Apocrine carcinoma is a rare subtype of invasive ductal breast cancer that shows apocrine differentiation and largely triple-negative immunohistology. Triple-negative breast cancers are known to have more aggressive clinical courses. However, unlike most other subtypes, it is reported that triple-negative apocrine carcinoma (TNAC) has a better prognosis. Due to the scarcity of reported studies, our knowledge regarding its clinical behavior, prognosis and response to therapy is very limited. In this study, we retrospectively retrieved 41 triple-negative apocrine carcinoma cases from our breast cancer database, with an average follow-up of 32.8 months. It was found that TNAC had a poorer response to neoadjuvant therapy but a better prognosis than other nonapocrine types of triple-negative breast cancer. Meanwhile, TNAC has a low proliferative nature, as indicated by its low Ki-67 index. An updated analysis of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database showed that chemotherapy did not improve breast-cancer-specific survival in TNAC patients. Our results suggest that TNAC is a special subtype of triple-negative breast cancer with a better short-term prognosis despite poor response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy.
In estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer, changes in biomarker expression after neoadjuvant therapy indicate the therapeutic response and are prognostic. However, there is limited information about the biomarker alteration caused by neoadjuvant endocrine therapy in ER-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative breast cancer. We recruited ER-positive/HER2-negative breast cancer patients who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT), neoadjuvant endocrine therapy (NET), or sequential neoadjuvant endocrine-chemotherapy (NECT) at Peking University Cancer Hospital from 2015 to 2021. A total of 579 patients had paired immunohistochemistry information in both diagnostic biopsy samples and post-neoadjuvant therapy surgical samples. Through a paired comparison of the immunohistochemical information in pre-treatment and post-treatment samples, we found that progesterone receptor (PR) expression reductions were more frequent than ER expression reductions (70.8% vs. 35.2%) after neoadjuvant therapy. The percentage of patients who had a decreased Ki-67 index in the post-operative samples was similar in the three groups (79.8% vs. 79.7% vs. 78.4%). Moreover, PR losses caused by NET were related to low baseline PR expression (p = 0.001), while we did not find a significant association between PR losses and Ki-67 reductions (p = 0.428) or ER losses (p = 0.274). All three types of neoadjuvant therapies caused a reduction in ER, PR, and Ki-67 expression. In conclusion, we found that PR loss after NET was only significantly related to low baseline PR expression, and there is no significant difference in the extent of prognostic factor change including Ki-67 and ER between the PR loss and non-loss groups.
Androgen receptor (AR) expression is frequently observed in breast cancer, but its association with estrogen receptor (ER) expression in breast cancer remains unclear. This study analyzed the clinicopathological and molecular features associated with AR negativity in both ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancer, trying to elucidate the molecular correlation between AR and ER. Our results showed that AR negativity was associated with different clinicopathological characteristics and molecular features in ER-positive and ER-negative breast cancer. Moreover, AR-positive breast cancer has better clinicopathological features than AR-negative breast cancer, especially in the ER-negative subtype. These results suggest that the role of AR in ER-negative breast cancer is distinctive from that in ER-positive breast cancer.
Background: Breast leiomyoma is a rare benign mesenchymal tumor, accounting for less than 1% of all breast neoplasms. Cases of breast atypical leiomyoma is even more rarely reported and its diagnostic criteria together with its clinical courses is not cleared defined. Case presentation: We described two patients with breast leiomyomas. One has unilateral benign breast leiomyoma, the other one has bilateral breast leiomyomas. For the bilateral case, the left-side tumor was diagnosed as benign leiomyoma while the right-side tumor was diagnosed as atypical leiomyoma. The morphological features that lead to the diagnosis of atypical leiomyoma are its invasive growth pattern, mild nuclear atypia, and mitotic figures up to 3mitoses/10HPF. Conclusions: Atypical breast leiomyoma appears to behave like benign leiomyoma without recurrence in our study with nine-year follow-up. Due to the limited experience, cases presented as atypical intraparenchymal breast leiomyoma should be closely followed.