Pathological features and clinical outcomes of breast cancer according to levels of oestrogen receptor expression

FOXC1 and SOX10 in Estrogen Receptor-Low Positive/HER2-Negative Breast Cancer: Potential Biomarkers for the Basal-like Phenotype Prediction

CONTEXT.—

Breast cancer with low (1%-10%) estrogen receptor (ER) expression (ER-low positive) constitutes a small portion of invasive breast cancers, and the treatment strategy for these tumors remains debatable.

OBJECTIVE.—

To characterize the features and outcomes of ER-low positive patients, and clarify the clinical significance of FOXC1 and SOX10 expression in ER-low positive/HER2-negative tumors.

DESIGN.—

Among 9082 patients diagnosed with primary invasive breast cancer, the clinicopathologic features of those with ER-low positive breast cancer were characterized. FOXC1 and SOX10 mRNA levels were analyzed in ER-low positive/HER2-negative cases from public data sets. The expression of FOXC1 and SOX10 in ER-low positive/HER2-negative tumors was evaluated by immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS.—

The clinicopathologic study of ER-low positive tumors indicated more aggressive characteristics compared with those tumors with ER >10%, while they had more overlapping features with ER-negative tumors irrespective of the HER2 status. The intrinsic molecular subtype of ER-low positive cases with high FOXC1 and SOX10 mRNA expression was more likely to be nonluminal. Among the ER-low positive/HER2-negative tumors, 56.67% (51 of 90) and 36.67% (33 of 90) were positive for FOXC1 and SOX10, respectively, which was significantly positively correlated with CK5/6 expression. In addition, the survival analysis demonstrated no significant difference between patients who received and who did not receive endocrine therapy.

CONCLUSIONS.—

ER-low positive breast cancers biologically overlap more with ER-negative tumors. ER-low positive/HER2-negative cases demonstrate a high rate of FOXC1 or SOX10 expression, and these cases might be better categorized as a basal-like phenotype/subtype. FOXC1 and SOX10 testing may be used for the intrinsic phenotype prediction for ER-low positive/HER2-negative patients.

Quantitative expression of oestrogen receptor in breast cancer: Clinical and molecular significance

BACKGROUND

Oestrogen receptor (ER) positive breast cancer (BC) patients are eligible for endocrine therapy (ET), regardless of ER immunohistochemical expression level. There is a wide spectrum of ER expression and the response to ET is not uniform. This study aimed to assess the clinical and molecular consequences of ER heterogeneity with respect to ET-response.

METHODS

ER expression, categorised by percentage and staining intensity in a large BC cohort (n = 7559) was correlated with clinicopathological parameters and patient ET response. The Cancer Genome Atlas Data BC cohort (n = 1047) was stratified by ER expression and transcriptomic analysis completed to better understand the molecular basis of ER heterogeneity.

RESULTS

The quantitative proportional increase in ER expression was positively associated with favourable prognostic parameters. Tumours with 1-9% ER expression were characteristically similar to ER-negative (<1%) tumours. Maximum ET-response was observed in tumours with 100% ER expression, with responses significantly different to tumours exhibiting ER at < 100% and significantly decreased survival rates were observed in tumours with 50% and 10% of ER expression. The Histochemical-score (H-score), which considers both staining intensity and percentage, added significant prognostic value over ER percentage alone with significant outcome differences observed at H-scores of 30, 100 and 200. There was a positive correlation between ER expression and ESR1 mRNA expression and expression of ER-regulated genes. Pathway analysis identified differential expression in key cancer-related pathways in different ER-positive groups.

CONCLUSION

ET-response is statistically proportionally related to ER expression with significant differences observed at 10%, 50% and 100%. The H-score adds prognostic and predictive information.

