Skip to main content
. 2012 Jun 19;107(2):382–387. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2012.219

Table 2. Comparison of biomarker expression and molecular subtypes among young vs old women.

  Women ⩽40 Women ⩾50  
Variables (%) (%) P -value
ER status n=158 n=99 0.01
 Positive 79 (50.0) 65 (65.7)  
 Negative 79 (50.0) 34 (34.3)  
 Level (%) 33.04±41.67 57.87±44.65 <0.00
       
PR status n=158 n=99 0.07
 Positive 60 (38.0) 49 (49.5)  
 Negative 98 (62.0) 50 (50.5)  
 Level (%) 18.43±30.49 27.9±37.12 0.03
       
Her2 status n=157 n=99 1.00
 Positive 35 (22.3) 23 (23.2)  
 Negative 122 (77.7) 76 (76.8)  
 Amplification level (FISH) 4.89±2.66 4.65±2.91  
       
KI67 n=149 n=98 0.01
 High (>14%) 126 (82.9) 75 (76.5)  
 Low (⩽14%) 23 (17.1) 23 (23.5)  
 Level (%) 49.58±30.96 40.11±29.78 0.01
       
P53 n=143 n=98 0.00
 Normal (<10%) 79 (55.2) 72 (73.5)  
 High (⩾10%) 64 (44.8) 26 (26.5)  
 Level (%) 31.34±38.76 17.90±32.16 0.00
       
Molecular subtypes n=157 n=99 0.05
 Luminal A 18 (11.4) 20 (20.2)  
 Luminal B 45 (28.7) 30 (30.3)  
 Her2 subtype 21 (13.4) 8 (8.1)  
 Luminal-Her2 14 (8.9) 15 (15.2)  
 Triple negative 59 (37.6) 26 (26.2)  

Abbreviation: FISH=fluorescent in situ hybridisation.