What matters most: Randomized controlled trial of breast cancer surgery conversation aids across socioeconomic strata.

BACKGROUND: Women of lower socioeconomic status (SES) with early-stage breast cancer are more likely to report poorer physician-patient communication, lower satisfaction with surgery, lower involvement in decision making, and higher decision regret compared to women of higher SES. The objective of this study was to understand how to support women across socioeconomic strata in making breast cancer surgery choices. METHODS: We conducted a 3-arm (Option Grid, Picture Option Grid, and usual care), multisite, randomized controlled superiority trial with surgeon-level randomization. The Option Grid (text only) and Picture Option Grid (pictures plus text) conversation aids were evidence-based summaries of available breast cancer surgery options on paper. Decision quality (primary outcome), treatment choice, treatment intention, shared decision making (SDM), anxiety, quality of life, decision regret, and coordination of care were measured from T0 (pre-consultation) to T5 (1-year after surgery. RESULTS: Sixteen surgeons saw 571 of 622 consented patients. Patients in the Picture Option Grid arm (n = 248) had higher knowledge (immediately after the visit [T2] and 1 week after surgery or within 2 weeks of the first postoperative visit [T3]), an improved decision process (T2 and T3), lower decision regret (T3), and more SDM (observed and self-reported) compared to usual care (n = 257). Patients in the Option Grid arm (n = 66) had higher decision process scores (T2 and T3), better coordination of care (12 weeks after surgery or within 2 weeks of the second postoperative visit [T4]), and more observed SDM (during the surgical visit [T1]) compared to usual care arm. Subgroup analyses suggested that the Picture Option Grid had more impact among women of lower SES and health literacy. Neither intervention affected concordance, treatment choice, or anxiety. CONCLUSIONS: Paper-based conversation aids improved key outcomes over usual care. The Picture Option Grid had more impact among disadvantaged patients. LAY SUMMARY: The objective of this study was to understand how to help women with lower incomes or less formal education to make breast cancer surgery choices. Compared with usual care, a conversation aid with pictures and text led to higher knowledge. It improved the decision process and shared decision making (SDM) and lowered decision regret. A text-only conversation aid led to an improved decision process, more coordinated care, and higher SDM compared to usual care. The conversation aid with pictures was more helpful for women with lower income or less formal education. Conversation aids with pictures and text helped women make better breast cancer surgery choices.

A prospective cohort study to analyze the interaction of tumor-to-breast volume in breast conservation therapy versus mastectomy with reconstruction.

PURPOSE: We explored the impact of the relative volume of a tumor versus the entire breast on outcomes in patients undergoing breast conservation therapy (BCT) versus mastectomy and reconstruction (M + R). We hypothesized that there would be a threshold tumor:breast ratio (TBR) below which patient-reported outcomes (PRO) would favor BCT and above which would favor M + R. METHODS: We conducted a prospective cohort study of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancers undergoing BCT or M + R. A prerequisite for inclusion, analysis of tumor and breast volumes was conducted from three-dimensional magnetic resonance imaging reconstructions to calculate the TBR. Three-dimensional photography was utilized to calculate pre- and postoperative volumes and assess symmetry. Oncologic, surgical, and patient-reported outcome data were obtained from relevant BREAST-Q modules administered pre- and postoperatively. RESULTS: The BCT cohort had significantly smaller tumor volumes (p = 0.001) and lower TBRs (p = 0.001) than patients undergoing M + R overall. The M + R group, however, comprised a broader range of TBRs, characterized at lower values by patients opting for contralateral prophylactic mastectomy. Postoperative satisfaction with breasts, psychosocial, and sexual well-being scores were significantly higher in the BCT cohort, while physical well-being significantly favored the M + R cohort 480.2 ± 286.3 and 453.1 ± 392.7 days later, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Relative to BCT, M + R was used to manage a broad range of TBRs. The relative importance of oncologic and surgical risk reduction, symmetry, and number of procedures can vary considerably and may limit the utility of TBR as a guide for deciding between BCT and M + R. Clinical Trial StatementThis study was registered with clinicaltrials.gov as "A Prospective Trial to Assess Tumor:Breast Ratio and Patient Satisfaction Following Lumpectomy Versus Mastectomy With Reconstruction", Identifier: NCT02216136.