The Clinical and Biological Significance of Estrogen Receptor-Low Positive Breast Cancer

Estrogen receptor (ER) status in breast cancer (BC) is determined using immunohistochemistry (IHC) with nuclear expression in ≥1% of cells defined as ER-positive. BC with 1%-9% expression (ER-low-positive), is a clinically and biologically unique subgroup. In this study, we hypothesized that ER-low-positive BC represents a heterogeneous group with a mixture of ER-positive and ER-negative tumor, which may explain their divergent clinical behavior. A large BC cohort (n = 8171) was investigated and categorized into 3 groups: ER-low-positive (1%-9%), ER-positive (≥10%), and ER-negative (<1%) where clinicopathological and outcome characteristics were compared. A subset of ER-low-positive cases was further evaluated using IHC, RNAscope, and RT-qPCR. PAM50 subtyping and ESR1 mRNA expression levels were assessed in ER-low-positive cases within The Cancer Genome Atlas data set. The reliability of image analysis software in assessment of ER expression in the ER-low-positive category was also assessed. ER-low-positive tumors constituted <2% of BC cases examined and showed significant clinicopathological similarity to ER-negative tumors. Most of these tumors were nonluminal types showing low ESR1 mRNA expression. Further validation of ER status revealed that 45% of these tumors were ER-negative with repeated IHC staining and confirmed by RNAscope and RT-qPCR. ER-low-positive tumors diagnosed on needle core biopsy were enriched with false-positive ER staining. BCs with 10% ER behaved similar to ER-positive, rather than ER-negative or low-positive BCs. Moderate concordance was found in assessment of ER-low-positive tumors, and this was not improved by image analysis. Routinely diagnosed ER-low-positive BC includes a proportion of ER-negative cases. We recommend repeat testing of BC showing 1%-9% ER expression and using a cutoff ≥10% expression to define ER positivity to help better inform treatment decisions.

Immune landscape of breast tumors with low and intermediate estrogen receptor expression

Immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) is currently approved for patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), whereas responses to ICB are also observed in a small subgroup of Estrogen Receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer. The cut-off for ER-positivity (≥1%) is based on likelihood of endocrine treatment response, but ER-positive breast cancer represents a very heterogeneous group. This raises the question whether selection based on ER-negativity should be revisited to select patients for ICB treatment in the context of clinical trials. Stromal tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) and other immune parameters are higher in TNBC compared to ER-positive breast cancer, but it is unknown whether lower ER levels are associated with more inflamed tumor microenvironments (TME). We collected a consecutive series of primary tumors from 173 HER2-negative breast cancer patients, enriched for tumors with ER expression between 1 and 99% and found levels of stromal TILs, CD8 + T cells, and PD-L1 positivity in breast tumors with ER 1-9% and ER 10-50% to be comparable to tumors with ER 0%. Expression of immune-related gene signatures in tumors with ER 1-9% and ER 10-50% was comparable to ER 0%, and higher than in tumors with ER 51-99% and ER 100%. Our results suggest that the immune landscape of ER low tumors (1-9%) and ER intermediate tumors (10-50%) mimic that of primary TNBC.

The prognostic and predictive impact of low estrogen receptor expression in early breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Traditionally, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive breast cancer has been defined as tumors with ≥1% positive for ER. The updated American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists (ASCO/CAP) guidelines recommend that tumors with ER expression of 1%-10% should be classified as ER-low-positive, recognizing the limited clinical evidence on the prognostic and predictive role of low ER expression. We aimed to investigate the predictive role of ER-low expression to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NeoCT) and the prognostic significance of ER-low expressing breast tumors compared with ER-positive or ER-negative breast tumors.

Methods

A meta-analysis was conducted using the Meta-analyses Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines and eligible articles were identified on PubMed and ISI Web of Science databases. The primary outcome was pathologic complete response and secondary outcomes were disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). Twelve retrospective cohort studies were included in the meta-analysis. NeoCT resulted in higher pathologic complete response among patients with ER-low expression compared with ER-positive and comparable to ER-negative. Patients with ER-low breast cancer had a statistically significant worse DFS and OS compared with patients with ER-positive breast cancer, whereas no difference in DFS or OS was observed between ER-low and ER-negative subgroups.

