Skip to main content
. 2004 Jul 29;6(5):R571–R585. doi: 10.1186/bcr912

Table 1.

Clinicopathological variables in the patients entered into this study

Characteristic No. of patients (%)
Total 103 (100)
Age (years)
 ≤50 31 (30)
 >50 72 (70)
Invasive tumours
 Lymph node status
  Negative 37 (41)
  Positive 53 (59)
  Not assessed 13
 Invasive tumour grade
  Grade I 16 (16)
  Grade II 51 (49)
  Grade III 36 (35)
 Invasive tumour size (cm)
  ≤2 cm 53 (52)
  >2 cm 48 (48)
  Multifocal 2
 Lymphovascular invasion
  Present 50 (50)
  Absent 50 (50)
  Not assessed 3
 NPI
  GPG < 3.4 34 (39)
  MPG 3.4–5.4 37 (42)
  PPG > 5.4 17 (19)
  Not possible to calculate 15
 ER (quick-score)
  Positive (4–8) 63 (64)
  Negative (0–3) 36 (36)
  Not assessed 4
 HER-2 IHC
  Negative (0/1+) 87 (84)
  Positive (2+/3+) 16 (16)
 Ki67 IHC
  Low proliferation, <10% 51 (50)
  High proliferation, ≥10% 52 (50)
Ductal carcinoma in situ
 VNPC
  Grade I 23 (24)
  Grade II 36 (37)
  Grade III 38 (39)
  Not assessed 6
 ER (quick-score)
  Positive (4–8) 61 (64)
  Negative (0–3) 35 (36)
  Not assessed 7
 HER-2 IHC
  Negative (0/1+) 77 (80)
  Positive (2+/3+) 19 (20)
  Not assessed 7
 Ki67 IHC
  Low proliferation, <10% 61 (59)
  High proliferation, ≥10% 42 (41)

ER, oestrogen receptor; GPG, good prognostic group; IHC, immunohistochemistry; MPG, moderate prognostic group; NPI, Nottingham Prognostic Index; PPG, poor prognostic group; VNPC, Van Nuys Pathologic classification.