Table 3.
ILC and benefit of genomic companion diagnostic tests
| Test | Ref. | Cohort | Results | Study conclusion | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GGI/MapQuantDx™ | [89] | 166 ILC | Test outperformed grade | Prognostic value in ILC | |
| MammaPrint | [90] | 217 ILC | Independent value of MammaPrint, specifically in lymph node-negative ILC | ||
| [91] | 487 ILC (255 CILC) | 10.2% CILC and 22.8% of ILC variants were high risk | Prognostic value in ILC | ||
| OncotypeDx | [55] | 353 ILC | 20% low-, 72% intermediate-, and 8% high-risk score | ILC more likely low/int score but 5-year DMFS equivalent to non-ILC | |
| [92] | 30 ILC | All ILC low or int risk | Questions utility in ILC; more data required | ||
| [93] | 97 ILC | 1% of ILC (non-pleomorphic) record high-risk RS | Questions utility in ILC; more data required | ||
| [94] | 102 ILC | Different RS distribution in ILC v IBC-NST | More data required | ||
| [95] | 59 ILC | 50% ILC in low risk | More data required | ||
| [96] | 9037 ILC | SEER data | 38.1% ILC intermediate risk; 2.4% high risk | More data required | |
| [97] | 7316 ILC | SEER data | 72% ILC in intermediate-risk group; 8% high risk | Adjuvant Ctx did not confer survival benefit to int or high risk; note LN+ cases included | |
| [98] | 49,819 ILC | Genomic Health clinical lab 2004–2017 | 63.9% ILC in low risk, 33.6 in intermediate, 2.5% in high risk | Classic ILCs have lower average RS (16.3) compared to IDC (18.4) and ILC variants (18.2), and lower rate of tumours with high scores (2.5% vs. 10.7% vs. 8.4%, respectively) | |
| Prosigna | [99] | 341 ILC | Danish Breast Cancer Group | ILC had poorer 10-year DR rates than ROR matched IDC | Prognostic value in ILC |
| EndoPredict/EPClin | [100] | 470 ILC | TransATAC and ABCSG-6/8 | 63.4% were low EPClin risk group (a 10-year DR risk of 4.8%) compared to 172 (36.6%) women in the high-risk group (110-year DR risk of 26.6%) | Significant prognostic value; Ctx in low-risk group not indicated |