Discussion

The current evidence suggests that ER-low breast cancer has a more similar outcome to ER-negative than to ER-positive breast cancer in terms of DFS and OS. ER-low expression seems also to have a predictive role regarding NeoCT. Considering the certainty of current evidence categorized as low to moderate, our results urge the need for well-designed prospective studies investigating the molecular background and the most appropriate treatment strategy for ER-low expressing breast cancer.

•

The predictive and prognostic roles of estrogen receptor (ER)-low breast cancer have been studied in this meta-analysis.

•

ER-low expression was associated with higher pathologic complete response after NeoCT compared with ER-positive.

•

Both disease-free and overall survival were comparable between ER-low breast cancer and ER-negative breast cancer.

Hormone Receptor Expression on Endocrine Therapy in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of hormone receptor expression on endocrine therapy in patients with breast cancer.

METHODS

The databases were used to collect the effect of high expression and low expression of hormone receptors on the efficacy of endocrine therapy in breast cancer. Two evaluators independently screened the literature based on preset inclusion and exclusion criteria. The quality of the article was evaluated using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) system. The survival data included in the literature were extracted and the ln(hazard ratio (HR)) and se[ln(HR)] of the overall survival (OS), disease-free survival (DFS), and recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were calculated according to different level of hormone receptors. The RevMan 5.3 software was used to evaluate the meta-analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 13 relevant literature were included in the study. There were 8318 estrogen receptor (ER)-positive and 7926 progesterone receptor (PR)-positive patients. Overall survival, DFS, and RFS rates in high expression of ER(+) patients were significantly higher in low expression of ER(+) patients (OS HR = .59, 95% confidence interval (CI): .46-.76, P < .0001; DFS HR = .62, 95%CI: .50-.76, P < .00001; RFS HR = .44, 95% CI: .33-.58, P < .00001). In patients with high expression of PR(+), OS, DFS, and RFS rates were significantly higher than those with low expression of PR(+) (OS HR = .66, 95% CI: .57-.78, P < .00001; DFS HR = .52, 95% CI: .42-.65, P < .00001; RFS HR = .24, 95% CI: .11-.53, P = .0004).

CONCLUSION

The expression of ER and PR are powerful predictors of adjuvant endocrine therapy response. Breast cancer patients with high expression of hormone receptors benefit more from endocrine therapy and have better prognosis.

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists Guideline Update

PURPOSE.—

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS.—

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS.—

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines .

Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Testing in Breast Cancer: ASCO/CAP Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To update key recommendations of the American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists estrogen (ER) and progesterone receptor (PgR) testing in breast cancer guideline.

METHODS

A multidisciplinary international Expert Panel was convened to update the clinical practice guideline recommendations informed by a systematic review of the medical literature.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Expert Panel continues to recommend ER testing of invasive breast cancers by validated immunohistochemistry as the standard for predicting which patients may benefit from endocrine therapy, and no other assays are recommended for this purpose. Breast cancer samples with 1% to 100% of tumor nuclei positive should be interpreted as ER positive. However, the Expert Panel acknowledges that there are limited data on endocrine therapy benefit for cancers with 1% to 10% of cells staining ER positive. Samples with these results should be reported using a new reporting category, ER Low Positive, with a recommended comment. A sample is considered ER negative if < 1% or 0% of tumor cell nuclei are immunoreactive. Additional strategies recommended to promote optimal performance, interpretation, and reporting of cases with an initial low to no ER staining result include establishing a laboratory-specific standard operating procedure describing additional steps used by the laboratory to confirm/adjudicate results. The status of controls should be reported for cases with 0% to 10% staining. Similar principles apply to PgR testing, which is used primarily for prognostic purposes in the setting of an ER-positive cancer. Testing of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) for ER is recommended to determine potential benefit of endocrine therapies to reduce risk of future breast cancer, while testing DCIS for PgR is considered optional. Additional information can be found at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Expanding the Biotherapeutics Realm via miR-34a: "Potent Clever Little" Agent in Breast Cancer Therapy

