Magnetic resonance imaging in patients with unilateral bloody nipple discharge; useful when conventional diagnostics are negative?

BACKGROUND: Unilateral bloody nipple discharge (UBND) is mostly caused by benign conditions such as papilloma or ductal ectasia. However, in 7-33 % of all nipple discharge, it is caused by breast cancer. Conventional diagnostic imaging like mammography (MMG) and ultrasonography (US) is performed to exclude malignancy. Preliminary investigations of breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) assume that it has additional value. With an increasing availability of MRI, it is of clinical importance to evaluate this. We evaluated the additional diagnostic value of MRI in patients with UBND in the absence of a palpable mass, with normal conventional imaging. METHODS: All women with UBND in the period November 2007-July 2012 were included. In addition to the standard work-up (patient's history, physical examination, MMG, and US), MRI was performed. Data from these examinations and treatment were collected retrospectively. RESULTS: A total of 111 women (mean age 52 years; range 23-80) were included. In nine (8 %) patients, malignancy was suspected on MRI while conventional imaging was normal. In eight (89 %) of these patients, histology was obtained, two by core biopsy and six by terminal duct excision. Benign conditions were found in six patients (86 %) and a (pre-) malignant lesion in two patients. In both cases, it concerned a ductal carcinoma in situ, which was treated with breast-conserving therapy. Moreover, in two cases of (pre)malignancy, the MRI was interpreted as negative. CONCLUSION: In patients with UBND who show no signs of a malignancy on conventional diagnostic examinations, the added value of a breast MRI is limited, since a malignancy can be demonstrated in <2 %.

Relevant impact of central pathology review on nodal classification in individual breast cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: In the MIRROR study, pN0(i + ) and pN1mi were associated with reduced 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) compared with pN0. Nodal status (N-status) was assessed after central pathology review and restaging according to the sixth AJCC classification. We addressed the impact of pathology review. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Early favorable primary breast cancer patients, classified pN0, pN0(i + ), or pN1(mi) by local pathologists after sentinel node procedure, were included. We assessed the impact of pathology review on N-status (n = 2842) and 5-year DFS for those without adjuvant therapy (n = 1712). RESULTS: In all, 22% of the 1082 original pN0 patients was upstaged. Of the 623 original pN0(i + ) patients, 1% was downstaged, 26% was upstaged. Of 1137 patients staged pN1mi, 15% was downstaged, 11% upstaged. Originally, 5-year DFS was 85% for pN0, 74% for pN0(i + ), and 73% for pN1mi; HR 1.70 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.27-2.27] and HR 1.57 (95% CI 1.16-2.13), respectively, compared with pN0. By review staging, 5-year DFS was 86% for pN0, 77% for pN0(i + ), 77% for pN1mi, and 74% for pN1 + . CONCLUSION: Pathology review changed the N-classification in 24%, mainly upstaging, with potentially clinical relevance for individual patients. The association of isolated tumor cells and micrometastases with outcome remained unchanged. Quality control should include nodal breast cancer staging.

Tumour characteristics, survival and prognostic factors of hereditary breast cancer from BRCA2-, BRCA1- and non-BRCA1/2 families as compared to sporadic breast cancer cases.

