[History of the anatomical and clinical autopsy]. / Geschichte der anatomischen und klinischen Obduktion.

The history of the autopsy is naturally also a part of the history of anatomy and pathology and spans over about 2300 years. The first documented autopsies were conducted in about 300 B.C. Thereafter, due to the prohibition of dissections due to religious, social, or hygienic reasons, a long period of stagnation took place. With the onset of the Renaissance in the 15th and 16th century, interest in the ancient sciences such as anatomy began to rise and consequently an increasing number of dissections for anatomical studies were conducted. Nevertheless, it took nearly 200 years until clinical symptoms and/or causes of disease and death were correlated with anatomical findings. In the second half of the 19th century, the clinical autopsy based on the combination of macroscopic and microscopic findings became more and more important as a precondition for the systematic description of diseases. Based on autopsy findings and together with several new techniques, modern pathology could be established at the beginning of the 20th century as a source of scientific knowledge for the clinical medicine and as a theoretical discipline of its own.

Triple-negative high-risk breast cancer derives particular benefit from dose intensification of adjuvant chemotherapy: results of WSG AM-01 trial.

BACKGROUND: This paper evaluates the prognostic and predictive impact of protein expression of various molecular markers in high-risk breast cancer (HRBC) patients with >9 involved lymph nodes, who received different chemotherapy dose-intensification strategies within a prospective randomized WSG AM-01 trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Paraffin-embedded tumors from 236 patients, who were randomly assigned to dose-dense conventional chemotherapy with four cycles of E(90)C(600) followed by three cycles of C(600)M(40)F(600) every 2 weeks (DD) or a rapidly cycled tandem high-dose regimen with two cycles of E(90)C(600) every 2 weeks followed by two cycles of E(90)C(3000)Thiotepa(400) every 3 weeks (HD), were available for retrospective central pathological review (116 HD/120 DD). Expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), MIB-1, epidermal growth factor receptor, and Her-2/neu was evaluated immunohistochemically using tissue microarrays. Results were correlated with follow-up data and treatment effects by proportional hazard Cox regression models (including interaction analysis). RESULTS: After a median follow-up of 61.7 months, 5-year event-free survival (EFS) as well as overall survival (OS) rates for the 236 patients were significantly better in the HD arm: EFS: 62% versus 41% [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.60, 95% CI 0.43-0.85, P = 0.004]; OS: 76% versus 61% (HR = 0.58, 95% CI 0.39-0.87, P = 0.007). In multivariate analysis, HD, tumor size <3 cm, positive PR, negative MIB-1 staining, and grade 1/2 were associated with favorable outcome. Interaction analysis showed that regarding predictive effects, triple negative (ER/PR/Her-2/neu) and G3 tumors derived most benefit from HD. CONCLUSION: Tandem HD improves both EFS and OS in HRBC. This therapy effect may be partly attributable to superior efficacy in the subgroup of triple-negative tumors and/or G3 with their poor prognostic marker profile.

[Prognostic and predictive impact of protein expression profiling in high risk breast cancer patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy]. / Prognostische und prädiktive Bedeutung von Proteinexpressions-Profilen in einer Hochrisiko-Mammakarzinomsubgruppe aus der WSG AM01 phase III-Studie (Hochdosis-Chemotherapie versus konventionelle dosis-dichte Chemotherapie).

The prognostic and predictive impact of protein expression profiles was analyzed in high-risk breast cancer patients who had previously been shown to benefit from high-dose chemotherapy (HDCT) in comparison to dose-dense chemotherapy (DDCT). Using tissue microarrays, the expression of 34 protein markers was evaluated in 236 patients who had received either HDCT or DDCT (in the WSG AM01 trial). 1) 24 protein markers of the initial panel of 34 markers were sufficient to identify five profile clusters by K-means clustering: luminal A (27%), luminal B (12%), HER-2 (21%), basal-like (13%) cluster and a so called 'multiple marker negative'=MMN cluster (27%) characterized by the absence of specifying markers. 2) After DDCT, HER-2 and basal-like groups had significantly worse event-free survival (EFS) (HR 3.6 (95% CI, 1.65-8.18; p = 0.001) and HR 3.7 (95% CI, 1.68-8.48); p < 0.0001), respectively) when compared to both luminal groups. 3) After HDCT, the hazard ratio was 1.5 (95% CI, 0.76-3.05) for EFS in the HER-2 subgroups and 1.1 (95% CI, 0.37-3.32) in the basal-like subgroups which indicates a better outcome for patients in the HER-2 and basal-like subgroups who received HDCT. Protein expression profiling in high-risk breast cancers identified 5 subtypes, which differed with respect to survival and response to chemotherapy: In contrast to luminal A and B subtypes, HER-2 and basal-like subgroups had a significant predictive benefit from HDCT when compared to DDCT.