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
Clinical Trial
. 2010 Jan;11(1):1-9.
doi: 10.1631/jzus.B0900295.

Fractionated evaluation of immunohistochemical hormone receptor expression enhances prognostic prediction in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy

Ching-hung Lin  1 , Huang-chun Lien, Fu-chang Hu, Yen-shen Lu, Sung-hsin Kuo, Ling-chu Wu, San-lin You, Ann-lii Cheng, King-jen Chang, Chiun-sheng Huang
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Fractionated evaluation of immunohistochemical hormone receptor expression enhances prognostic prediction in breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen as adjuvant therapy

Ching-hung Lin et al. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2010 Jan.

Abstract

Objective: To compare the prognostic prediction between dichotomized and fractionated evaluations of hormone receptor expressions.

Methods: Patients with stages I-III breast cancers, who received adjuvant tamoxifen, were enrolled. The expression of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) was evaluated by immunohistochemistry (IHC). A fractionated score (F score), the percentage of positive-staining nuclei (0=none, 1=1%-10%, 2=11%-30%, 3=31%-50%, 4=51%-70%, and 5=71%-100%), was assigned to each case. The dichotomized scoring method defines an F score >1 as positive. The prognostic values of both scores were compared by multiple Cox's proportional hazard models of disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS).

Results: Four hundred and sixteen patients with a median follow-up of 78.0 months were included. F scores for ER and PR correlated directly with DFS and OS. Although both the dichotomized and fractionated ER and PR scores were significantly associated with DFS and OS in univariate analyses, only fractionated ER and PR scores remained as independent prognostic factors of DFS and OS in the final multiple Cox's proportional hazard models.

Conclusion: Fractionated IHC hormone receptor expression evaluation enhances the prognostic prediction compared with a dichotomized assessment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Representative immunohistochemical image of each fractionated score (F score) of estrogen receptor (ER). F scores 0 (a), 1 (b), 2 (c), 3 (d), 4 (e), and 5 (f) were shown
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Representative immunohistochemical image of each fractionated score (F score) of estrogen receptor (ER). F scores 0 (a), 1 (b), 2 (c), 3 (d), 4 (e), and 5 (f) were shown
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Representative immunohistochemical image of each fractionated score (F score) of estrogen receptor (ER). F scores 0 (a), 1 (b), 2 (c), 3 (d), 4 (e), and 5 (f) were shown
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Representative immunohistochemical image of each fractionated score (F score) of estrogen receptor (ER). F scores 0 (a), 1 (b), 2 (c), 3 (d), 4 (e), and 5 (f) were shown
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Representative immunohistochemical image of each fractionated score (F score) of estrogen receptor (ER). F scores 0 (a), 1 (b), 2 (c), 3 (d), 4 (e), and 5 (f) were shown
Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Representative immunohistochemical image of each fractionated score (F score) of estrogen receptor (ER). F scores 0 (a), 1 (b), 2 (c), 3 (d), 4 (e), and 5 (f) were shown
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Disease-free (a) and overall (b) survival curves (unadjusted analysis) by estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) IHC score
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Disease-free (a) and overall (b) survival curves (unadjusted analysis) by estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) IHC score
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Covariate-adjusted survival curves for disease-free survival (DFS) time based on a fitted multiple Cox’s proportional hazard model (n=416)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Arpino G, Weiss H, Lee AV, Schiff R, de Placido S, Osborne CK, Elledge RM. Estrogen receptor-positive, progesterone receptor-negative breast cancer: association with growth factor receptor expression and tamoxifen resistance. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(17):1254–1261. - PubMed
    1. Badve SS, Baehner FL, Gray RP, Childs BH, Maddala T, Liu ML, Rowley SC, Shak S, Perez EA, Shulman LJ, et al. Estrogen- and progesterone-receptor status in ECOG 2197: comparison of immunohistochemistry by local and central laboratories and quantitative reverse transcription polymerase chain reaction by central laboratory. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(15):2473–2481. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.13.6424. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Banerjee M, George J, Song EY, Roy A, Hryniuk W. Tree-based model for breast cancer prognostication. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(13):2567–2575. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.11.141. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Barnes DM, Harris WH, Smith P, Millis RR, Rubens RD. Immunohistochemical determination of oestrogen receptor: comparison of different methods of assessment of staining and correlation with clinical outcome of breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer. 1996;74(9):1445–1451. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Cianfrocca M, Goldstein LJ. Prognostic and predictive factors in early-stage breast cancer. Oncologist. 2004;9(6):606–616. doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.9-6-606. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types

LinkOut - more resources