Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2004 Jul;57(7):675-81.
doi: 10.1136/jcp.2003.010777.

Prognostic value of proliferation in invasive breast cancer: a review

Affiliations
Review

Prognostic value of proliferation in invasive breast cancer: a review

P J van Diest et al. J Clin Pathol. 2004 Jul.

Abstract

Breast cancer is the leading cause of death among solid tumours in women, and its incidence is increasing in the West. Adjuvant chemotherapy and hormonal treatment improve survival but have potentially serious side effects, and are costly. Because adjuvant treatment should be given to high risk patients only, and traditional prognostic factors (lymph node status, tumour size) are insufficiently accurate, better predictors of high risk and treatment response are needed. Invasive breast cancer metastasises haematogenously very early on, so many breast cancer prognosticators are directly or indirectly related to proliferation. Although studies evaluating the role of individual proliferation regulating genes have greatly increased our knowledge of this complex process, the functional end result-cells dividing-has remained the most important prognostic factor. This article reviews the prognostic value of different proliferation assays in invasive breast cancer, and concludes that increased proliferation correlates strongly with poor prognosis, irrespective of the methodology used. Mitosis counting provides the most reproducible and independent prognostic value, and Ki67/MIB1 labelling and cyclin A index are promising alternatives that need methodological fine tuning.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Marcus JN, Watson P, Page DL, et al. Hereditary breast cancer: pathobiology, prognosis, and BRCA1 and BRCA2 gene linkage. Cancer 1996;77:697–709. - PubMed
    1. Eng C , Stratton M, Ponder B, et al. Familial cancer syndromes. Lancet 1994;343:709–13. - PubMed
    1. Kerlikowske K , Grady D, Rubin SM, et al. Efficacy of screening mammography: a meta-analysis. JAMA 1995;273:149–54. - PubMed
    1. Groenendijk RP, Bult P, Tewarie L, et al. Screen-detected breast cancers have a lower mitotic activity index. Br J Cancer 2000;82:381–4. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cowan WK, Angus B, Gray JC, et al. A study of interval breast cancer within the NHS breast screening programme. J Clin Pathol 2000;53:140–6. - PMC - PubMed

Substances