Predictors of Locoregional Recurrence After Failure to Achieve Pathologic Complete Response to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study evaluated factors predictive of locoregional recurrence (LRR) in women with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy who do not experience pathologic complete response (pCR). METHODS: This is a single-institution retrospective review of women with TNBC treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation therapy in 2000 through 2013. LRR was estimated between patients with and without pCR using the Kaplan-Meier method. Patient-, tumor-, and treatment-specific factors in patients without pCR were analyzed using the Cox proportional hazards method to evaluate factors predictive of LRR. Log-rank statistics were then used to compare LRR among these risk factors. RESULTS: A total of 153 patients with a median follow-up of 48.6 months were included. The 4-year overall survival and LRR were 70% and 15%, respectively, and the 4-year LRR in patients with pCR was 0% versus 22.0% in those without (P<.001). In patients without pCR, lymphovascular space invasion (LVSI; hazard ratio, 3.92; 95% CI, 1.64-9.38; P=.002) and extranodal extension (ENE; hazard ratio, 3.32; 95% CI, 1.35-8.15; P=.009) were significant predictors of LRR in multivariable analysis. In these patients, the 4-year LRR with LVSI was 39.8% versus 15.0% without (P<.001). Similarly, the 4-year LRR was 48.1% with ENE versus 16.1% without (P=.002). In patients without pCR, the presence of both LVSI and ENE were associated with an even further increased risk of LRR compared with patients with either LVSI or ENE alone and those with neither LVSI nor ENE in the residual tumor (P<.001). CONCLUSIONS: In patients without pCR, the presence of LVSI and ENE increases the risk of LRR in TNBC. The risk of LRR is compounded when both LVSI and ENE are present in the same patient. Future clinical trials are warranted to lower the risk of LRR in these high-risk patients.

Treatment response as predictor for brain metastasis in triple negative breast cancer: A score-based model.

BACKGROUND: Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) has worse prognosis than other subtypes of breast cancer, and many patients develop brain metastasis (BM). We developed a simple predictive model to stratify the risk of BM in TNBC patients receiving neo-adjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), surgery, and radiation therapy (RT). METHODS: Patients with TNBC who received NAC, surgery, and RT were included. Cox proportional hazards method was used to evaluate factors associated with BM. Significant factors predictive for BM on multivariate analysis (MVA) were used to develop a risk score. Patients were divided into three risk groups: low, intermediate, and high. A receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve was drawn to evaluate the value of the risk group in predicting BM. This predictive model was externally validated. RESULTS: A total of 160 patients were included. The median follow-up was 47.4 months. The median age at diagnosis was 49.9 years. The 2-year freedom from BM was 90.5%. Persistent lymph node positivity, HR 8.75 (1.76-43.52, P = 0.01), and lack of downstaging, HR 3.46 (1.03-11.62, P = 0.04), were significant predictors for BM. The 2-year rate of BM was 0%, 10.7%, and 30.3% (P < 0.001) in patients belonging to low-, intermediate-, and high-risk groups, respectively. Area under the ROC curve was 0.81 (P < 0.001). This model was externally validated (C-index = 0.79). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of downstaging and persistent lymph node positivity after NAC are associated with development of BM in TNBC. This model can be used by the clinicians to stratify patients into the three risk groups to identify those at increased risk of developing BM and potentially impact surveillance strategies.

Overuse of Chest CT in Patients With Stage I and II Breast Cancer: An Opportunity to Increase Guidelines Compliance at an NCCN Member Institution.

