 0.001), or tumor burden, such as T<sub>0-2</sub> (OS, hazard ratio: 1.693, 95% CI 1.368-2.096, <i>p</i> < 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.76, 95% CI 1.405-2.205, <i>p</i> < 0.001) and N<sub>1-2</sub> (OS, hazard ratio: 1.451, 95% CI 1.171-1.799, <i>p</i> = 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.488, 95% CI 1.187-1.865, <i>p</i> = 0.001). Furthermore, older age, black race, unmarried status, higher tumor burden (T<sub>3-4</sub> and N<sub>3</sub>), triple-negative subtype, and higher histological grade were independent risk factors for both OS and CSS. Surgery of the breast and chemotherapy could significantly improve the prognosis for patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Patients with ILC have worse outcomes compared to those with IDC when associated with bone-only metastasis, especially in subgroups with lower histological grade or tumor burden. More effective treatment measures may be needed for ILC, such as cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors, new targeted drugs, etc.</p>","PeriodicalId":520575,"journal":{"name":"Breast care (Basel, Switzerland)","volume":" ","pages":"296-305"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9247535/pdf/brc-0017-0296.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Breast care (Basel, Switzerland)","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000521097","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/26 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is more likely to have bone metastasis than invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). However, the prognosis for bone metastasis in ILC and IDC is barely known. So, the aim of this study was to investigate the difference of prognosis between ILC and IDC accompanied by bone metastasis.

Methods: We evaluated the women with bone-only metastasis of defined IDC or ILC reported to the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program from 2010 to 2016. Pearson's χ2 test was used to compare the differences of clinicopathologic factors between IDC and ILC. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to verify the effects of histological types (IDC and ILC) and other clinicopathologic factors on the overall survival (OS) and cancer-specific survival (CSS).

Results: Overall, 3,647 patients with IDC and 945 patients with ILC met the inclusion criteria and were analyzed in our study. The patients with ILC were more likely to be older and to have lower histological grade and a higher proportion of the HR*/HER2- subtype. However, less treatment was administered to ILC than IDC, such as surgery of the breast, radiation, and chemotherapy. Compared to patients with IDC, patients with ILC showed worse OS (median OS, 36 and 42 months, respectively, p < 0.001) and CSS (median CSS, 39 and 45 months, respectively, p < 0.001), especially in subgroups with HR*/HER2- subtype (OS, hazard ratio: 1.501, 95% CI 1.270-1.773, p < 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.529, 95% CI 1.281-1.825, p < 0.001), lower histological grade (I-II) (OS, hazard ratio: 1.411, 95% CI 1.184-1.683, p < 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.488, 95% CI 1.235-1.791, p < 0.001), or tumor burden, such as T0-2 (OS, hazard ratio: 1.693, 95% CI 1.368-2.096, p < 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.76, 95% CI 1.405-2.205, p < 0.001) and N1-2 (OS, hazard ratio: 1.451, 95% CI 1.171-1.799, p = 0.001; CSS, hazard ratio: 1.488, 95% CI 1.187-1.865, p = 0.001). Furthermore, older age, black race, unmarried status, higher tumor burden (T3-4 and N3), triple-negative subtype, and higher histological grade were independent risk factors for both OS and CSS. Surgery of the breast and chemotherapy could significantly improve the prognosis for patients.

Conclusion: Patients with ILC have worse outcomes compared to those with IDC when associated with bone-only metastasis, especially in subgroups with lower histological grade or tumor burden. More effective treatment measures may be needed for ILC, such as cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors, new targeted drugs, etc.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

侵袭性小叶癌与浸润性导管癌相比,IV期乳腺癌仅骨转移的预后更差。
背景:浸润性小叶癌(ILC)比浸润性导管癌(IDC)更易发生骨转移。然而,ILC和IDC的骨转移预后尚不清楚。因此,本研究的目的是探讨ILC与IDC合并骨转移的预后差异。方法:我们对2010年至2016年监测、流行病学和最终结果项目报告的明确的IDC或ILC仅骨转移的女性进行评估。采用Pearson χ2检验比较IDC与ILC的临床病理因素差异。通过单因素和多因素分析验证组织学类型(IDC和ILC)及其他临床病理因素对总生存期(OS)和癌症特异性生存期(CSS)的影响。结果:总的来说,3647例IDC患者和945例ILC患者符合纳入标准,并被纳入我们的研究。ILC患者年龄较大,组织学分级较低,HR*/HER2-亚型比例较高。然而,与IDC相比,对ILC的治疗较少,如乳房手术、放疗和化疗。与IDC患者相比,ILC患者的OS(中位OS分别为36和42个月,p < 0.001)和CSS(中位CSS分别为39和45个月,p < 0.001)更差,尤其是HR*/HER2-亚型亚组(OS,风险比:1.501,95% CI 1.270 ~ 1.773, p < 0.001;CSS,风险比:1.529,95% CI 1.281-1.825, p < 0.001),较低的组织学分级(I-II) (OS,风险比:1.411,95% CI 1.184-1.683, p < 0.001;CSS,风险比:1.488,95% CI 1.235-1.791, p < 0.001),或肿瘤负荷,如T0-2 (OS,风险比:1.693,95% CI 1.368-2.096, p < 0.001;CSS,风险比:1.76,95% CI 1.405 ~ 2.205, p < 0.001)和N1-2 (OS,风险比:1.451,95% CI 1.171 ~ 1.799, p = 0.001;CSS,风险比:1.488,95% CI 1.187-1.865, p = 0.001)。此外,年龄较大、黑人、未婚、较高的肿瘤负担(T3-4和N3)、三阴性亚型和较高的组织学分级是OS和CSS的独立危险因素。乳房手术加化疗可显著改善患者预后。结论:与IDC患者相比,ILC患者与仅骨转移相关的预后更差,特别是在组织学分级或肿瘤负荷较低的亚组中。ILC可能需要更有效的治疗措施,如周期蛋白依赖性激酶4/6抑制剂、新的靶向药物等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信