Diagnostic Performance of Point-of-Care Apparent Diffusion Coefficient Measures to Reduce Biopsy in Breast Lesions at MRI: Clinical Validation.

Background The Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network Cancer Research Group multicenter A6702 trial identified an optimal apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) cutoff to potentially reduce biopsies by 21% without affecting sensitivity. Whether this performance can be achieved in clinical settings has not yet been established. Purpose To validate the performance of point-of-care ADC measurements with the A6702 trial ADC cutoff for reducing unnecessary biopsies in lesions detected at breast MRI. Materials and Methods Consecutive breast MRI examinations performed from May 2015 to January 2019 at a single medical center and showing biopsy-confirmed Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System category 4 or 5 lesions, without ipsilateral cancer, were identified. Point-of-care lesion ADC measurements collected at clinical interpretation were retrospectively evaluated. MRI examinations included axial T2-weighted, diffusion-weighted, and dynamic contrast-enhanced sequences. Sensitivity and biopsy reduction rates were calculated by applying the A6702 optimal (ADC, 1.53 × 10-3 mm2/sec) and alternate conservative (1.68 × 10-3 mm2/sec) cutoffs. Lesion pathologic outcomes were the reference standard. To assess reproducibility, one radiologist repeated ADC measurements, and agreement was summarized using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Results A total of 240 lesions in 201 women (mean age, 49 years ± 13 [SD]) with pathologic outcomes (63 malignant and 177 benign) were included. Applying the optimal ADC cutoff produced an overall biopsy reduction rate of 15.8% (38 of 240 lesions [95% CI: 11.2, 20.9]), with a sensitivity of 92.1% (58 of 63 lesions [95% CI: 82.4, 97.4]; sensitivity was 97.2% [35 of 36 lesions] [95% CI: 82.7, 99.6] for invasive cancers). Results were similar for screening versus diagnostic examinations (P = .92 and .40, respectively). Sensitivity was higher for masses than for nonmass enhancements (NMEs) (100% vs 85.3%; P = .009). Applying the conservative ADC cutoff achieved a sensitivity of 95.2% (60 of 63 lesions [95% CI: 86.7, 99.0]), with a biopsy reduction rate of 10.4% (25 of 240 lesions [95% CI: 6.7, 14.5]). Repeated single-reader measurements showed good agreement with clinical ADCs (intraclass correlation coefficient, 0.72 [95% CI: 0.58, 0.81]). Conclusion This study validated the clinical use of ADC cutoffs to reduce MRI-prompted biopsies by up to 16%, with a suggested tradeoff of lowered sensitivity for in situ and microinvasive disease manifesting as NME. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02022579 © RSNA, 2024 Supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Honda and Iima in this issue.

Multi-pilot implementation experiences of patient-centered pathology reports: lessons learned for the advancement of patient-centered tools for cancer decision-making.

PURPOSE: New federal legislation in the United States grants patients expanded access to their medical records, making it critical that medical records information is understandable to patients. Provision of informational summaries significantly increase patient perceptions of patient-centered care and reduce feelings of uncertainty, yet their use for cancer pathology is limited. METHODS: Our team developed and piloted patient-centered versions of pathology reports (PCPRs) for four cancer organ sites: prostate, bladder, breast, and colorectal polyp. The objective of this analysis was to identify common barriers and facilitators to support dissemination of PCPRs in care delivery settings. We analyzed quantitative and qualitative data from pilot PCPR implementations, guided by the RE-AIM framework to explore constructs of reach, effectiveness, adoption, implementation, and maintenance. RESULTS: We present two case studies of PCPR implementation - breast cancer and colorectal polyps-that showcase diverse workflows for pathology reporting. Cross-pilot learnings emphasize the potential for PCPRs to improve patient satisfaction, knowledge, quality of shared decision-making activities, yet several barriers to dissemination exist. CONCLUSION: While there is promise in expanding patient-centered cancer communication tools, more work is needed to expand the technological capacity for PCPRs and connect PCPRs to opportunities to reduce costs, improve quality, and reduce waste in care delivery systems.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 4.2023.

The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Breast Cancer address all aspects of management for breast cancer. The treatment landscape of metastatic breast cancer is evolving constantly. The therapeutic strategy takes into consideration tumor biology, biomarkers, and other clinical factors. Due to the growing number of treatment options, if one option fails, there is usually another line of therapy available, providing meaningful improvements in survival. This NCCN Guidelines Insights report focuses on recent updates specific to systemic therapy recommendations for patients with stage IV (M1) disease.