Background: The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) recommend that patients with clinical stage I/II breast cancer undergo advanced imaging for staging only when symptomatic. Regardless, many asymptomatic patients undergo chest CT. The goal of this study was to assess the use and results of chest CT in these patients at an NCCN Member Institution. Methods: Patients with breast cancer diagnosed between 1998 and 2012 were identified in a prospectively maintained database. All patients with clinical stage I/II disease who did not receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy were included. Data collected included demographics, tumor size, node status, chest CT within 6 months of diagnosis, imaging findings, need for additional workup, and identification of metastatic disease. Appropriate statistical tests were used for analysis. Results: From 1998 to 2012, 3,321 patients were diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. Of these, 2,062 (62.1%) had clinical stage I breast cancer at diagnosis and 1,259 (37.9%) had stage II; 227 patients (11%) with stage I and 456 (36.2%) with stage II breast cancer received staging chest CT. Of patients undergoing CT, 184 (26.9%) were found to have pulmonary nodules, which measured ≤5 mm for 128 patients (69.6%), 5 to 10 mm for 46 patients (25.0%), 11 to 20 mm for 6 patients (3.2%), and ≥20 mm for 4 patients (2.2%). Patients undergoing chest CT for staging subsequently underwent a mean of 2.34 (range, 0-16) additional CTs in follow-up. Of all patients undergoing chest CT for staging, only 9 (1.3%) were ultimately diagnosed with pulmonary metastases at an average of 25 months (range, 0-97) after initial staging chest CT. Conclusions: A significant percentage of patients with stage I/II breast cancer underwent unnecessary chest CT as part of their initial workup. Nearly one-third of these patients were found to have pulmonary nodules, but only 1.3% were ever diagnosed with pulmonary metastases. Adherence to NCCN Guidelines will reduce the excessive use of CT chest imaging.

Axillary Ultrasound Accurately Excludes Clinically Significant Lymph Node Disease in Patients With Early Stage Breast Cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Assess the performance characteristics of axillary ultrasound (AUS) for accurate exclusion of clinically significant axillary lymph node (ALN) disease. BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is currently the standard of care for staging the axilla in patients with clinical T1-T2, N0 breast cancer. AUS is a noninvasive alternative to SLNB for staging the axilla. METHODS: Patients were identified using a prospectively maintained database. Sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated by comparing AUS findings to pathology results. Multivariate analyses were performed to identify patient and/or tumor characteristics associated with false negative (FN) AUS. A blinded review of FN and matched true negative cases was performed by 2 independent medical oncologists to compare treatment recommendations and actual treatment received. Recurrence-free survival was described using Kaplan-Meier product limit methods. RESULTS: A total of 647 patients with clinical T1-T2, N0 breast cancer underwent AUS between January 2008 and March 2013. AUS had a sensitivity of 70%, NPV of 84%, and PPV of 56% for the detection of ALN disease. For detection of clinically significant disease (>2.0 mm), AUS had a sensitivity of 76% and NPV of 89%. FN AUS did not significantly impact adjuvant medical decision making. Patients with FN AUS had recurrence-free survival equivalent to patients with pathologic N0 disease. CONCLUSIONS: AUS accurately excludes clinically significant ALN disease in patients with clinical T1-T2, N0 breast cancer. AUS may be an alternative to SLNB in these patients, where axillary surgery is no longer considered therapeutic, and predictors of tumor biology are increasingly used to make adjuvant therapy decisions.

Predictors of false negative axillary ultrasound in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: We sought to identify clinicopathologic factors related to false negative axillary ultrasound (AUS) results. METHODS: Patients with a clinically node-negative stage I-II breast cancer who also had a normal AUS were identified from our prospectively maintained database. All AUS studies were interpreted by dedicated breast radiologists as "normal" according to the absence of specific characteristics shown to be commonly associated with metastatic involvement. True- and false-negative AUS studies were compared statistically based on clinical, radiographic, and histologic parameters. RESULTS: Of the 118 patients with a normal AUS, 25 (21%) were ultimately found to be node-positive on pathologic assessment after axillary surgery. On bivariate analysis, primary tumor size and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) were found to be significantly different between true- and false-negative AUS. The average tumor size was smaller in the true-negative group compared with that in the false-negative group (16 versus 21 mm [P < 0.01]). The presence of LVI was more likely in the false-negative group (44%) compared with that in the true-negative group (8%, P < 0.0001). No significant difference was noted between groups with regard to patient age, race, body mass index, tumor grade, histologic type, hormone receptor status, and time between AUS and axillary surgery. On multivariate analysis, only the presence of LVI achieved statistical significance (P = 0.0007). CONCLUSIONS: AUS is a valuable tool that accurately predicted absence of axillary disease in 79% of patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer. AUS findings may be less accurate in the setting of LVI, and a negative AUS in patients with LVI should be interpreted cautiously.