BACKGROUND

One of the most prevalent cancers befell to women is considered to be breast cancer (BC). It is also the deadliest among the female population after lung cancer. Additionally, several studies have demonstrated that there is an association between microRNA34-a and breast cancer.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar up to December 2018. Those studies which have been studied miR-34a and its tumor-suppressing capabilities were considered as the most important topics. Moreover, we extracted articles which were solely focused on microRNA-34a in breast cancer therapy. Finally, 80 articles were included.

RESULTS

In comparison with the normal tissues, down-regulation of miR-34a expression is shown considerably in tumor cells. Overexpression of miR-34a acts as a tumor suppressor by transcriptional regulating one of the signaling pathways (TP53), NOTCH, and transforming growth factor beta (TGF-β), Bcl- 2 and SIRT1genes, HDAC1 and HDAC7, Fra-1, TPD52, TLR Via CXCL10. Moreover, drug resistance declines which lead to the apoptosis, cell cycle arrest and senescence. As a result, the proliferation, invasion and metastasis of the tumor are suppressed. The Mrx34 drug contains miR-34a mimic and a lipid vector. MiR-34a as the active ingredient portrays the role of a tumor suppressor. This drug has recently entered the clinical trials studies.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest a robust cause for developing miR-34a as a therapeutic agent to target BC. In that scenario, miR-34a is strongly useful to introduce new therapeutic goals for BC. Moreover, this review aims to confirm the signal pathways, therapeutic and diagnostic values of miR- 34a in BC and beyond.

Silencing CDR1as enhances the sensitivity of breast cancer cells to drug resistance by acting as a miR-7 sponge to down-regulate REGγ

In our study, we aimed to investigate the role of CDR1as during competitive inhibition of miR‐7 in the regulation of cisplatin chemosensitivity in breast cancer via regulating REGγ. RT‐qPCR was applied to detect the expression of CDR1as and miR‐7 in breast cancer tissues, breast cancer cell lines and corresponding drug‐resistant cell lines. The correlation between CDR1as and miR‐7 and between miR‐7 and REGγ was evaluated. MCF‐7‐R and MDA‐MB‐231‐R cells were selected followed by transfection of a series of mimics, inhibitors or siRNA. The effect of CDR1as on the half maximal inhibitor concentration (IC50), cisplatin sensitivity and cell apoptosis was also analysed. Furthermore, a subcutaneous xenograft nude mouse model was established to further confirm the effect of CDR1as on the chemosensitivity of breast cancer to cisplatin in vivo. Immunohistochemical staining was conducted to test the Ki‐67 expression in nude mice. A positive correlation was found between the drug resistance and CDR1as expression in breast cancer. CDR1as could increase the resistance of breast cancer cells to cisplatin. miR‐7 expression was low, while REGγ was highly expressed in MCF‐7‐R and MDA‐MB‐231‐R cells. CDR1as competitively inhibited miR‐7 and up‐regulated REGγ. Overexpression of miR‐7 could reverse the enhanced sensitivity of silenced CDR1as to drug‐resistant breast cancer cells. Additionally, in vivo experiments demonstrated that CDR1as mediated breast cancer occurrence and its sensitivity to cisplatin. Silencing CDR1as decreased Ki‐67 expression. Silencing CDR1as may inhibit the expression of REGγ by removing the competitive inhibitory effect on miR‐7 and thus enhancing the sensitivity of drug‐resistant breast cancer cells.

