Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Is Surgical Excision of Focal Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia Warranted? Experience at a Tertiary Care Center.
Grabenstetter, Anne; Brennan, Sandra B; Sevilimedu, Varadan; Kuba, M Gabriela; Giri, Dilip D; Wen, Hannah Yong; Morrow, Monica; Brogi, Edi.
Afiliação
  • Grabenstetter A; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA. grabensa@mskcc.org.
  • Brennan SB; Department of Radiology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Sevilimedu V; Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Kuba MG; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Giri DD; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Wen HY; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Morrow M; Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
  • Brogi E; Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.
Ann Surg Oncol ; 30(7): 4087-4094, 2023 Jul.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36905438
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

The core-needle biopsy (CNB) diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) generally mandates follow-up excision, but controversy exists on whether small foci of ADH require surgical management. This study evaluated the upgrade rate at excision of focal ADH (fADH), defined as 1 focus spanning ≤ 2 mm.

METHODS:

We retrospectively identified in-house CNBs with ADH as the highest-risk lesion obtained between January 2013 and December 2017. A radiologist assessed radiologic-pathologic concordance. All CNB slides were reviewed by two breast pathologists, and ADH was classified as fADH and nonfocal ADH based on extent. Only cases with follow-up excision were included. The slides of excision specimens with upgrade were reviewed.

RESULTS:

The final study cohort consisted of 208 radiologic-pathologic concordant CNBs, including 98 fADH and 110 nonfocal ADH. The imaging targets were calcifications (n = 157), a mass (n = 15), nonmass enhancement (n = 27), and mass enhancement (n = 9). Excision of fADH yielded seven (7%) upgrades (5 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 2 invasive carcinoma) versus 24 (22%) upgrades (16 DCIS, 8 invasive carcinoma) at excision of nonfocal ADH (p = 0.01). Both invasive carcinomas found at excision of fADH were subcentimeter tubular carcinomas away from the biopsy site and deemed incidental.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our data show a significantly lower upgrade rate at excision of focal ADH than nonfocal ADH. This information can be valuable if nonsurgical management of patients with radiologic-pathologic concordant CNB diagnosis of focal ADH is being considered.
Assuntos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Mama / Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Neoplasias da Mama / Carcinoma Intraductal não Infiltrante Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2023 Tipo de documento: Article