AIM OF THE STUDY: Results on tumour characteristics and survival of hereditary breast cancer (BC), especially on BRCA2-associated BC, are inconclusive. The prognostic impact of the classical tumour and treatment factors in hereditary BC is insufficiently known. METHODS: We selected 103 BRCA2-, 223 BRCA1- and 311 non-BRCA1/2 BC patients (diagnosis 1980-2004) from the Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic. To correct for longevity bias, analyses were also performed while excluding index patients undergoing DNA testing 2 years after BC diagnosis. As a comparison group, 759 sporadic BC patients of comparable age at and year of diagnosis were selected. We compared tumour characteristics, the occurrence of ipsilateral recurrence (LRR) and contralateral BC (CBC) as well as distant disease-free (DDFS), BC-specific (BCSS) and overall survival (OS) between these groups. By multivariate modelling, the prognostic impact of tumour and treatment factors was investigated separately in hereditary BC. RESULTS: We confirmed the presence of the particular BRCA1-phenotype. In contrast, tumour characteristics of BRCA2-associated BC were similar to those of non-BRCA1/2 and sporadic BC, with the exception of a high risk of CBC (3.1% per year) and oestrogen-receptor (ER)-positivity (83%). No significant differences between BRCA2-associated BC and other BC subgroups were found with respect to LRR, DDFS, BCSS and OS. Independent prognostic factors for BC-specific survival in hereditary BC (combining the three subgroups) were tumour stage, adjuvant chemotherapy, histologic grade, ER status and a prophylactic (salpingo-)oophorectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Apart from the frequent occurrence of contralateral BC and a positive ER-status, BRCA2-associated BC did not markedly differ from other hereditary or sporadic BC. Our observation that tumour size and nodal status are prognostic factors also in hereditary BC implies that the strategy to use these factors as a proxy for ultimate mortality appears to be valid also in this specific group of patients.

[Preventive surgical prcedures for inherited risk of breast cancer]. / Preventief chirurgisch ingrijpen bij erfelijke belasting voor borstkanker.

Preventive surgical procedures for inherited risk of breast cancer Forwomen with a demonstrated BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, the cumulative risk of developing invasive breast cancer before the age of 70 years is about 50-85% and the risk of developing invasive epithelial ovarian cancer is 20-60%. Regular surveillance including physical examination and imaging is offered to mutation carriers and the options for risk-reducing surgery are discussed. Although bilateral prophylactic mastectomy is a drastic intervention, it significantly reduces the incidence of breast cancer. For mutation carriers with breast cancer, the decision to combine risk-reducing surgery with treatment is determined by the TNM stage of the disease. Prophylactic bi- or contralateral mastectomy after previous treatment for unilateral breast cancer reduces the incidence of contralateral breast cancer, but has no impact on survival. The complexity of the problem demands a multidisciplinary approach within the context of a family cancer clinic.

Contralateral recurrence and prognostic factors in familial non-BRCA1/2-associated breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: A higher incidence of contralateral breast cancer and ipsilateral recurrence has been reported in familial breast cancer than in sporadic cancer. This study investigated the influence of contralateral cancer and tumour stage on survival in patients with familial non-BRCA1/BRCA2-associated breast cancer. METHODS: The incidences of contralateral breast cancer, ipsilateral recurrence, distant disease-free and overall survival were assessed in 327 patients from families with three or more breast and/or ovarian cancers, but no BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutation (familial non-BRCA1/2), and in 327 control subjects with sporadic breast cancer, matched for year and age at detection. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 7.3 years for patients with familial-non-BRCA1/2 cancers and 6.5 years for patients with sporadic breast cancer. Tumours were stage T1 or lower in 62.1 per cent of familial non-BRCA1/2 cancers versus 49.9 per cent in sporadic breast cancers (P = 0.003), and node negative in 55.8 versus 52.1 per cent, respectively (P = 0.477). After 10 years the incidence of metachronous contralateral breast cancer was 6.4 per cent for familial non-BRCA1/2 tumours versus 5.4 per cent for sporadic cancers. The rate of ipsilateral recurrence was not significantly increased (17.0 versus 14.2 per cent, respectively, at 10 years; P = 0.132). Tumour size (hazard ratio (HR) 1.02 per mm increase, P = 0.016) and node status (HR 2.6 for three or more involved nodes versus node negative, P = 0.017) were independent predictors of overall survival in the familial non-BRCA1/2 group, and in the whole group, whereas contralateral breast cancer (HR 0.7, P = 0.503) and risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy (HR 0.4, P = 0.163) were not. CONCLUSION: Stage at detection was a key determinant of prognosis in familial non-BRCA1/2 breast cancer, whereas contralateral cancer was not. Risk-reducing contralateral mastectomy did not significantly improve survival, but early detection can. Decisions on breast-conserving treatment can be made on the same grounds in patients with familial and sporadic breast cancer.