Higher ER load is not associated with better outcome in stage 1-3 breast cancer: a descriptive overview of quantitative HR analysis in operable breast cancer

Purpose

In breast cancer, hormone receptor (HR) status is generally a qualitative measure; positive or negative. Quantitatively measured oestrogen and progesterone receptors (ER and PR) are frequently proposed prognostic and predictive markers, some guidelines even provide different treatment options for patients with strong versus weak expression.

Aim

To evaluate quantitative HR load assessed by immunohistochemistry as a prognostic and predictive measure in stage 1–3 breast cancer.

Methods

We reviewed all the available literature on quantitatively measured HRs using immunohistochemistry.

Results

All included studies (n = 19) comprised a cohort of 30,754 patients. Only 2 out of 17 studies found a clear correlation between higher quantitative ER and better disease outcome. Only one trial examined quantitative ER both as prognostic and predictive marker and found no association between ER% and survival. Ten studies examined quantitative PR load, only two of those found a significant correlation between higher PR load and better disease outcome. Two trials examined quantitative PR both as prognostic and predictive marker, neither found any association between PR% and disease outcome.

Conclusions

There is no clear evidence for using quantitatively assessed ER and PR as prognostic nor predictive marker in patients with stage 1–3 breast cancer. We recommend only using a qualitative HR status in future guidelines and treatment considerations.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-019-05233-9) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Down-regulated expression of LINC00518 prevents epithelial cell growth and metastasis in breast cancer through the inhibition of CDX2 methylation and the Wnt signaling pathway

Breast cancer (BC)-related mortality is associated with the potential metastatic properties of the primary breast tumors. The following study was conducted with the main focus on the effect of LINC00518 on the growth and metastasis of BC epithelial cells via the Wnt signaling pathway through regulation of the methylation of CDX2 gene. Initially, differentially expressed long intergenic non-protein coding RNAs (lincRNAs) related to BC were screened out in the Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) database, after which we detected the LINC00518 expression and localization in BC tissues and cells. Then the CDX2 positive expression and methylation level were identified. The targeting relationship of LINC00518 and CDX2, and binding methyltransferase in the promoter region were examined. BC epithelial cell proliferation, colony formation ability, invasion, migration and apoptosis were further evaluated. The lincRNA expression data related to BC downloaded from the TCGA database revealed that there was a high expression of LINC00518 in BC, and a negative correlation between LINC00518 and CDX2. In addition, LINC00518 promotes CDX2 methylation by recruiting DNA methyltransferase through activating the Wnt signaling pathway. The down-regulation of LINC00518 inhibited proliferation, invasion, migration, and EMT of BC epithelial cells while enhancing apoptosis. The inhibitory effects of LINC00518 down-regulation was reversed by CDX2 down-regulation. In conclusion, our findings revealed that down-regulation of LINC00518 might have the ability to suppress BC progression by up-regulating CDX2 expression through the reduction of methylation and blockade of the Wnt signaling pathway, resulting in the inhibition of proliferation and promotion of apoptosis of BC epithelial cells.

Only estrogen receptor "positive" is not enough to predict the prognosis of breast cancer

PURPOSE

Beginning in 2018, biomarkers including estrogen receptor (ER) status were incorporated in the 8th AJCC staging system. ER expression levels were not considered in these changes. We hypothesized that the levels of ER expression could affect the prognosis of breast cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted to identify all female patients with invasive breast cancer between 2003 and 2012. ER negative (group I), weakly ER-positive (group II), and strongly ER-positive (group III) were defined as Allred total scores of 0-2, 3-5, and 6-8, respectively. We examined a multigene panel, designated the BCT score, which is a newly developed prognostic model for predicting the risk of a distant metastasis.

