Comparison of the Frequency Distribution of Vascular-Lymphatic, Neural, and Cutaneous Invasion in Molecular Subtypes of Breast Cancer

Document Type : Original Article(s)

Authors

1 Professor, Infectious Diseases and Tropical Medicine Research Center, Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

2 Assistant, Professor of Pathology, Department of Pathology, School of Medicine, Al-Zahra Hospital, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

3 School of Medicine, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences, Isfahan, Iran

10.48305/jims.2025.45167.2433

Abstract

Background: Breast cancer is a very diverse disease in terms of clinical manifestations, biological behavior and response to treatment. Local invasion of vascular-lymphatic, neural and cutaneous tissues is one of the most important factors that can be effective in predicting tumor behavior, response to treatment and prognosis. In this regard, the study was conducted with the aim of comparing the frequency distribution of vascular-lymphatic, neural and cutaneous invasion in molecular subgroups of breast cancer.
Methods: In a cross-sectional study, breast cancer samples that were examined and reported in the pathology laboratory of Al-Zahra Hospital in Isfahan between 2013 and 2018 were included in the study, and clinicopathological information, tissue invasion and their subtypes were determined and extracted. Chi square test was performed to determine the presence of significant differences in types of tissue invasion.
Findings: Lymphovascular invasion was the most common type of invasion (80.4%) followed by perineural and cutaneous invasion (28.4% and 26.8%, respectively). Lymphovascular invasion was significantly higher in the basal like subgroup (P = 0.04) and lower in the Luminal A subgroup (P = 0.01). Perineural and cutaneous invasion were not significantly different among subgroups.
Conclusion: Lymphovascular invasion was significantly higher in basal like subgroup and less in the Luminal A subgroup. Also, Perineural, cutaneous and nipple invasion showed no significant difference among subgroups. The findings of this study are applicable for the health system.

Highlights

Azar Baradaran: Google Scholar 

Maryam Derakhshan: Google Scholar

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Ban KA, Godellas CV. Epidemiology of breast cancer. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 2014; 23(3): 409-22.
  2. DeSantis C, Ma J, Bryan L, Jemal A. Breast cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 2014; 64(1): 52-62.
  3. Babu GR, Samari G, Cohen SP, Mahapatra T, Wahbe RM, Mermash S, et al. Breast cancer screening among females in Iran and recommendations for improved practice: a review. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2011; 12(7): 1647-55.
  4. Mousavi SM, Montazeri A, Mohagheghi MA, Jarrahi AM, Harirchi I, Najafi M, et al. Breast cancer in Iran: an epidemiological review. Breast J 2007; 13(4): 383-91.
  5. Puig-Vives M, Sanchez M, Sanchez-Cantalejo J, Torrella-Ramos A, Martos C, Ardanaz E, et al. Distribution and prognosis of molecular breast cancer subtypes defined by immunohistochemical biomarkers in a Spanish population-based study. Gynecol Oncol 2013; 130(3): 609-14.
  6. Ramos-Vara JA. Principles and methods of immunohistochemistry. Methods Mol Biol 2011: 691: 83-96.
  7. Ugras S, Stempel M, Patil S, Morrow M. Estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status predict lymphovascular invasion and lymph node involvement. Ann Surg Oncol 2014; 21(12): 3780-6.
  8. Del Casar J, Martin A, Garcia C, Corte M, Alvarez A, Junquera S, et al. Characterization of breast cancer subtypes by quantitative assessment of biological parameters: relationship with clinicopathological characteristics, biological features and prognosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008; 141(2): 147-52.
  9. Ihemelandu CU, Leffall Jr LD, Dewitty RL, Naab TJ, Mezghebe HM, Makambi KH, et al. Molecular breast cancer subtypes in premenopausal and postmenopausal African-American women: age-specific prevalence and survival. J Surg Res 2007; 143(1): 109-18.
  10. Muñoz M, Fernández-Aceñero MJ, Martín S, Schneider J. Prognostic significance of molecular classification of breast invasive ductal carcinoma. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2009; 280(1): 43-8.
  11. Nguyen PL, Taghian AG, Katz MS, Niemierko A, Abi Raad RF, Boon WL, et al. Breast cancer subtype approximated by estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER-2 is associated with local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26(14): 2373-8.
  12. Spitale A, Mazzola P, Soldini D, Mazzucchelli L, Bordoni A. Breast cancer classification according to immunohistochemical markers: clinicopathologic features and short-term survival analysis in a population-based study from the South of Switzerland. Ann Oncol 2009; 20(4): 628-35.
  13. Wiechmann L, Sampson M, Stempel M, Jacks LM, Patil SM, King T, et al. Presenting features of breast cancer differ by molecular subtype. Ann Surg Oncol 2009; 16(10): 2705-10.
  14. Kadivar M, Mafi N, Joulaee A, Shamshiri A, Hosseini N. Breast cancer molecular subtypes and associations with clinicopathological characteristics in Iranian women, 2002-2011. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2012; 13(5): 1881-6.
  15. Grimm LJ, Johnson KS, Marcom PK, Baker JA, Soo MS. Can breast cancer molecular subtype help to select patients for preoperative MR imaging? Radiology 2015; 274(2): 352-8.
  16. Carey LA, Perou CM, Livasy CA, Dressler LG, Cowan D, Conway K, et al. Race, breast cancer subtypes, and survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. JAMA 2006; 295(21): 2492-502.
Journal of Isfahan Medical School
Volume 43, Issue 816
4th Week, July
July and August 2025
Pages 552-558

Files

History

  • Receive Date: 26 April 2025
  • Accept Date: 23 June 2025

Share

How to cite

Statistics