Prognostic factors for breast cancer and their use in the clinical setting

References

• American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2004. Atlanta, GA, USA, 1–60 (2004).
   Google Scholar
• Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 63, 181–187 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark GM. Do we really need prognostic factors for breast cancer? Br. Cancer Res. Treat. 30, 117–126 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• No authors listed. Tamoxifen for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Lancet 351, 1451–1467 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ CollaborativeGroup. Polychemotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group. Lancet 352, 930–942 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldhirsch A, Glick JH, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Senn HJ. Meeting highlights: International Consensus Panel on the Treatment of Primary Breast Cancer. Seventh International Conference on Adjuvant Therapy of Primary Breast Cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 3817–3827 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitner SP, Swern AS, Weinberger D, Duncan LJ, Hutter RV. Predictors of recurrence for patients with small (one centimeter or less) localized breast cancer (T1a,b N0 M0). Cancer 76, 2266–2274 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feuer EJ, Wun LM. DEVCAN: Probability of Developing or Dying of Cancer. Version 4.0. National Cancer Institute, MD, USA (1999).
   Google Scholar
• Kelsey JL, Gammon MD, John EM. Reproductive factors and breast cancer. Epidemiol. Rev. 15, 36–47 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ewertz M, Duffy SW, Adami HO et al. Age at first birth, parity and risk of breast cancer: a meta-analysis of 8 studies from Nordic countries. Int. J. Cancer 46, 597–603 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Layde PM, Webster LA, Baughman AL, Wingo PA, Rubin GL, Ory HW. The independent associations of parity, age at first full term pregnancy, and duration of breast feeding with the risk of breast cancer. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 42, 963–973 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factorsin Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and hormone replacement therapy: collaborative reanalysis of data from 51 epidemiological studies of 52,705 women with breast cancer and 108,411 women without breast cancer. Lancet 350, 1047–1059 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pharoah PD, Day NE, Duffy S, Easton DF, Ponder BA. Family history and the risk of breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Int. J. Cancer 71, 800–809 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ford D, Easton DF, Stratton M et al. Genetic heterogeneity and penetrance analysis of the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes in breast cancer families. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 62, 334–345 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peto J, Collins N, Barfoot R et al. The prevalence of BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations amongst early onset breast cancer cases in the UK. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 91, 943–949 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thorlacius S, Struewing JP, Hartge P et al. Population based study of risk of breast cancer in carriers of BRCA2 mutation. Lancet 352, 1337–1339 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Struewing JP, Hartge P, Wacholder S et al. The risk of cancer associated with specific mutations of BRCA1 and BRCA2 among Ashkenazi Jews. N. Engl. J. Med. 336, 1401–1408 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gail MH, Costantino JP. Validating and improving models for projecting the absolute risk of breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 93(5), 334–335 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Claus EB, Risch N, Thompson WD. Autosomal dominant inheritance of early-onset breast cancer. Cancer 73, 643–651 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 63, 181–187 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tinnemans JG, Wobbes T, Holland R, Hendriks JH, Van der Sluis RF, De Boer HH. Treatment and survival of female patients with non palpable breast carcinoma. Ann. Surg. 209, 249–253 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher ER, Sass R, Fisher B. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project for breast cancer (protocol no 4): discrimination for tenth year treatment failure. Cancer 53, 712–723 (1984).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitner SP, Swern AS, Weinberger D, Duncan LJ, Hutter RV. Predictors of recurrence for patients with small (one centimeter or less) localized breast cancer (T1a,b N0 M0). Cancer 76, 2266–2274 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McKinney CD, Frierson HF Jr, Fechner RE, Wilhelm MC, Edge SB. Pathologic findings in nonpalpable invasive breast cancer. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 16, 33–36 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Greco M et al. Prognosis of breast cancer patients after mastectomy and dissection of internal mammary nodes. Ann. Surg. 202, 702–707 (1985).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosen PP, Groshen S, Kinne DW, Norton L. Factors influencing prognosis in node-negative breast carcinoma: analysis of 767 T1N0M0/T2N0M0 patients with long-term follow up. J. Clin. Oncol. 11, 2090–2100 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koscielny S, Tubiana M, Le MG et al. Breast cancer: relationship between the size of the primary tumour and the probability of metastatic dissemination. Br. J. Cancer 49, 709–715 (1984).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eifel P, Axelson JA, Costa J et al. Consensus Development Conference Statement: adjuvant therapy for breast cancer, November 1–3, 2000. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 93, 979–989 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Koscielny S, Tubiana M, Le MG et al. Breast cancer: relationship between the size of the primary tumour and the probability of metastatic dissemination. Br. J. Cancer 49, 709–715 (1984).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher ER, Anderson S, Redmond C, Fisher B. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project Protocol B-06: 10-year pathologic and clinical prognostic discriminants. Cancer 71, 2507–2514 (1993).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Veronesi U, Galimberti V, Zurrida S et al. Prognostic significance of number and level of axillary nodal metastases in breast cancer. Breast 2, 224–228 (1993).