Risk of Lobular Neoplasia Upgrade with Synchronous Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) and classic lobular carcinoma in situ encompass a spectrum of proliferative lesions known as lobular neoplasia (LN). When imaging-concordant and found in isolation on core needle biopsy (CNB), LN infrequently upgrades to carcinoma on surgical excision, and routine excision is not indicated. Upgrade rates in the setting of synchronous carcinoma are not well studied. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with radiology-pathology concordant synchronous LN and separately biopsied ipsilateral (n = 35) or contralateral (n = 15) carcinoma who underwent excision between 2010 and 2021 were retrospectively identified. Frequency of upgrade, to either invasive or in situ carcinoma, was quantified, and factors associated with upgrade were assessed using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: The median age was 55 (range 33-74) years. The upgrade rate of LN was 6% and not significantly different between ipsilateral (2.9%) and contralateral (13.3%) carcinoma (p = 0.15). All upgraded LN lesions were ALH on CNB and detected as non-mass enhancement on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). No additional disease was demonstrated after excision at the site of the original LN CNB in 22.9% (8 out of 35) of ipsilateral and 13.3% (2 out of 15) of contralateral patients. Upgrade was not associated with family history, menopausal status, imaging modality used to detect LN, or extent of LN on CNB (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate a low upgrade rate (6%) in our study cohort of LN with synchronous ipsilateral or contralateral carcinoma, which suggests that not all LN mandates excision with synchronous carcinoma. Larger, multi-institution studies are needed to validate these findings.

Breast Cancer, Version 3.2022, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology.

The therapeutic options for patients with noninvasive or invasive breast cancer are complex and varied. These NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines for Breast Cancer include recommendations for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, and management of breast cancer during pregnancy. The content featured in this issue focuses on the recommendations for overall management of ductal carcinoma in situ and the workup and locoregional management of early stage invasive breast cancer. For the full version of the NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer, visit NCCN.org.

Preoperative Breast MRI for Newly Diagnosed Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Imaging Features and Performance in a Multicenter Setting (ECOG-ACRIN E4112 Trial).

Background There are limited data from clinical trials describing preoperative MRI features and performance in the evaluation of mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Purpose To report qualitative MRI features of DCIS, MRI performance in the identification of additional disease, and associations of imaging features with pathologic, genomic, and surgical outcomes from the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group-American College of Radiology Imaging Network (ECOG-ACRIN) E4112 trial. Materials and Methods Secondary analyses of a multicenter prospective clinical trial from the ECOG-ACRIN Cancer Research Group included women with DCIS diagnosed with conventional imaging techniques (mammography and US), confirmed via core-needle biopsy (CNB), and enrolled between March 2015 and April 2016 who were candidates for wide local excision (WLE) based on conventional imaging and clinical examination results. DCIS MRI features and pathologic features from CNB and excision were recorded. Each woman without invasive upgrade of the index DCIS at WLE received a 12-gene DCIS score. MRI performance metrics were calculated. Associations of imaging features with invasive upgrade, dichotomized DCIS score (<39 vs ≥39), and single WLE success were estimated in uni- and multivariable analyses. Results Among 339 women (median age, 60 years; interquartile range, 51-66 years), most DCIS cases showed nonmass enhancement (NME) (195 of 339 [58%]) on MRI scans with larger median size than on mammograms (19 mm vs 12 mm; P < .001). Positive predictive value of MRI-prompted CNBs was 32% (21 of 66) (95% CI: 22, 44), yielding an additional cancer detection rate of 6.2% (21 of 339) (95% CI: 4.1, 9.3). MRI false-positive rate was 14.2% (45 of 318) (95% CI: 10.7, 18.4). No imaging features were associated with invasive upgrade or DCIS score (P = .05 to P = .95). Smaller size and focal NME distribution at MRI were linked to single WLE success (P < .001). Conclusion Preoperative MRI depicted ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosed with conventional imaging most commonly as nonmass enhancement, with larger median span than mammography, and additional cancer detection rate of 6.2%. MRI features of this subset of DCIS did not enable prediction of pathologic or genomic outcomes. Clinical trial registration no. NCT02352883 © RSNA, 2021 Online supplemental material is available for this article. See also the editorial by Kuhl in this issue. An earlier incorrect version of this article appeared online. This article was corrected on August 4, 2021.

