Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences) ›› 2023, Vol. 55 ›› Issue (2): 243-253. doi: 10.19723/j.issn.1671-167X.2023.02.007

Previous Articles     Next Articles

Clinicopathological features and prognosis of breast cancer with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 low expression

Xiao-juan ZHU1,Hong ZHANG1,*(),Shuang ZHANG1,Dong LI1,Xin LI1,Ling XU2,Ting LI1   

  1. 1. Department of Pathology, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China
    2. Breast Disease Center, Peking University First Hospital, Beijing 100034, China
  • Received:2022-11-30 Online:2023-04-18 Published:2023-04-12
  • Contact: Hong ZHANG E-mail:zhanghong-path@pkufh.com

Abstract:

Objective: There is an increasing interest in human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) low expression breast cancer with the result of novel anti-HER2 antibody-drug conjugates for breast cancer. HER2 low expression breast cancer is expected to become a new type of breast cancer. This study analyzed and compared the clinicopathological features and survival data of breast cancer with HER2 low expression group [immunohistochemistry (IHC) 1+ or IHC 2+, and fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) negative] and HER2 zero expression group (IHC 0), in order to explore the difference in clinical biology of HER2 low expression breast cancers. Methods: Among 1 250 female patients with primary non-metastatic breast cancer admitted to the Breast Disease Center of Peking University First Hospital from January 2014 to December 2017, 969 cases were HER2 negative (IHC 0, 1+, 2+, and FISH was not amplified). The clinicopathologic features and prognosis of the patients with HER2 low expression (IHC 1+ or 2+, and unamplified by FISH) and HER2 zero expression (IHC 0) were analyzed. Disease free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) were evaluated, survival rates were calculated by Kaplan-Meier curve, and survival differences were compared by Log-rank test. Cox regression analysis of univariate and multivariate prognostic factors. Bilateral test was used, and P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: In the 969 patients with HER2 negative breast cancer, 606 had HER2 low expression (62.54%) and 363 had HER2 zero expression (37.46%). Compared with breast cancer with HER2 zero expression, those with HER2 low expression had higher N stage (P=0.001) and TNM stage (P=0.044), the proportion of non-specific histological types was higher (82.7% vs. 79.1%, P=0.009), the histological grade was higher (P=0.048), and the positive rate of hormone receptor was higher (83.2% vs. 75.2%, P=0.003). The percentage of Ki-67 value index >30% was lower (30.4% vs. 36.6%, P=0.044). There was no significant difference in DFS and OS between the two groups (P>0.05). In the 969 cases, 777 were hormone receptor positive and 192 were hormone receptor negative (triple negative cancer). Among the 777 cases with hormone receptor positive, 504 (64.9%) were HER2 low expression, and 273 (35.1%) were HER2 zero expression. Compared with breast cancer with HER2 zero expression group, the HER2 low expression group had a younger age (P=0.016), a higher proportion of premenopausal patients (P=0.029), more lymph node involvement (P=0.002), and a higher total TNM stage (P=0.031), and less frequent histological types of lobular and mucinous carcinoma (3.6% vs. 7.3%, 4.8% vs. 10.6%, P=0.001). There was no difference in DFS and OS between HER2 low expression and zero expression (P>0.05). Among 192 patients with hormone receptor negative, there were 102 cases (53.1%) with HER2 low expression and 90 cases (46.9%) with HER2 zero expression. Compared with the HER2 zero expression groups, HER2 low expression group was older (P=0.001), the proportion of premenopausal patients was low (P=0.029), the histological grade was lower (P < 0.001), the Ki-67 value index was lower (P < 0.001), and androgen receptor positive rate was higher (58.8% vs. 34.4%, P < 0.001). DFS was better than HER2 zero expression group (P=0.038), but there was no difference in OS between the two groups (P>0.05). Conclusion: HER2 low expression breast cancer accounts for about half of all breast cancers, and the incidence is much higher than that of HER2 positive breast cancer. Its clinicopathologic features are heterogeneous, and the status of hormone receptor expression has an impact on the clinical biology of this group.