RESULTS

Among the 4949 patients enrolled in this study, 1310 (26.5%), 361 (7.3%), and 3277 (66.2%) were categorized as group I, II, and III, respectively. Median F/U duration was 57.8 months. Compared to group III, patients in group II were younger, had larger tumors, and were also more likely to have PR-negative tumors, HER-2 amplification, high Ki-67, and high nuclear grade. Between group II and III, there was a significant difference in OS (P = 0.0764, 0.909, and 0.010, respectively). After adjusting for additional factors that may affect OS, the HR for OS showed higher in group II than in group III. The baseline median BCT score indicated that lower ER expression was associated with significantly higher BCT score (P < 0.0001) and significantly more likely to have high risk group (P < 0.0001) relative to higher levels of ER expression group.

CONCLUSION

ER expression levels affect the prognosis of breast cancer. The risk for patients with weakly ER-positive breast cancer should not be underestimated.

Immunohistochemical Performance of Estrogen and Progesterone Receptor Antibodies on the Dako Omnis Staining Platform: Evaluation in Multicenter Studies

The analysis of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR) expression levels by immunohistochemistry is an important part of the initial evaluation of breast cancer and critically important in treatment planning. Anti-ERα (clone EP1) and anti-PR (clone PgR 1294) antibodies are in development for the Dako Omnis automated staining platform. These antibodies are not yet commercially available and are in performance evaluation, including the 4 international, multicenter studies reported here. For each antibody, a reproducibility study and a method comparison study was done in a randomized manner in order to test the antibodies under conditions closest to real-world user conditions. The reproducibility studies included 5 staining runs on the Dako Omnis with 20 formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded human breast carcinoma specimens in 3 independent laboratories, and the method comparison studies included several hundred specimens stained on the Dako Omnis and on the Autostainer Link 48 platforms. Stained slides were evaluated for nuclear ER or PR expression according to American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guidelines (≥1% cut-off for positive) by pathologists who were blinded from the staining method and specimen ID. For both anti-ERα (clone EP1) and anti-PR (clone PgR 1294) on the Dako Omnis, high reproducibility agreement rates were obtained on the interrun, interlaboratory, and interobserver endpoints. High concordance rates were observed between the specimens stained on the Dako Omnis platform and the Autostainer Link 48 platform. Staining quality was excellent for both anti-ERα (clone EP1) and anti-PR (clone PgR 1294) on the Dako Omnis. These results suggest that these antibodies are reliable and reproducible tools for immunohistochemistry analysis of ER and PR expression levels in formalin-fixed and paraffin-embedded breast carcinoma tissues on the Dako Omnis platform.

Immunohistochemical Surrogates for Molecular Classification of Breast Carcinoma: A 2015 Update

CONTEXT

-The pioneering works on molecular classification (MC) by Perou and Sorlie et al in the early 2000s using global gene expression profiling identified 5 intrinsic subtypes of invasive breast cancers (IBCs): luminal A, luminal B, normal breast-like, HER2-enriched, and basal-like subtypes, each unique in incidence, survival, and response to therapy. Because the application of gene expression profiling in daily practice is not economical or practical at the present time, many investigators have studied the use of immunohistochemical (IHC) surrogates as a substitute for determining the MC of IBC.

OBJECTIVE

-To discuss the continuing efforts that have been made to develop clinically significant and readily available IHC surrogates for the MC of IBC.

DATA SOURCES

-Data were obtained from pertinent peer-reviewed English-language literature.

CONCLUSIONS

-The most commonly used IHC surrogates are estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2), dividing IBC into luminal, HER2, and triple-negative subtypes. The addition of Ki-67, cytokeratin 5, and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) separates luminal B from luminal A subtypes, and basal-like subtype from triple-negative breast cancer. More recently, biomarkers such as androgen receptor and p53 have been shown to further stratify these molecular subtypes. Although many studies of IHC-based MC have shown clinical significance similar to gene expression profiling-defined MC, its critical limitations are: (1) a lack of standardization in terminology, (2) a lack of standardization in biomarkers used for each subtype, and (3) the lack of a uniform cutoff for each biomarker. A panel of IHC surrogates for each subtype of IBC is proposed.