   Google Scholar
• Russo J, Frederick J, Ownby HE et al. Predictors of recurrence and survival of patients with breast cancer. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 88, 123–131 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Smith JA III, Gamez-Araujo JJ, Gallager HS, White EC, McBride CM. Carcinoma of the breast: analysis of total lymph node involvement versus level of metastasis. Cancer 39, 527–532 (1977).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher B, Bauer M, Wickerham DL et al. Relation of the number of positive axillary nodes to the prognosis of patients with primary breast cancer. An NSABP update. Cancer 52, 1551–1557 (1983).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cox CE, Pendas S, Cox JM et al. Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer. Ann. Surg. 277, 645–653 (1998).
   Google Scholar
• Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long term follow up. Histopathology 19, 403–410 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Galea MH, Blamey RW, Elston CE, Ellis IO. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 22, 207–219 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton LW, Page DL, Dupont WD. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma: a reproducibility study. Cancer 73, 2765–2770 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frierson HF Jr, Wolber RA, Berean KW et al. Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histological grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 105, 195–198 (1995).
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N et al. Histological grading of breast carcinomas. A study of interobserver agreement. Hum. Pathol. 26, 873–879 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carstens PHB, Greenberg RA, Francis D, Lyon H. Tubular carcinoma of the breast. A long-term follow-up. Histopathology 9, 271–280 (1985).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clayton F. Pure mucinous carcinomas of the breast: morphologic features and prognostic correlates. Hum. Pathol. 17, 34–38 (1986).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page DL, Dixon JM, Anderson TJ, Lee D, Stewart HJ. Invasive cribriform carcinoma of the breast. Histopathology 7, 525–536 (1983).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ridolfi RL, Rosen PP, Port A, Kinne D, Mike V. Medullary carcinoma of the breast – a clinicopathologic study with a ten year follow-up. Cancer 40, 1365–1385 (1977).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Haagensen CD, Lane N, Lattes R, Bodian C. Lobular neoplasia (so-called lobular carcinoma in situ) of the breast. Cancer 42, 737–767 (1978).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fisher ER, Gregorio RM, Redmond C. Tubulolobular invasive breast cancer: a variant of lobular invasive cancer. Hum. Pathol. 8, 679–683 (1977).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosen PP, Groshen S, Saigo S et al. Pathological prognostic factors in stage I (TIN0M0) and stage II (TINIM0) breast carcinoma: a study of 644 patients with median follow-up of 18 years. J. Clin. Oncol. 7, 1239–1251 (1977).
   Google Scholar
• Bettelheim R, Penman HG, Thornton-Jones H, Neville AM. Prognostic significance of peritumoral vascular invasion in breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 50, 771–777 (1984).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Örbo H, Stalsberg H, Kunde D. Topographic criteria in the diagnosis of tumor emboli in intramammary lymphatics. Cancer 66, 972–977 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Galea M, O’Rouke S, Blamey RW, Elston CW. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion: relationship with recurrence and survival in a large series with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 24, 41–47 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rosen PP. Tumor emboli in intramammary lymphatics in breast carcinoma: pathologic criteria for diagnosis and clinical significance. Pathol. Ann. 18, 215–232 (1983).