Key words: Breast cancer, Human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, Low expression, Clinicopathological features, Prognosis

CLC Number: 

  • R737.9

Table 1

Clinical characteristics analysis of HER2 low expression and HER2 zero expression breast cancer patients"

Characteristics All cases (n=969) HR positive cases (n=777) HR negative cases (n=192)
HER2 zero HER2 low P value HER2 zero HER2 low P value HER2 zero HER2 low P value
Age/years
    Total 55 (46, 65) 55 (46, 64) 0.545 57 (48, 66) 54 (45, 64) 0.016 52 (42, 62) 58 (50, 67) 0.001
    < 45 64 (17.6) 104 (17.2) 38 (13.9) 96 (19.0) 26 (28.9) 8 (7.8)
    ≥45 299 (82.4) 502 (82.8) 235 (86.1) 408 (81.0) 64 (71.1) 94 (92.2)
Menopausal status
    Postmenopausal 213 (58.7) 342 (56.4) 0.495 105 (38.5) 235 (46.6) 0.029 45 (50.0) 45 (50.0) 0.029
    Premenopausal 150 (41.3) 264 (43.6) 168 (61.5) 269 (53.4) 73 (71.6) 29 (28.4)
T stage
    1 199 (54.8) 314 (51.8) 0.758 166 (60.8) 279 (55.4) 0.145 33 (36.7) 35 (34.3) 0.943
    2 150 (41.3) 273 (45.0) 100 (36.6) 210 (41.7) 50 (55.6) 63 (61.8)
    3 12 (3.3) 13 (2.1) 6 (2.2) 11 (2.2) 6 (6.7) 2 (2.0)
    4 2 (0.6) 6 (1.0) 1 (0.4) 4 (0.8) 1 (1.1) 2 (2.0)
N stage
    0 255 (70.2) 360 (59.4) 0.001 192 (70.3) 293 (59.1) 0.002 63 (70.0) 67 (65.7) 0.341
    1 80 (22.0) 182 (30.0) 59 (21.6) 162 (32.1) 21 (23.3) 20 (19.6)
    2 19 (5.2) 44 (7.3) 15 (5.5) 36 (7.1) 4 (4.4) 8 (7.8)
    3 9 (2.5) 20 (3.3) 7 (2.6) 13 (2.6) 2 (2.2) 7 (6.9)
TNM stage
    Ⅰ 163 (44.9) 237 (39.1) 0.044 137 (50.2) 210 (41.7) 0.031 26 (28.9) 27 (26.5) 0.207
    Ⅱ 167 (46.0) 295 (48.7) 110 (40.3) 238 (47.2) 57 (63.3) 57 (55.9)
    Ⅲ 33 (9.1) 74 (12.2) 26 (9.5) 56 (11.1) 7 (7.8) 18 (17.6)

Table 2

Pathological characteristics analysis of HER2 low expression and HER2 zero expression breast cancer patients"

Characteristics All cases (n=969) HR positive cases (n=777) HR negative cases (n=192)
HER2 zero HER2 low P value HER2 zero HER2 low P value HER2 zero HER2 low P value
Histologic type, n (%)
    No special type 287 (79.1) 501 (82.7) 0.009 212 (77.7) 423 (83.9) < 0.001 75 (83.3) 77 (75.5) 0.306
    Lobular carcinoma 20 (5.5) 20 (3.3) 20 (7.3) 18 (3.6) 0 (0) 2 (2.0)
    Mucinous carcinoma 29 (8.0) 24 (4.0) 29 (10.6) 24 (4.8) 0 (0) 0 (0)
    Others 27 (7.4) 61 (10.1) 12 (4.4) 39 (7.7) 15 (16.7) 22 (21.6)
Histological grading, n (%)
    G1 82 (22.8) 156 (25.8) 0.048 73 (29.3) 146 (29.0) 0.448 3 (3.3) 10 (9.9) < 0.001
    G2 166 (46.1) 299 (49.4) 149 (55.2) 260 (51.6) 17 (18.9) 39 (38.6)
    G3 112 (31.1) 150 (24.8) 42 (15.6) 98 (19.4) 70 (77.8) 52 (51.5)
    Absent 3 (0.8) 1 (0.2)
Ki-67, n (%)
    ≤30% 230 (63.4) 422 (69.6) 0.044 214 (78.4) 377 (74.8) 0.263 16 (17.8) 45 (44.1) < 0.001
   >30% 133 (36.6) 184 (30.4) 59 (21.6) 127 (25.2) 74 (82.2) 57 (55.9)