Sociodemographic Factors Associated With Rapid Relapse in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: A Multi-Institution Study.

BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) accounts for disproportionately poor outcomes in breast cancer, driven by a subset of rapid-relapse TNBC (rrTNBC) with marked chemoresistance, rapid metastatic spread, and poor survival. Our objective was to evaluate clinicopathologic and sociodemographic features associated with rrTNBC. METHODS: We included patients diagnosed with stage I-III TNBC in 1996 through 2012 who received chemotherapy at 1 of 10 academic cancer centers. rrTNBC was defined as a distant metastatic recurrence event or death ≤24 months after diagnosis. Features associated with rrTNBC were included in a multivariable logistic model upon which backward elimination was performed with a P<.10 criterion, with a final multivariable model applied to training (70%) and independent validation (30%) cohorts. RESULTS: Among all patients with breast cancer treated at these centers, 3,016 fit the inclusion criteria. Training cohort (n=2,112) bivariable analyses identified disease stage, insurance type, age, body mass index, race, and income as being associated with rrTNBC (P<.10). In the final multivariable model, rrTNBC was significantly associated with higher disease stage (adjusted odds ratio for stage III vs I, 16.0; 95% CI, 9.8-26.2; P<.0001), Medicaid/indigent insurance, lower income (by 2000 US Census tract), and younger age at diagnosis. Model performance was consistent between the training and validation cohorts. In sensitivity analyses, insurance type, low income, and young age were associated with rrTNBC among patients with stage I/II but not stage III disease. When comparing rrTNBC versus late relapse (>24 months), we found that insurance type and young age remained significant. CONCLUSIONS: Timing of relapse in TNBC is associated with stage of disease and distinct sociodemographic features, including insurance type, income, and age at diagnosis.

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Breast Cancer, Version 4.2021.

The NCCN Guidelines for Breast Cancer include up-to-date guidelines for clinical management of patients with carcinoma in situ, invasive breast cancer, Paget disease, phyllodes tumor, inflammatory breast cancer, male breast cancer, and breast cancer during pregnancy. These guidelines are developed by a multidisciplinary panel of representatives from NCCN Member Institutions with breast cancer-focused expertise in the fields of medical oncology, surgical oncology, radiation oncology, pathology, reconstructive surgery, and patient advocacy. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the most recent updates to recommendations for adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with nonmetastatic, early-stage, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer.

Genetic testing and surgical treatment after breast cancer diagnosis: Results from a national online cohort.

BACKGROUND: Genetic testing for hereditary breast cancer has implications for breast cancer decision-making. We examined genetic testing rates, factors associated with testing, and the relationship between genetic testing and contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM). METHODS: Patients with breast cancer (2000-2015) from The Health of Women Study were identified and categorized as low, moderate, or high-likelihood of the genetic mutation using a previously published scale based on period-relevant national guidelines incorporating age and family history. Genetic testing and CPM rates were compared using univariate and multivariate logistic regression. RESULTS: Among 4170 patients (median age 56-years), 38% were categorized as high-likelihood of having a genetic mutation. Among high-likelihood women, 67% underwent genetic testing, the odds of which were increased among women of higher-education and White-race (p < .001). Among 2028 patients reporting surgical treatment, 385 (19%) chose CPM. CPM rate was highest among mutation-positive women (41%), but 26% of women with negative tests still underwent CPM. Independent of test result, genetic testing increased the odds of CPM on multivariate analysis (adjusted-OR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.29-2.22). CONCLUSIONS: Genetic testing rates were higher among women at high-likelihood of mutation carriage, but one-third of these women were not tested. Racial disparities persisted, highlighting the need to improve testing in non-White populations. CPM rates were associated with mutation-carriage and genetic testing, but many women chose CPM despite negative testing, suggesting that well-educated women consider factors other than cancer mortality in selecting CPM.