   Google Scholar
• Davis BW, Gelber R, Goldhirsch A et al. Prognostic significance of peritumoral vessel invasion in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer with axillary node metastases. Hum. Pathol. 16, 1212–1218 (1985).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roses DF, Bell DA, Flotte TJ, Taylor R, Ratech H, Dubin N. Pathologic predictors of recurrence in stage 1 (T1N0M0 and T2N0M0) breast cancer. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 78, 817–820 (1982).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Locker AP, Ellis IO, Morgan DA, Elston CW, Mitchell A, Blamey RW. Factors influencing local recurrence after excision and radiotherapy for primary breast cancer. Br. J. Surg. 76, 890–894 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kemperman H, Borger J, Hart A, Peterse H, Bartelink H, van Dongen. Prognostic factors for survival after breast conserving therapy for Stage I and II breast cancer; the role of local recurrence. Eur. J. Cancer 31A, 690–698 (1995).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• O’Rourke S, Galea MH, Morgan D et al. An audit of local recurrence after simple mastectomy. Br. J. Surg. 81, 386–389 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anderson E, Clarke RB, Howell A. Estrogen responsiveness and control of normal human breast proliferation. J. Mammary Gland Biol. Neoplasia 3, 23–35 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey JN, Clark GM, Osborne CK, Allred DC. Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 17, 1474–1481 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allred DC, Harvey JN, Berardo M, Clark GM. Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Mod. Pathol. 11, 155–168 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne CK, Clark GM, Ravdin PM. Adjuvant systemic therapy of primary breast cancer. In: Diseases of the Breast. Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Hellman S (Eds), Lippincott-Raven, PA, USA, 548–578 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• 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 74, 1445–1451 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pertschuk LP, Feldman JG, Kim YD et al. Estrogen receptor immunocytochemistry in paraffin embedded tissues with ER1D5 predicts breast cancer response more accurately than H222sp in frozen sections or cytosol-based ligand-binding assays. Cancer 77, 2514–2519 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pertschuk LP, Kim DS, Nayer K et al. Immunocytochemical estrogen and progestin receptor assays in breast cancer with monoclonal antibodies. Cancer 66, 1663–1670 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allred DC, Bustamante MA, Daniel CO, Gaskill HV, Cruz AB Jr. Immunocytochemical analysis of estrogen receptors in human breast carcinomas. Arch. Surg. 125, 107–113 (1990).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Molino A, Micciolo R, Turazza M et al. Prognostic significance of estrogen receptors in 405 primary breast cancers: a comparison of immunohistochemical and biochemical methods. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 45, 241–249 (1997).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersen J, Poulsen HS. Immunohistochemical estrogen receptor determination in paraffin-embedded tissue. Cancer 64, 1901–1908 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Barnes DM, Millis RR, Beex LV, Thorpe SM, Leake RE. Increased use of immunohistochemistry for oestrogen receptor measurement in mammary carcinoma: the need for quality assurance. Eur. J. Cancer 34, 1677–1682 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark GM. Prognostic and predictive factors. In: Diseases of the Breast. Harris JR, Lippman ME, Morrow M, Hellman S (Eds), Lippincott-Raven, PA, USA, 461–485 (1996).
   Google Scholar
• Slamon DJ, Clark GM, Wong SG, Levin WJ, Ullrich A, McGuire WL. Human breast cancer: correlation of relapse and survival with amplification of the HER-2/neu oncogene. Science 235, 177–182 (1987).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Slamon DJ, Godolphin W, Jones LA et al. Studies of the HER-2/neu proto-oncogene in human breast and ovarian cancer. Science 244, 707–712 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thor AD, Schwartz LH, Koerner FC et al. Analysis of c-erbB-2 expression in breast carcinomas with clinical follow-up. Cancer Res. 49, 7147–7152 (1989).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kallioniemi OP, Kallioniemi A, Kurisu W et al. ErbB-2 amplification in breast cancer analysed by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 89, 5321–5325 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cianfrocca M, Goldstein LJ. Prognostic and predictive factors in early-stage breast cancer. Oncologist 9, 606–616 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gusterson BA, Gelber RD, Goldhirsch A et al. Prognostic importance of c-erbB-2 expression in breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 10, 1049–1056 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allred DC, Clark GM, Molina R et al. Overexpression of HER-2/neu and its relationship with other prognostic factors change during the progression of in situ to invasive breast cancer. Hum. Pathol. 23, 974–979 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muss HB, Thor AD, Berry DA et al. c-erbB-2 expression and response to adjuvant therapy in women with node-positive early breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 330, 1260–1266 (1994).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thor AD, Berry DA, Budman DR et al. erbB-2, p53 and efficacy of adjuvant therapy in lymph node-positive breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 90, 1346–1360 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paik S, Bryant J, Park C et al. ErbB-2 and response to doxorubicin in patients with axillary lymph-node positive, hormone receptor-negative breast cancer. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 90, 1361–1370 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andrulis IL, Bull SB, Blackstein ME et al. neu/cerbB-2 amplification identifies a poor-prognosis group of women with node-negative breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 16, 1340–1349 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paik S, Hazan R, Fisher ER et al. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project: prognostic significance of erbB-2 protein overexpression in primary breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 8, 103–112 (1990).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leitzel K, Teramoto Y, Konrad K et al. Elevated serum c-erbB-2 antigen levels and decreased response to hormone therapy of breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 13, 1129–1135 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carlomagno C, Perrone F, Gallo C et al. c-erbB-2 overexpression decreases the benefit of adjuvant tamoxifen in early-stage breast cancer without axillary lymph node metastases. J. Clin. Oncol. 