Intensity of follow-up after breast cancer surgery: low versus high?

The incidence of breast cancer has been on the rise in the United States over the past several decades. The advanced longevity of the population during this same time period, specifically of elderly women, translates to increases in the absolute number of women diagnosed with breast cancer yearly. This, in combination with decreasing mortality rates, has now led to an increase in the number of breast cancer survivors who need long-term follow-up. There has been significant debate over what tests should be obtained, how often they should be obtained, how long surveillance should be continued, and by whom this should be performed. We review the published guidelines for surveillance, available data regarding low- versus high-intensity surveillance plans, current practice patterns, and recommendations for future strategies.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy during prophylactic mastectomy: is there a role?

PURPOSE: We investigated rates of occult malignancy in the breast and sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) in patients undergoing prophylactic mastectomy (PM) and whether routine sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is justified. METHODS: A retrospective review of our database identified patients undergoing PMs with SLNB. Descriptive statistics were utilized for data summary. A P value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: There were 384 patients during the study period who underwent 467 PMs. Of the 467 PMs, 15 (3.2%) cancers were found on final pathology. All 6 of the invasive cancers identified were T1. A total of 682 SLNs were taken for an average of 1.46 SLNs per PM. There were 5 positive SLNs (1.1%). All were in patients undergoing contralateral PM for either history of breast cancer or new diagnosis of breast cancer. Only one patient with a positive SLN was found to have an occult breast malignancy in the PM specimen. CONCLUSION: In 467 PMs performed, 15 (3.2%) occult malignancies were found in the breast and 5 (1.1%) positive SLNs were found. Based on these results, the routine use of SLNB at the time of PM is unnecessary and does not warrant the morbidity associated with this procedure.

Does the volume of ductal carcinoma in situ impact the positive margin rate in patients undergoing breast conservation for invasive breast cancer?

BACKGROUND: We sought to investigate whether the volume of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) impacts margin status in patients undergoing lumpectomy for invasive breast cancer. METHODS: We identified 358 patients with stages I-III invasive breast cancer and associated DCIS who were treated with breast-conserving therapy from 1999 to 2009. Data included patient and tumor characteristics, percentage of DCIS (<25%, 26%-50%, or >50%), and pathologic outcomes. Data were compared using chi-square and Fisher exact tests. A two-tailed P value of <0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The 358 patients had a mean age of 58 ± 13 y; 260 (72%) patients were >50 y. The volume of DCIS in lumpectomy specimens was <25% in 296 (83%) patients, 26%-50% in 29 (8%) patients, and >50% in 33 (9%) patients. Tumors with decreasing DCIS volume were more likely to be estrogen receptor positive (239 [82%] with <25% DCIS, 21 [72%] with 26%-50% DCIS, 22 [67%] with >50% DCIS; P=0.026). DCIS volume was not significantly associated with patient age, tumor size, grade, and stage, nodal status, progesterone receptor status, or Her2 status (P>0.05). Overall, 137 (38%) patients had one or more positive margins, including 97 of 296 (33%) with <25% DCIS volume, 17 of 29 (59%) with 26%-50% DCIS volume, and 23 of 33 (70%) with >50% DCIS volume (P<0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The volume of DCIS associated with an invasive breast cancer in the final lumpectomy specimen is a strong predictor of positive surgical margins. Future analyses will focus on the ability of core pathology to provide this information for intraoperative surgical decision making.

Individualizing Breast Cancer Risk Assessment in Clinical Practice.

Multiple tools exist to assess a patient's breast cancer risk. The choice of risk model depends on the patient's risk factors and how the calculation will impact care. High-risk patients-those with a lifetime breast cancer risk of ≥20%-are, for instance, eligible for supplemental screening with breast magnetic resonance imaging. Those with an elevated short-term breast cancer risk (frequently defined as a 5-year risk ≥1.66%) should be offered endocrine prophylaxis. High-risk patients should also receive guidance on modification of lifestyle factors that affect breast cancer risk.

