790
Views
17
CrossRef citations to date
0
Altmetric
Research Article

Prognostic value of Bcl-2 in two independent populations of estrogen receptor positive breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy

, , , , , , & show all
Pages 781-789 | Received 10 Oct 2011, Accepted 16 Dec 2012, Published online: 30 Mar 2012
 

Abstract

Introduction. Estrogen receptor (ER) status is not an optimal marker for response to adjuvant endocrine therapy since approximately 30% of patients with ER-positive tumors eventually relapse. Bcl-2 is regulated by ER and may thus be considered as an indicator of ER activity and a candidate supplementary marker to ER status. Patients and methods. Tumor tissue from 257 patients with ER-positive breast cancer treated with tamoxifen was used for determination of the best threshold for immunohistochemical Bcl-2 assessment as prognostic marker. Subsequently, samples from the Danish patients of the randomized clinical trial BIG 1-98 comprising 1191 ER-positive patients treated with tamoxifen, letrozole or a sequence of the two were immunohistochemically stained for Bcl-2 to further explore the prognostic value of Bcl-2. Results. Two Bcl-2 levels were found to divide the population of the primary study into significantly different groups according to disease-free survival (DFS). Multivariate analysis confirmed the significance of the lowest level, and showed Bcl-2 to be an independent prognostic marker. Analysis of the Danish cohort of the BIG 1-98 confirmed that Bcl-2 was a significant predictor of DFS, independent of known prognostic markers. However, in an additional analysis of a subset of the Danish cohort of BIG 1-98 including only HER-2 normal patients, the effect of Bcl-2 was not statistically significant. Discussion. Low Bcl-2 can predict poor outcome of patients with ER-positive tumors treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy, whereas the use of Bcl-2 for determination of addition of chemotherapy was not supported by this study.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank the steering committee of IBCSG for access to the BIG 1-98 data. We wish to thank “Breast Friends”, “Dansk Kraeftforsknings Fond”, “Danish Agency for Science Technology and Innovation” and “A Race Against Breast Cancer” for financial support. Partial funding for BIG1-98 was provided by the U.S. National Institutes of Health, grant number CA-75362.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.

Reprints and Corporate Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

To request a reprint or corporate permissions for this article, please click on the relevant link below:

Academic Permissions

Please note: Selecting permissions does not provide access to the full text of the article, please see our help page How do I view content?

Obtain permissions instantly via Rightslink by clicking on the button below:

If you are unable to obtain permissions via Rightslink, please complete and submit this Permissions form. For more information, please visit our Permissions help page.