Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Mol Cancer Res. 2018 Dec 17;17(3):669–675. doi: 10.1158/1541-7786.MCR-18-0188

Figure 2.

Figure 2.

A) Analysis of archival material from 37 breast cancer patients from all subgroups (ER+/PR+/Her2-: top, Her2+: middle, ER-/PR-/Her2-: bottom), stained with the pY88/p27 dual assay, and then grouped into different pY88 scores (light green=0, dark green=1, yellow=2). Samples were also scored for Ki67, and MBR (tubular + nuclear + mitotic rate, respectively, defined by the WHO). B) Summary of subgroup cohorts. C) Six samples from A were stained in triplicate as independent runs and read independently to determine reproducibility of the pY88/p27 stain and marked with * in A. Top: p27 staining, Bottom: pY88 staining. Data: Mean +/−SE. D) Patient cohort with pY88/p27. Neoadjuvant therapy: 1= Adriamycin Cytoxan 4 cycles; 2=Taxol 4 cycles; 3= Pertuzimab, Tratuzamab, 4 cycles. Biopsies from this cohort were analyzed in the pY88/p27 IHC assay (N=>3 independent stains). Data are mean +/− SE. Left: p27 staining. Right: pY88 staining. Line depicts break between pY88 subgroup 1 and 2.