Positive margin rates following breast-conserving surgery for stage I-III breast cancer: palpable versus nonpalpable tumors.

BACKGROUND: Margin status is a significant risk factor for local recurrence. We sought to examine whether the method of tumor localization predicted the margin status and the need for re-excision for both nonpalpable and palpable breast cancer. METHODS: We identified 358 consecutive breast cancer patients who were treated with breast-conserving therapy (BCT) from 1999 to 2006. Data included patient and tumor characteristics, method of localization (needle versus palpation), and pathologic outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used for data summary and data were compared using χ(2). RESULTS: Of 358 patients undergoing BCT, 234 (65%) underwent needle localization for a nonpalpable tumor and 124 (35%) underwent a palpation-guided procedure. Patients undergoing palpation-guided procedures were younger and had larger tumors at a more advanced pathologic stage of disease than those undergoing needle localization procedures (P < 0.05 for each). Patient race, tumor grade, presence of lymphovascular invasion, biomarker profile, and nodal status were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). Overall, 137 patients (38%) had one or more positive margins: 90 of 234 (38%) who had a needle localization procedure and 47 of 124 (38%) who had a palpation-guided procedure (P > 0.05). The number of margins affected did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Although patients with palpable breast cancer had larger tumors than those with nonpalpable breast cancer, the incidence and number of positive margins was similar to those who had needle localization for nonpalpable tumors. Improved methods of localization are needed to reduce the rate of positive margins and the need for re-excision.

Compromised margins following mastectomy for stage I-III invasive breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: We investigated factors associated with positive margins following mastectomy and the impact on outcomes. METHODS: We identified 240 patients with stage I-III invasive breast cancer who underwent mastectomy from 1999 to 2009. Data included patient and tumor characteristics, pathologic margin assessment, and outcomes. Margin positivity was defined as the presence of in situ or invasive malignancy at any margin. Descriptive statistics were used for data summary and were compared using χ(2). RESULTS: Of the 240 patients, 132 (55%) had a simple mastectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy and 108 (45%) had a modified radical mastectomy. Overall, 21 patients (9%) had positive margins, including 12 (57%) with one positive margin, 3 (14%) with two positive margins, and 6 (29%) with three or more positive margins. The most commonly affected margin was the deep margin (48% of patients). Eight of the 21 patients (38%) received adjuvant chest wall irradiation. There were no differences between patients who had a positive margin and those who did not with respect to patient age, race, percentage of in situ component, tumor size, tumor grade, lymphovascular invasion, or immunostain profile (P > 0.05 for all). None of the patients with positive margins experienced a local recurrence. CONCLUSIONS: Positive margins following mastectomy occurred in nearly 10% of our patients. No specific patient or tumor characteristics predicted a risk for having a positive margin. Despite the finding that only approximately 40% of patients received adjuvant radiation in the setting of a positive margin, no local recurrences have been observed.

Impact of consensus guidelines for breast-conserving surgery in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ.

BACKGROUND: Consensus guidelines published in 2016 recommended a 2 mm free margin as the standard for negative margins in patients undergoing breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The goal of the guideline recommendation was standardization of re-excision practices. AIMS: To evaluate the impact of this consensus guideline on our institutional practices. METHODS: We identified all patients at our institution with pure DCIS who were initially treated with BCS from September 2014 to August 2018 using a prospectively-maintained institutional database. A retrospective chart review was performed to determine margin status and re-excision rates during the 2 years before and the 2 years after the guideline was published in order to determine the effect on our re-excision rates. Close margins were defined as <2 mm. RESULTS: In the 2 years before the consensus guideline was published, 184 patients with DCIS underwent BCS. Twenty-six patients had positive margins and 24 underwent re-excision, including three who had completion mastectomy. Of the remaining 159 patients, 76 had ≥2 mm (negative) margins. The remaining 82 patients had close margins and 48 of these patients (58.5%) underwent re-excision, including one who had a completion mastectomy. Excluding the patients with positive margins, our re-excision rate was 30.4% prior to the guideline. In the 2 years after the consensus guideline was published, 192 patients with DCIS underwent initial BCS. Twenty-four patients had positive margins and 22 underwent re-excision, including three who had completion mastectomy. Of the remaining 168 patients, 95 patients had ≥2 mm (negative) margins. The remaining 73 patients had close margins and 45 of those patients (61.6%) underwent re-excision, including six who had completion mastectomy. Excluding the patients with positive margins, our re-excision rate was 26.8% after the guideline. CONCLUSIONS: Our institution's re-excision rate did not change significantly during the 2 years before and after the publication of the consensus guideline on adequate margins for patients undergoing BCT for DCIS. Our overall re-excision rate decreased slightly. However, of the patients who had close margins, a larger proportion underwent re-excision after the guideline was published. The guideline publication appears to have affected our institutional practices slightly, but not dramatically as many of our surgeons' practices were comparable to the guideline recommendations prior to 2016. We continue to use clinical judgment based on patient and tumor characteristics in deciding which patients will benefit from margin re-excision.