Table 3

Relationship between HER2 status and hormone receptor expression in HER2 negative breast cancer"

Items HER2 zero, n (%) HER2 low, n (%) P value
HR positive 273 (75.2) 504 (83.2) 0.003
HR negative 90 (24.8) 102 (16.8)

Table 4

Relationship between HER2 status and CK5/6 and/or EGFR and AR expression in hormone receptor negative breast cancer"

Items HER2 zero, n (%) HER2 low, n (%) P value
CK5/6 and/or EGFR
    CK5/6 and/or EGFR positive 77 (85.6) 74 (72.5)
    CK5/6 and/or EGFR negative 10 (11.1) 20 (24.5) 0.056
    Absent 3 (3.3) 3 (2.9)
AR
    AR positive 31 (34.4) 60 (58.8)
    AR negative 51 (56.7) 27 (26.5) < 0.001
    Absent 8 (8.9) 15 (14.7)

Table 5

Prognostic factors of patients with HER2 negative breast cancers"

Figure 1

Comparison of DFS and OS between HER2 zero expression and HER2 low expression breast cancer HER2, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; DFS, disease free survival; OS, overall survival."

Table 6

Prognostic factors of patients with HER2 negative breast cancers in different hormone receptor status"

Figure 2

Comparison of DFS and OS between HER2 zero expression and HER2 low expression hormone receptor positive breast cancer Abbreviations as in Figure 1."

Figure 3

Comparison of DFS and OS between HER2 zero expression and HER2 low expression hormone receptor negative breast cancer Abbreviations as in Figure 1."