14, 2702–2708 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wright C, Nicholson S, Angus B et al. Relationship between c-erbB-2 protein product expression and response to endocrine therapy in advanced breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 65, 118–121 (1992).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clark GM. Should selection of adjuvant chemotherapy for patients with breast cancer be based on erbB-2 status? J. Natl Cancer Inst. 90, 1320–1321 (1998).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Ellis MJ, Coop A, Singh B et al. Letrozole is more effective neoadjuvant endocrine therapy than tamoxifen for ErbB-1- and/or ErbB-2-positive, estrogen receptor-positive primary breast cancer: evidence from a phase III randomized trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 3808–3816 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ravdin PM, Siminoff LA, Davis GJ et al. Computer program to assist in making decisions about adjuvant therapy for women with early breast cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 19, 980–991 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van ‘t Veer LJ, Dai H, van de Vijver MJ et al. Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 415, 530–536 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van’t Veer LJ et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 347, 1999–2009 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bieche I, Lidereau R. Genetic alterations in breast cancer. Genes Chromosomes Cancer 14(4), 227–251 (1995).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Steeg PS, Zhou Q. Cyclins and breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 52(1–3), 17–28 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perou CM, Jeffrey SS, van de Rijn M et al. Distinctive gene expression patterns in human mammary epithelial cells and breast cancers. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96(16), 9212–9217 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sørlie T, Tibshirani R, Parker J et al. Repeated observation of breast tumor subtypes in independent gene expression data sets. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 100, 8418–8423 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pusztai L, Ayers M, Stec J et al. Gene expression profiles obtained from fine-needle aspirations of breast cancer reliably identify routine prognostic markers and reveal large-scale molecular differences between estrogen-negative and estrogen-positive tumors. Clin. Cancer Res. 9, 2406–2415 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Paik S, Shak S, Tang G et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 351, 2817–2826 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janni W, Hepp F, Rjosk D et al. The fate and prognostic value of occult metastatic cells in the bone marrow of patients with breast carcinoma between primary treatment and recurrence. Cancer 92, 46–53 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cristofanilli M, Budd GT, Ellis MJ et al. Circulating tumor cells, disease progression, and survival in metastatic breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 351, 781–791 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bieglmayer C, Szepesi T, Kopp B et al. CA15.3, MCA, CAM26, CAM29 are members of a polymorphic family of mucin-like glycoproteins. Tumor Biol. 12, 138–148 (1991).
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Dnistrian AM, Schwartz MK, Greenberg EJ, Smith CA, Schwartz DC. Evaluation of CAM26, CAM29, CA15.3 and CEA as circulating tumor markers in breast cancer patients. Tumor Biol. 12, 1282–1290 (1991).
   Google Scholar
• Molina R, Jo J, Filella X et al. C-erbB-2 oncoprotein, CEA and CA15.3 in patients with breast cancer: prognostic value. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 51, 109–119 (1998).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gion M, Mione R, Nascimben O et al. The tumor associated antigen CA15.3 in primary breast cancer. Evaluation of 667 cases. Br. J. Cancer 63, 809–813 (1991).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Troester MA, Hoadley KA, Sorlie T et al. Cell-type-specific responses to chemotherapeutics in breast cancer. Cancer Res. 64(12), 4218–4226 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janni W, Rack B, Schindlbeck C et al. The persistence of isolated tumor cells in bone marrow from patients with breast carcinoma predicts an increased risk for recurrence. Cancer 103(5), 884–891 (2005).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Keyomarsi K, Tucker SL, Buchholz TA et al. Cyclin E and survival in patients with breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 347, 1566–1575 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Loskutoff DJ, Curriden SA, Hu G, Deng G. Regulation of cell adhesion by PAI. APMIS 107, 54–61 (1999).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duffy MJ. The biochemistry of metastasis. Adv. Clin. Chem. 32, 135–166 (1996).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbeck N, Kates RE, Schmitt M. Clinical relevance of invasion factors urokinase-type plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 for individualized therapy decisions in primary breast cancer is greatest when used in combination. J. Clin. Oncol. 20, 1000–1007 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbeck N, Kates RE, Look MP et al. Enhanced benefit from adjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients classified high-risk according to urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1 (n = 3424). Cancer Res. 62, 4617–4622 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Janicke F, Prechtl A, Thomssen C et al. Randomized adjuvant chemotherapy trial in high-risk, lymph node-negative breast cancer patients identified by urokinase-type plasminogen activator and plasminogen activator inhibitor type 1. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 93, 913–920 (2001).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harbeck N, Kates RE, Gauger K et al. Urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and its inhibitor PAI-I: novel tumor-derived factors with a high prognostic and predictive impact in breast cancer. Thromb. Haemost. 91, 450–456 (2004).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Look MP, van Putten WL, Duffy MJ et al. Pooled analysis of prognostic impact of urokinase-type plasminogen activator and its inhibitor PAI-1 in 8377 breast cancer patients. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 94, 116–128 (2002).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Look MP, van Putten WL, Duffy MJ et al. Pooled analysis of prognostic impact of uPA and PAI-1 in breast cancer patients. Thromb. Haemost. 90, 538–548 (2003).
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar