Relationship among outcome, stage of disease, and histologic grade for 22,616 cases of breast cancer. The basis for a prognostic index

Survival rates for 22,616 cases of breast cancer listed in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program of the National Cancer Institute were stratified on outcome according to the histologic grade and stage of disease. Two different staging systems, “local, regional, and distant” and a modified American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) system adopted for SEER were used. Relative survival rates were calculated at 5 and 10 years. Patients who were assigned Stage II, Grade 1 had the same survival as those assigned Stage I, Grade 3. Their survival was better than patients assigned Stage I, Grade 4. The 5‐year relative survival rate for patients listed as Stage I, Grade 1 was 99% and for patients listed as Stage I, Grade 2, it was 98%. At 10 years, the survival rate of patients assigned Stage I, Grade 1 was 95%. Patients with histologic Grade 1 tumors less than 2 cm in size and with positive axillary lymph nodes had a 5‐year survival rate of 99%. As breast tumors increased in size, the histologic grade also increased. The results suggest that in linking histologic grade with stage of disease, the staging system should also be considered. Histologic grade when used in conjunction with stage of disease can improve the prediction of outcome. Our results also indicate that a prognostic index can be created for breast cancer using a combination of stage of disease and histologic grade. The data suggest that only three grades are needed for breast cancer. 68:2142‐2149, 1991.

[1]  H. Bloom,et al.  Histological Grading and Prognosis in Breast Cancer , 1957, British Journal of Cancer.

[2]  J. Vegelius,et al.  Analysis of reproducibility of subjective grading systems for breast carcinoma. , 1979, Journal of clinical pathology.

[3]  G. Bonadonna,et al.  Tumor grade as a prognostic factor in primary breast cancer. , 1989, European journal of cancer & clinical oncology.

[4]  H. Bloom,et al.  Impact of tumor grade and host resistance on survival of women with breast cancer , 1971, Cancer.

[5]  R. Gelber,et al.  Prognostic significance of tumor grade in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer with axillary lymph node metastasis , 1986, Cancer.

[6]  W. A. Evans Histological Factors in the Prognosis of Mammary Cancer Treated by Radical Operation and X-Rays , 1933 .

[7]  R. Scarff Prognosis in carcinoma of the breast. , 1938, British Journal of Radiology.

[8]  L. Freedman,et al.  Histological grade and other prognostic factors in relation to survival of patients with breast cancer. , 1979, British Journal of Cancer.

[9]  G. Garas,et al.  Intralaboratory variations in the grading of breast carcinoma. , 1982, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[10]  B. V. Pedersen,et al.  Histologic malignancy grading of invasive ductal breast carcinoma. A regression analysis of prognostic factors in low‐risk carcinomas from a multicenter trial , 1987, Cancer.

[11]  Yasargil Ec HOMOGRAFT REPLACEMENT OF THE AORTIC VALVE. , 1964, Lancet.

[12]  S. Wyard,et al.  THE NATURAL DURATION OF CANCER , 1925, Canadian Medical Association journal.

[13]  C. Elston,et al.  THE ASSESSMENT OF HISTOLOGICAL DIFFERENTIATION IN BREAST CANCER , 1984 .

[14]  C. Redmond,et al.  Histologic grading of breast cancer. , 1980, Pathology annual.

[15]  Donald E. Henson,et al.  Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases , 1989 .

[16]  H. Bloom Prognosis in Carcinoma of the Breast , 1950, British Journal of Cancer.

[17]  C. Redmond,et al.  Pathologic findings from the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel projects (NSABP) prognostic discriminants for 8‐year survival for node‐negative invasive breast cancer patients , 1990, Cancer.

[18]  R W Blamey,et al.  Prognostic factors in breast cancer -- the formation of a prognostic index. , 1979, Clinical oncology.

[19]  J. Glick Meeting highlights: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer. , 1988, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[20]  C. Redmond,et al.  Relative worth of estrogen or progesterone receptor and pathologic characteristics of differentiation as indicators of prognosis in node negative breast cancer patients: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-06. , 1988, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[21]  Henson De End points and significance of reproducibility in pathology. , 1989 .

[22]  S Friedman,et al.  Prognostic value of histologic grade nuclear components of Scarff‐Bloom‐Richardson (SBR). An improved score modification based on a multivariate analysis of 1262 invasive ductal breast carcinomas , 1989, Cancer.

[23]  Henson De Grading of tumors. , 1988 .

[24]  R. Blamey,et al.  A prognostic index in primary breast cancer. , 1982, British Journal of Cancer.

[25]  R. W. Scarff,et al.  THE POSITION OF HISTOLOGY IN THE PROGNOSIS OF CARCINOMA OF THE BREAST. , 1928 .

[26]  Henson De The histological grading of neoplasms. , 1988 .

[27]  G M Clark,et al.  How to use prognostic factors in axillary node-negative breast cancer patients. , 1990, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[28]  W. McGuire Estrogen receptor versus nuclear grade as prognostic factors in axillary node negative breast cancer. , 1988, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.