Ultrasound-guided lumpectomy for palpable breast cancers.

BACKGROUND: We sought to determine the re-excision rate following lumpectomy for palpable breast cancers using intraoperative ultrasound (US). A secondary aim was to investigate the impact on surgical decision-making. METHODS: We identified 73 women who underwent US-guided lumpectomy for palpable breast cancer between 2006 and 2010. A cohort of 124 women who underwent palpation-guided lumpectomy was used for a comparison group. Data included patient demographics, tumor characteristics, intraoperative findings, and pathologic outcomes. Descriptive statistics were used for data summary and compared by chi-square or t test, as appropriate. RESULTS: A total of 73 women underwent US-guided lumpectomy, and 124 women underwent palpation-guided lumpectomy (median age 55 years). Patients undergoing palpation-guided lumpectomy had smaller tumors that were more likely to be HER2/neu amplified compared with patients undergoing US-guided lumpectomy (P < 0.05 for each). There were no differences between the 2 groups with respect to patient age, tumor grade, and estrogen/progesterone receptor status (P > 0.05 for each). Re-excision rates were similar in both groups [17 (23%) in the US group versus 31 (25%) in the palpation group; P > 0.05]. In the US group, 45 patients (62%) had additional shave margins taken based on US interrogation of the specimen, and 12 patients (16%) were spared a 2nd procedure based on the use of intraoperative US. CONCLUSIONS: Although palpable breast cancers can be excised based on direct palpation or needle localization, we believe that US guidance provides an excellent tool to aid the breast surgeon. Only 10% of patients had a positive margin on final pathology as a result, and the overall re-excision rate was acceptable.

Correlation of ductal lavage cytology with ductoscopy-directed duct excision histology in women at high risk for developing breast cancer: a prospective, single-institution trial.

OBJECTIVES: The study was designed to determine which histological lesions produce cellular atypia in lavage specimens and whether ductoscopy adds useful information for the evaluation of high-risk patients with atypical lavage cytology. METHODS: We prospectively recruited women ≥35 years at high risk for developing breast cancer. All underwent ductal lavage. Women found to have atypia underwent ductoscopy-directed duct excision (group 1). Women without atypia were observed (group 2). Data included patient demographics, risk assessment, cytologic and histologic findings, and outcomes. Descriptive statistics were utilized for data summary and were compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: We enrolled 102 women; 93 (91%) were Caucasian. Their median age was 49 (range 34-73) years with a median follow-up of 80 (range 5-90) months. Overall, 27 (26%) had atypical lavage cytology (group 1), and 75 (74%) had benign cytology (group 2). Subsequent duct excision in group 1 revealed benign histology in 11 (44%), papillomas in 9 (36%), atypical hyperplasia (AH) in 4 (16%), and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in 1 (4%). At follow-up, three patients developed breast cancer, including one group 1 patient and two group 2 patients. There were no differences between groups 1 and 2 according to patient demographics, Gail scores, or risk for subsequent breast cancer (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although 20% of high-risk women with ductal lavage atypia have AH or malignancy on subsequent excision, the majority do not. Atypia identified by ductal lavage is not associated with a higher risk of developing subsequent breast cancer, even in this high-risk population.