Related Experiment Video
Updated: Feb 25, 2026

07:41
Performing Data Mining And Integrative Analysis Of Biomarker in Breast Cancer Using Multiple Publicly Accessible Databases
Published on: May 17, 2019
9.7K
AN OVERVIEW OF PROGNOSTIC MARKERS IN BREAST CANCER
1Reader, Department of Pathology, Armed Forces Medical College, Pune 411 040.
Medical Journal, Armed Forces India
|August 5, 2017
Summary
Axillary lymph node metastasis is a key breast cancer prognostic factor, but new biological markers offer improved prediction. Reviewing select markers like ER and PR can identify high-risk patients cost-effectively.
Area of Science:
- Oncology
- Pathology
- Molecular Biology
Background:
- Axillary lymph node metastasis has historically been the primary prognostic factor in breast cancer.
- Traditional factors (age, tumor size, grade) and lymph node status alone often fail to accurately predict prognosis.
- Newer biological and molecular markers show promise in identifying high-risk breast cancer patients.
Purpose of the Study:
- To review key biological and molecular parameters for breast cancer prognosis.
- To identify cost-effective markers that accurately predict patient outcomes.
- To guide oncologists in selecting appropriate prognostic indicators.
Main Methods:
- Literature review of established and emerging prognostic markers in breast cancer.
- Analysis of biological and molecular parameters including Estrogen Receptor (ER), Progesterone Receptor (PR), S phase fraction, DNA ploidy, MIB-1 antibody, p53, C-erb-2, nm23, Cathepsin, and Topoisomerase II alpha.
- Evaluation of the predictive capabilities and cost-effectiveness of these markers.
Main Results:
- Selected biological markers offer enhanced prognostic accuracy compared to traditional factors alone.
- Certain markers can effectively identify 'high risk' patient groups.
- A comprehensive analysis of all markers may not be essential or cost-effective for all cases.
Conclusions:
- Biological and molecular markers are crucial for accurate breast cancer prognosis.
- A judicious selection of key markers can improve risk stratification and treatment decisions.
- Further research into cost-effective prognostic panels is warranted.