Surveillance for second breast cancer events in women with a personal history of breast cancer using breast MRI: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Women with personal history of breast cancer (PHBC) are currently recommended to receive annual mammography for surveillance of breast cancer recurrence or new primary. However, given issues in accuracy with mammography, there is a need for evolving evidence-based surveillance recommendations with supplemental imaging. In this systematic review, we compiled and compared existing studies that describe the test performance of surveillance breast MRI among women with PHBC. METHODS: We searched PubMed and EMBASE using MeSH terms for studies (2000-2019) that described the diagnostic characteristics of breast MRI in women with PHBC. Search results were reviewed and included based on PICOTS criteria; quality of included articles was assessed using QUADAS-2. Meta-analysis of single proportions was conducted for diagnostic characteristics of breast MRI, including tests of heterogeneity. RESULTS: Our review included 11 articles in which unique cohorts were studied, comprised of a total of 8338 women with PHBC and 12,335 breast MRI done for the purpose of surveillance. We predict intervals (PI) for cancer detection rate per 1000 examinations (PI 9-15; I2 = 10%), recall rate (PI 5-31%; I2 = 97%), sensitivity (PI 58-95%; I2 = 47%), specificity (PI 76-97%; I2 = 97%), and PPV3 (PI 16-40%; I2 = 44%). CONCLUSIONS: Studies addressing performance of breast MRI are variable and limited in population-based studies. The summary of evidence to date is insufficient to recommend for or against use of breast MRI for surveillance among women with PHBC.

Clinical risk score to predict likelihood of recurrence after ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery.

PURPOSE: A majority of women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) receive breast-conserving surgery (BCS) but then face a risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) which can be either recurrence of DCIS or invasive breast cancer. We developed a score to provide individualized information about IBTR risk to guide treatment decisions. METHODS: Data from 2762 patients treated with BCS for DCIS at centers within the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) were used to identify statistically significant non-treatment-related predictors for 5-year IBTR. Factors most associated with IBTR were estrogen-receptor status of the DCIS, presence of comedo necrosis, and patient age at diagnosis. These three parameters were used to create a point-based risk score. Discrimination of this score was assessed in a separate DCIS population of 301 women (100 with IBTR and 200 without) from Kaiser Permanente Northern California (KPNC). RESULTS: Using NCCN data, the 5-year likelihood of IBTR without adjuvant therapy was 9% (95% CI 5-12%), 23% (95% CI 13-32%), and 51% (95% CI 26-75%) in the low, intermediate, and high-risk groups, respectively. Addition of the risk score to a model including only treatment improved the C-statistic from 0.69 to 0.74 (improvement of 0.05). Cross-validation of the score resulted in a C-statistic of 0.76. The score had a c-statistic of 0.67 using the KPNC data, revealing that it discriminated well. CONCLUSIONS: This simple, no-cost risk score may be used by patients and physicians to facilitate preference-based decision-making about DCIS management informed by a more accurate understanding of risks.

Treating Second Breast Events After Breast-Conserving Surgery for Ductal Carcinoma in Situ.

Background: Because of screening mammography, the number of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) survivors has increased dramatically. DCIS survivors may face excess risk of second breast events (SBEs). However, little is known about SBE treatment or its relationship to initial DCIS care. Methods: Among a prospective cohort of women who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) for DCIS from 1997 to 2008 at institutions participating in the NCCN Outcomes Database, we identified SBEs, described patterns of care for SBEs, and examined the association between DCIS treatment choice and SBE care. Using multivariable regression, we identified features associated with use of mastectomy, radiation therapy (RT), or antiestrogen therapy (AET) for SBEs. Results: Of 2,939 women who underwent BCS for DCIS, 83% received RT and 40% received AET. During the median follow-up of 4.2 years, 200 women (6.8%) developed an SBE (55% ipsilateral, 45% invasive). SBEs occurred in 6% of women who underwent RT for their initial DCIS versus 11% who did not. Local treatment for these events included BCS (10%), BCS/RT (30%), mastectomy (53%), or none (6%); only 28% of patients received AET. Independent predictors of RT or mastectomy for SBEs included younger age, shorter time to SBE diagnosis, and RT or AET for the initial DCIS. Conclusions: A sizable proportion of patients with SBEs were treated with mastectomy, most especially those who previously received RT for their initial DCIS and those who developed an ipsilateral SBE. Despite the occurrence of an SBE, relatively few patients received AET. Future studies should investigate optimal treatment approaches for SBEs, including the benefit of mastectomy versus lumpectomy for an ipsilateral SBE and the benefit of AET for a hormone-receptor-positive SBE contingent on AET use for the initial DCIS diagnosis.

Breast Malignancies in Children: Presentation, Management, and Survival.

