E-cadherin immunohistochemical expression in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: correlation with morphology and CDH1 somatic alterations.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: W B Saunders Country of Publication: United States NLM ID: 9421547 Publication Model: Print-Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 1532-8392 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 00468177 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Hum Pathol Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Publication: Philadelphia, PA : W B Saunders
      Original Publication: Philadelphia, W B. Saunders Co.
    • Subject Terms:
      Antigens, CD/*genetics ; Biomarkers, Tumor/*analysis ; Breast Neoplasms/*pathology ; Cadherins/*genetics ; Carcinoma, Lobular/*pathology; Antigens, CD/biosynthesis ; Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis ; Breast Neoplasms/genetics ; Cadherins/biosynthesis ; Carcinoma, Lobular/diagnosis ; Carcinoma, Lobular/genetics ; Female ; Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic/physiology ; Humans ; Immunohistochemistry ; Mutation
    • Abstract:
      E-cadherin (ECAD) immunohistochemical (IHC) expression is lost in ∼90% of invasive lobular carcinomas (ILCs) owing to genomic alterations of CDH1. We examined morphologic features and ECAD IHC expression in invasive breast carcinomas (BCs) with known CDH1 alterations. Between January 2014 and May 2018, 202 cases of BC with a CDH1 somatic alteration were identified. ECAD expression was lost in 77% (155/202) of cases and was retained in 23% (47/202) cases. Most (90%, 139/155) ECAD-negative cases were morphologically classified as ILC, while the remaining (10%, 16/155) were invasive mammary carcinoma with mixed ductal and lobular features (IMC). Of 47 cases with ECAD staining, 62% (29/47) were classified as ILC, 23% (11/47) were classified as IMC, and 15% (7/47) were classified as invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Of note, 51% (24/47) of ECAD-positive cases were initially diagnosed as IDC or IMC based on ECAD expression alone. For ECAD-negative BCs, 98% (152/155) of CDH1 alterations were truncating, and 2% (3/155) were variants of unknown significance (VUS). Truncating CDH1 alterations were identified in the majority of ECAD-positive BCs (72%, 34/47); however, VUS-type CDH1 alterations were more prevalent (28%, 13/47) in ECAD-positive BCs than in ECAD-negative BCs. Although 90% of ECAD-negative tumors were compatible with ILC in this study, 17% (29/168) of ILC cases were ECAD positive. In addition, CDH1 truncating alterations were seen in ECAD-positive ILC, supporting the notion of aberrant ECAD staining. Therefore, ECAD IHC expression must be interpreted in conjunction with morphology, and BC with classic histologic features of ILC should not be reclassified as IDC/IMC based solely on the status of ECAD IHC expression.
      (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
    • References:
      BMC Cancer. 2006 Mar 02;6:48. (PMID: 16512896)
      Br J Cancer. 1997;76(9):1131-3. (PMID: 9365159)
      Med Oncol. 2014 Nov;31(11):250. (PMID: 25260805)
      Histopathology. 2016 Jan;68(1):57-69. (PMID: 26768029)
      Nat Med. 2017 Aug 4;23(8):1004. (PMID: 28777785)
      Am J Pathol. 1993 Dec;143(6):1731-42. (PMID: 8256859)
      Am J Clin Pathol. 2001 Jan;115(1):85-98. (PMID: 11190811)
      Eur J Cancer. 2000 Jun;36(9):1098-106. (PMID: 10854942)
      Int J Cancer. 2001 May 1;92(3):404-8. (PMID: 11291078)
      Nucleic Acids Res. 2018 Jan 4;46(D1):D1062-D1067. (PMID: 29165669)
      Jpn J Cancer Res. 1994 Oct;85(10):1035-9. (PMID: 7961105)
      Cancer. 2002 Apr 1;94(7):2114-5; author reply 2115-6. (PMID: 11932917)
      Nucleic Acids Res. 2016 Sep 19;44(16):e131. (PMID: 27270079)
      Int J Cancer. 2003 Aug 20;106(2):208-15. (PMID: 12800196)
      Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15(15):6397-403. (PMID: 25124632)
      Hum Mutat. 1998;12(4):226-37. (PMID: 9744472)
      Breast Cancer Res. 2002;4(1):5-8. (PMID: 11879552)
      Nat Med. 2017 Jun;23(6):703-713. (PMID: 28481359)
      Mod Pathol. 2019 Nov;32(11):1574-1586. (PMID: 31231125)
      Am J Surg Pathol. 2008 May;32(5):773-83. (PMID: 18379416)
      Breast Cancer Res. 2015 Jan 30;17:12. (PMID: 25849106)
      Am J Surg Pathol. 1983 Mar;7(2):137-44. (PMID: 6859388)
      J Pathol. 2018 Aug;245(4):456-467. (PMID: 29774524)
      Am J Surg Pathol. 2013 Jul;37(7):e1-11. (PMID: 23759937)
      J Clin Oncol. 2016 Jun 1;34(16):1838-9. (PMID: 27022119)
      Am J Surg Pathol. 2007 Mar;31(3):427-37. (PMID: 17325485)
      J Clin Pathol. 2013 Nov;66(11):928-32. (PMID: 23940132)
      Mod Pathol. 2008 Oct;21(10):1224-37. (PMID: 18587329)
      Am J Surg Pathol. 2010 Oct;34(10):1472-9. (PMID: 20871222)
      Cell Mol Life Sci. 2008 Nov;65(23):3756-88. (PMID: 18726070)
      J Pathol. 2010 Jan;220(1):45-57. (PMID: 19877120)
      Breast Cancer Res. 2001;3(5):289-93. (PMID: 11597316)
      Mod Pathol. 2003 Jul;16(7):674-8. (PMID: 12861063)
      Am J Surg Pathol. 2014 Mar;38(3):434-5. (PMID: 24441664)
      Cell Adhes Commun. 1998;6(2-3):171-84. (PMID: 9823469)
      J Mol Diagn. 2015 May;17(3):251-64. (PMID: 25801821)
    • Grant Information:
      P30 CA008748 United States CA NCI NIH HHS
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: Breast cancer; CDH1; E-cadherin; Lobular; p120
    • Accession Number:
      0 (Antigens, CD)
      0 (Biomarkers, Tumor)
      0 (CDH1 protein, human)
      0 (Cadherins)
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20200630 Date Completed: 20210217 Latest Revision: 20210802
    • Publication Date:
      20221213
    • Accession Number:
      PMC7484442
    • Accession Number:
      10.1016/j.humpath.2020.06.002
    • Accession Number:
      32599083