Inter-site variation of oestrogen receptors in human breast cancers

Tilley, Wayne D.; Keightley, D.D.; Cant, E. L. M.

doi:10.1038/bjc.1978.242

Cited by 41 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Identification of the central part of the tumour as being the oldest part is convenient but, perhaps, inaccurate. In an equivalent study on large breast cancer biopsies (Silversward et al, 1980), qualitatively similar conclusions were reported in that receptor concentration is low at the centre and much higher at the periphery of the tumour-although this is not always the case (Tilley et al, 1978). A study of the receptor status of metastatic disease would be valuable in indicating which parts of the primary are most likely to give rise to secondary deposits.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Intra-tumoural variation of oestrogen receptor status in endometrial cancer

Castagnetta¹,

Casto²,

Mercadante³

et al. 1983

Br J Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Soluble and nuclear oestrogen receptor status was determined in both the central and peripheral portions.of tumour for 37 cases of adenocarcinoma of the endometrium. Of these, 29 had functional receptor in the peripheral biopsy, but only 19 retained functional receptor in the centre. Six of the 10 patients whose tumours showed this difference came from the group of 12 patients who were immediately post-menopausal (4.50+ 1.45 y post-menopausal age). Receptor status was not related to tumour classification into histological grades I and II. However, receptor-negative central biopsies were significantly more likely (P<0.05) to be Grade III. Early relapse was also related to a receptor-negative central biopsy.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 72%

“…Several studies have approached the problem of intra-tumoural variation in oestrogen receptor status in breast cancer (Tilley et al, 1978;Silversward et al, 1980). Others have demonstrated the advantages of measuring receptor in both soluble and pellet fractions of each biopsy (Laing et al, 1977;Barnes et al, 1979;Thorsen, 1979).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Intra-tumoural variation of oestrogen receptor status in endometrial cancer

Castagnetta¹,

Casto²,

Mercadante³

et al. 1983

Br J Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This problem has been addressed for both hormone receptor content (Tilley et al, 1978) and ploidy determination (Thornthwaite et al, 1980), and is usually overcome as in this study by analysis of several fragments of tumour obtained from various sites in the biopsy. Certain tissue dissociation methods may also result in cell suspensions qualitatively unrepresentative of the original biopsy composition.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Relationship between ploidy and steroid hormone receptors in primary invasive breast cancer

Horsfall¹,

Tilley²,

Orell³

et al. 1986

Br J Cancer

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The ER-ICA allowed assessment of tumour tissue sections (King and Green, 1984;Walker et al, 1988 (McCarty et al, 1986;Walker et al, 1988). This led to studies defining the number of ER-positive cells that a tumour required to accurately predict therapeutic response to endocrine therapy (Walker et al, 1988; Gaskell et al., 1989;Nicholson et al, 1991;Robertson et al, 1992 (Kiang and Kennedy, 1977;Tilley et al, 1978;Silfversward et al, 1980;Straus et al, 1982; Davis et al, 1984). This intra-tumour, intersample receptor variation was not time dependent as the multiple biopsies were taken from each tumour at the same time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Oestrogen receptor: a stable phenotype in breast cancer

Robertson

1996

Br J Cancer

127

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Oestrogen receptor (ER) expression in breast cancer is regarded as a phenotype that may change during the natural history of the disease or during endocrine therapy. It has been suggested that in up to 70% of tumours that show acquired resistance the mechanism may be changed in ER status from positive to negative. This paper proposes an alternative hypothesis that ER expression is a stable phenotype in breast cancer. The paper reviews the literature on ER expression during the natural history of breast cancer in patients and also presents data on the effect of endocrine therapy on ER expression. If the alternative hypothesis is true it has important implications for treatment from chemoprevention to acquired endocrine resistance in advanced disease. Equally, if the hypothesis is true, attempts to develop laboratory models of endocrine resistance where ER-positive tumours become ER negative need to be re-evaluated.Keywords: breast cancer; oestrogen receptor; stable phenotypeThe oestrogen receptor (ER) is a 65 kDa oestrogen-binding protein expressed by 46-77% of breast cancers (Walt et al., 1976;Knight et al., 1977; Maynard et al., 1978;Brooks et al., 1980;Osborne et al., 1980; Croton et al., 1981;Howell et al., 1984;Hawkins et al.,1987a;Williams et al., 1987;Clarke and McGuire, 1988). It is a generally held view that ER expression is not a permanent phenotype in breast cancer cells Moolgavakar et al., 1980; Encarnacion et al., 1993; Morrow and Jordon, 1993;Nomura et al., 1985;Jordan, 1994;Paik et al., 1994). One reason for this view is the belief that patients with ER-positive primary breast tumours often develop ER-negative metastases in regional lymph nodes or distant sites. This has been interpreted to show that ER negativity correlates with more aggressive tumour biology and loss of cellular control. A second reason is the strong correlation between ER and therapeutic response to primary endocrine therapy (Samaan et al., 1981;Howell et al., 1984;Williams et al., 1987), which formed the basis for early hypotheses of endocrine sensitivity and resistance. Up to 60% of ER-positive tumours respond to hormone therapy (e.g. Tamoxifen), while for ER-negative tumours the figure is around 10% Samaan et al., 1981;Williams et al., 1987). Therapeutic response to endocrine therapy is not permanent and eventually all such tumours progress. As ER negativity is strongly associated with primary resistance to endocrine therapy it is generally accepted that when responding tumours subsequently progress that in the majority of tumours this is due to loss of ER expression by the tumour Moolgavakar et al., 1980;Nomura et al., 1985; Encarnacion et al., 1993;Morrow and Jordan, 1993;Jordan, 1994;Paik et al., 1994). This paper proposes the alternative hypothesis that ER is a stable phenotype in breast cancer cells.The discovery of monoclonal antibodies (Kohler and Milstein, 1975) subsequently led to specific antibodies being raised to ER (Green and Jensen, 1982 . The ER-ICA allowed assessment of tumour tissue sections (King ...

show abstract

Inter-site variation of oestrogen receptors in human breast cancers

Cited by 41 publications

References 5 publications

Intra-tumoural variation of oestrogen receptor status in endometrial cancer

Intra-tumoural variation of oestrogen receptor status in endometrial cancer

Relationship between ploidy and steroid hormone receptors in primary invasive breast cancer

Oestrogen receptor: a stable phenotype in breast cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About