1 Yarden Y . Biology of HER2 and its importance in breast cancer[J]. Oncology, 2001, 61 (Suppl 2): 1- 13.
2 Choong GM , Cullen GD , O'Sullivan CC , et al. Evolving stan-dards of care and new challenges in the management of HER2-positive breast cancer[J]. CA Cancer J Clin, 2020, 70 (5): 355- 374.
doi: 10.3322/caac.21634
3 Swain SM , Baselga J , Kim SB , et al. Pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and docetaxel in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2015, 372 (8): 724- 734.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1413513
4 Wolff AC , Hammond ME , Hicks DG , et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Patho-logists clinical practice guideline update[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2013, 31 (31): 3997- 4013.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2013.50.9984
5 Gilcrease MZ , Woodward WA , Nicolas MM , et al. Even low-level HER2 expression may be associated with worse outcome in node-positive breast cancer[J]. Am J Surg Pathol, 2009, 33 (5): 759- 767.
doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e31819437f9
6 Modi S , Park H , Murthy RK , et al. Antitumor activity and safety of trastuzumab deruxtecan in patients with HER2-low-expressing advanced breast cancer: Results from a phase Ⅰb study[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38 (17): 1887- 1896.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02318
7 Tarantino P , Hamilton E , Tolaney SM , et al. HER2-low breast cancer: Pathological and clinical landscape[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2020, 38 (17): 1951- 1962.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.19.02488
8 Hammond ME , Hayes DF , Dowsett M , et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College Of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2010, 28 (16): 2784- 2795.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.6529
9 Schalper KA , Kumar S , Hui P , et al. A retrospective population-based comparison of HER2 immunohistochemistry and fluorescence in situ hybridization in breast carcinomas: Impact of 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists criteria[J]. Arch Pathol Lab Med, 2014, 138 (2): 213- 219.
doi: 10.5858/arpa.2012-0617-OA
10 Xin L , Wu Q , Zhan C , et al. Multicenter study of the clinico-pathological features and recurrence risk prediction model of early-stage breast cancer with low-positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression in China (Chinese Society of Breast Surgery 021)[J]. Chin Med J (Engl), 2022, 135 (6): 697- 706.
doi: 10.1097/CM9.0000000000002056
11 Schettini F , Chic N , Brasó-Maristany F , et al. Clinical, patholo-gical, and PAM50 gene expression features of HER2-low breast cancer[J]. NPJ Breast Cancer, 2021, 7 (1): 1.
doi: 10.1038/s41523-020-00208-2
12 Denkert C , Seither F , Schneeweiss A , et al. Clinical and molecular characteristics of HER2-low-positive breast cancer: Pooled analysis of individual patient data from four prospective, neoadjuvant clinical trials[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2021, 22 (8): 1151- 1161.
doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(21)00301-6
13 Rossi V , Sarotto I , Maggiorotto F , et al. Moderate immunohistochemical expression of HER-2 (2+) without HER-2 gene amplification is a negative prognostic factor in early breast cancer[J]. Oncologist, 2012, 17 (11): 1418- 1425.
doi: 10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0194
14 Won HS , Ahn J , Kim Y , et al. Clinical significance of HER2-low expression in early breast cancer: A nationwide study from the Korean Breast Cancer Society[J]. Breast Cancer Res, 2022, 24 (1): 22.
doi: 10.1186/s13058-022-01519-x
15 Horisawa N , Adachi Y , Takatsuka D , et al. The frequency of low HER2 expression in breast cancer and a comparison of prognosis between patients with HER2-low and HER2-negative breast cancer by HR status[J]. Breast Cancer, 2022, 29 (2): 234- 241.
doi: 10.1007/s12282-021-01303-3
16 Dehghani M , Keshavarz P , Talei A , et al. The Effects of Low HER2/neu expression on the clinicopathological characteristics of triple-negative breast cancer patients[J]. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev, 2020, 21 (10): 3027- 3032.
doi: 10.31557/APJCP.2020.21.10.3027
17 Jacot W , Maran-Gonzalez A , Massol O , et al. Prognostic value of HER2-low expression in non-metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and correlation with other biomarkers[J]. Cancers (Basel), 2021, 13 (23): 6059.
doi: 10.3390/cancers13236059
[1] Yu-mei LAI,Zhong-wu LI,Huan LI,Yan WU,Yun-fei SHI,Li-xin ZHOU,Yu-tong LOU,Chuan-liang CUI. Clinicopathological features and prognosis of anorectal melanoma: A report of 68 cases [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(2): 262-269.
