Histological grade provides significant prognostic information in addition to breast cancer subtypes defined according to St Gallen 2013

References

• Dowsett M, Goldhirsch A, Hayes DF, et al. International web-based consultation on priorities for translational breast cancer research. Breast Cancer Res 2007;9:R81.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, et al. Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen international expert consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 2013;24:2206–23.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 1991;19:403–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balslev I, Axelsson CK, Zedeler K, et al. The Nottingham prognostic index applied to 9,149 patients from the studies of the Danish breast cancer cooperative group (DBCG). Breast Cancer Res Treat 1994;32:281–90.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rakha EA, Reis-Filho JS, Baehner F, et al. Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res 2010;12:207.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schwartz AM, Henson DE, Chen D, et al. Histologic grade remains a prognostic factor for breast cancer regardless of the number of positive lymph nodes and tumor size: a study of 161 708 cases of breast cancer from the SEER program. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2014;138:1048–52.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ehinger A, Bendahl PO, Elston CW, et al. The role of histological grade in discrimination between Luminal A-like and Luminal B-like subtypes in a series of premenopausal breast cancer patients. Virchows Arch. 2014;465:123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ryden L, Jonsson PE, Chebil G, et al. Two years of adjuvant tamoxifen in premenopausal patients with breast cancer: a randomised, controlled trial with long-term follow-up. Eur J Cancer 2005;41:256–64.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swedish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. Randomized trial of two versus five years of adjuvant tamoxifen for postmenopausal early stage breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 1996;88:1543–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chebil G, Bendahl PO, Idvall I, et al. Comparison of immunohistochemical and biochemical assay of steroid receptors in primary breast cancer-clinical associations and reasons for discrepancies. Acta Oncol 2003;42:719–25.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Falck AK, Bendahl PO, Ingvar C, et al. Analysis of and prognostic information from disseminated tumor cells in bone marrow in primary breast cancer: a prospective observational study. BMC Cancer 2012;12:403.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malmstrom P, Bendahl PO, Boiesen P, et al. S-phase fraction and urokinase plasminogen activator are better markers for distant recurrences than Nottingham prognostic index and histologic grade in a prospective study of premenopausal lymph node-negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:2010–19.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klintman M, Bendahl PO, Grabau D, et al. The prognostic value of Ki67 is dependent on estrogen receptor status and histological grade in premenopausal patients with node-negative breast cancer. Mod Pathol 2010;23:251–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gruvberger-Saal SK, Bendahl PO, Saal LH, et al. Estrogen receptor beta expression is associated with tamoxifen response in ERalpha-negative breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:1987–94.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maisonneuve P, Disalvatore D, Rotmensz N, et al. Proposed new clinicopathological surrogate definitions of luminal A and luminal B (HER2-negative) intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. Breast Cancer Res 2014;16:R65.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Engstrom MJ, Opdahl S, Hagen AI, et al. Molecular subtypes, histopathological grade and survival in a historic cohort of breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013;140:463–73.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bastien RR, Rodriguez-Lescure A, Ebbert MT, et al. PAM50 breast cancer subtyping by RT-qPCR and concordance with standard clinical molecular markers. BMC Med Genomics 2012;5:44.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Braun L, Mietzsch F, Seibold P, et al. Intrinsic breast cancer subtypes defined by estrogen receptor signalling-prognostic relevance of progesterone receptor loss. Mod Pathol 2013;26:1161–71.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Purdie CA, Quinlan P, Jordan LB, et al. Progesterone receptor expression is an independent prognostic variable in early breast cancer: a population-based study. Br J Cancer 2013;110:565–72.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prat A, Cheang MC, Martin M, et al. Prognostic significance of progesterone receptor-positive tumor cells within immunohistochemically defined luminal A breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:203–9.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Boiesen P, Bendahl PO, South Sweden Breast Cancer Group, et al. Histologic grading in breast cancer–reproducibility between seven pathologic departments. Acta Oncol 2000;39:41–5.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton LW, Page DL, Dupont WD. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma. A reproducibility study. Cancer 1994;73:2765–70.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellis IO, Coleman D, Wells C, et al. Impact of a national external quality assessment scheme for breast pathology in the UK. J Clin Pathol 2006;59:138–45.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American society of clinical oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:5287–312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polley MY, Leung SC, McShane LM, et al. An international ki67 reproducibility study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2013;105:1897–906.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar