Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Pathological examination has been the gold standard for diagnosis in cancer and its role has also included the elucidation of etiology, pathogenesis, clinicopathological correlation, and prognostication. The advent of newer technologies and the realization that breast cancer is heterogeneous has shifted the focus to prognostication, with increased attention being paid to the identification of morphological features and immunohistochemical markers of prognostic relevance. However, despite the massive efforts invested in the identification of immunohistochemical biomarkers in breast cancer the majority have not proven to be of value in multivariate analyses and only estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and Her2/neu expression have remained essential components of pathological examination. These 3 markers were initially employed for prognostication but their role in treatment also rendered them of predictive value. Newer molecular methods, especially high-throughput technologies, have shown that even morphologically similar subtypes of breast cancer can show molecular heterogeneity; moreover, infiltrating ductal carcinoma can be separated into at least 4 molecular subtypes designated luminal (ER+, PR+, and Her2/neu-), Her2 overexpressing (ER-, PR-, and Her2/neu+), basal-like (ER-, PR-, Her2/neu-, and CK5/6+, EGFR+), and normal breast-like (ER-, PR-, and Her2/neu-), each with different clinical outcomes. The importance of proliferative gene expression in these subtypes has been demonstrated and surrogate immunohistochemical markers include ER, PR, Her2/neu, and Ki67 for the more expensive molecular tests. Molecular technologies, importantly, have not only provided further insights into the heterogeneity of breast cancer but have also opened new avenues for treatment through the identification of signaling molecules important in the proliferation and survival of the neoplastic cells. The treatment of cancer thus shifts from the conventional approach of 'one size fits all' to one of personalized treatment tailored to the specific characteristics of the tumor. Pathologists continue to play their traditional role in diagnosis but, as purveyors of the excised tissue, pathologists now have the additional role of identifying biomarkers responsive to therapeutic manipulation, thus playing an inextricable role as diagnostic oncologists in the management of breast cancer.
Leong et al. (Sat,) studied this question.