[2] Qi SHEN,Yi-xiao LIU,Qun HE. Mucinous tubular and spindle cell carcinoma of kidney: Clinicopathology and prognosis [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(2): 276-282.
[3] Qian SU,Xin PENG,Chuan-xiang ZHOU,Guang-yan YU. Clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of non-Hodgkin lymphoma in oral and maxillofacial regions: An analysis of 369 cases [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(1): 13-21.
[4] Quan ZHANG,Hai-feng SONG,Bing-lei MA,Zhe-nan ZHANG,Chao-hui ZHOU,Ao-lin LI,Jun LIU,Lei LIANG,Shi-yu ZHU,Qian ZHANG. Pre-operative prognostic nutritional index as a predictive factor for prognosis in non-metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with surgery [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2023, 55(1): 149-155.
[5] Xiao-yan XING,Jun-xiao ZHANG,Feng-yun-zhi ZHU,Yi-fan WANG,Xin-yao ZHOU,Yu-hui LI. Clinical analysis of 5 cases of dermatomyositis complicated with macrophage activation syndrome [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(6): 1214-1218.
[6] Le-qing CAO,Jing-rui ZHOU,Yu-hong CHEN,Huan CHEN,Wei HAN,Yao CHEN,Yuan-yuan ZHANG,Chen-hua YAN,Yi-fei CHENG,Xiao-dong MO,Hai-xia FU,Ting-ting HAN,Meng LV,Jun KONG,Yu-qian SUN,Yu WANG,Lan-ping XU,Xiao-hui ZHANG,Xiao-jun HUANG. Relationship between treatment and prognosis in patients with late-onset severe pneumonia after allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(5): 1013-1020.
[7] Yue WANG,Shuang ZHANG,Hong ZHANG,Li LIANG,Ling XU,Yuan-jia CHENG,Xue-ning DUAN,Yin-hua LIU,Ting LI. Clinicopathological features and prognosis of hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative breast cancer [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(5): 853-862.
[8] Min QIU,Yan-yan LIAN,Min LU,Bin-shuai WANG,Xiao-jun TIAN,Jian LU,Cheng LIU,Shu-dong ZHANG,Min JIANG,Lu-lin MA. Treatment and prognosis of multiple primary malignant neoplasms complicated with renal cell carcinoma [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(4): 680-685.
[9] Er-shu BO,Peng HONG,Yu ZHANG,Shao-hui DENG,Li-yuan GE,Min LU,Nan LI,Lu-lin MA,Shu-dong ZHANG. Clinicopathological features and prognostic analysis of papillary renal cell carcinoma [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(4): 615-620.
[10] Yu-han DENG,Yong JIANG,Zi-yao WANG,Shuang LIU,Yu-xin WANG,Bao-hua LIU. Long short-term memory and Logistic regression for mortality risk prediction of intensive care unit patients with stroke [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(3): 458-467.
[11] LAN Lin,HE Yang,AN Jin-gang,ZHANG Yi. Relationship between prognosis and different surgical treatments of zygomatic defects: A retrospective study [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2022, 54(2): 356-362.
[12] WANG Fei,ZHU Xiang,HE Bei,ZHU Hong,SHEN Ning. Spontaneous remission of follicular bronchiolitis with nonspecific interstitial pneumonia: A case report and literature review [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(6): 1196-1200.
[13] Wei-bo GAO,Mao-jing SHI,Hai-yan ZHANG,Chun-bo WU,Ji-hong ZHU. Relationship between marked hyperferritinemia and hemophagocytic lymphohistiocytosis [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(5): 921-927.
[14] Mei-xiang ZHANG,Wen-zhi SHI,Jian-xin LIU,Chun-jian WANG,Yan LI,Wei WANG,Bin JIANG. Clinical characteristics and prognosis of MLL-AF6 positive patients with acute myeloid leukemia [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(5): 915-920.
[15] Yan-fang JIANG,Jian WANG,Yong-jian WANG,Jia LIU,Yin PEI,Xiao-peng LIU,Ying-fang AO,Yong MA. Mid-to-long term clinical outcomes and predictors after anterior cruciate ligament revision [J]. Journal of Peking University (Health Sciences), 2021, 53(5): 857-863.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed   
[1] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2007, 39(4): 434 -436 .
[2] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2001, 33(3): 288 -289 .
[3] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2002, 34(2): 97 -98 .
[4] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2002, 34(2): 112 -116 .
[5] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2011, 43(1): 29 -33 .
[6] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2011, 43(2): 179 -182 .
[7] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2009, 41(6): 635 -639 .
[8] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2003, 35(4): 429 -433 .
[9] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2003, 35(5): 485 -487 .
[10] . [J]. Journal of Peking University(Health Sciences), 2003, 35(z1): 92 -94 .