PURPOSE: Pediatric breast malignancies are rare, and descriptions in the literature are limited. The purpose of our study was to compare pediatric and adult breast malignancy. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study using the National Cancer Data Base comparing patients ≤21 years to those >21 years at diagnosis (1998-2012). Generalized linear models estimated differences in demographic, tumor, and treatment characteristics. Cox regression was used to compare overall survival. RESULTS: Of 1,999,181 cases of invasive breast malignancies, 477 (0.02%) occurred in patients ≤21 years. Ninety-nine percent of adult patients had invasive carcinoma compared with 64.8% of pediatric patients with the remaining patients having sarcoma, malignant phyllodes, or malignancy not otherwise specified (p < 0.001). Pediatric patients were twice as likely to have an undifferentiated malignancy [relative risk (RR) 2.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.72-3.79]. Half of adults presented with Stage I disease compared with only 22.7% of pediatric patients (p < 0.001). Pediatric patients were 40% more likely to have positive axillary nodes (RR 1.42; 95% CI 1.10-1.84). Among patients with invasive carcinoma, pediatric patients were more than four times as likely to receive a bilateral than a unilateral mastectomy compared with adults (RR 4.56; 95% CI 3.19-6.53). There was no difference in overall survival between children and adults. CONCLUSIONS: Pediatric breast malignancies are more advanced at presentation, and there is variability in treatment practices. Adult and pediatric patients with invasive carcinoma have similar overall survival.

Apparent diffusion coefficient values may help predict which MRI-detected high-risk breast lesions will upgrade at surgical excision.

PURPOSE: To investigate whether diffusion-weighted imaging (DWI) features could assist in determining which high-risk lesions identified on dynamic contrast-enhanced (DCE) magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and diagnosed on core needle biopsy (CNB) will upgrade to malignancy on surgical excision. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This Institutional Review Board (IRB)-approved prospective study included participants with MRI-detected Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) 4 or 5 lesions with high-risk pathology on CNB who underwent surgical excision. Twenty-three high-risk lesions detected on 3T breast MRI in 20 women (average age = 54 ± 9 years) were evaluated, of which six lesions (26%) upgraded to malignancy at surgery. DCE, DWI characteristics, and clinical factors were compared between high-risk lesions that upgraded to malignancy on surgical excision and those that did not. Logistic regression modeling was performed to identify features that optimally predicted upgrade to malignancy, with performance described using area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC). RESULTS: High-risk lesions that upgraded on excision demonstrated lower apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) than those that did not (median, 1.08 × 10-3 mm2 /s vs.1.39 × 10-3 mm2 /s, P = 0.046), and a trend of greater maximum lesion size (median, 24 mm vs. 8 mm, P = 0.053). There were no significant differences in lesion type (mass vs. nonmass enhancement, P = 1.0) or kinetic features (P = 0.78 for peak initial enhancement; P = 1.0 for worst curve type) among the high-risk cohorts. A model incorporating maximum lesion size and ADC provided optimal performance to predict upgrade to malignancy (AUC = 0.89). CONCLUSION: ADC and maximum lesion size on MRI show promise for predicting which MRI-detected high-risk lesions will upgrade to malignancy at surgical excision. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2 Technical Efficacy: Stage 3 J. Magn. Reson. Imaging 2017;46:1028-1036.

Prioritizing Patient-Reported Outcomes in Breast Cancer Surgery Quality Improvement.

Breast-cancer-specific tools that measure health-related quality of life (HRQOL) were developed for use in research or clinical practice, and little is known about these tools' performance ability for quality improvement. Furthermore, existing tools may not fully reflect all issues that contribute to quality care as seen by patients. Work is needed to identify and validate patient-reported outcome measures for use in quality improvement in breast cancer surgical care. We conducted an exploratory qualitative study in order to better understand what HRQOL domains and processes of care define high quality surgical care for women undergoing mastectomy for breast cancer from both the patient and clinician perspective. We conducted focus groups and one-on-one interviews with 15 women and administered a prioritization questionnaire to participants. We also conducted a prioritization questionnaire among surgical oncologists, general surgeons, and reconstructive surgeons who are members of the Washington State Medical Association. Both the patient and surgeon prioritization questionnaire asked participants to prioritize HRQOL and treatment satisfaction-related aspects of their breast cancer surgical care at key time points before and after mastectomy. A Stakeholder Advisory Panel was convened to review focus group, interview, and prioritization questionnaire results and make recommendations as to patient-reported outcome domains to focus on and existing instruments to use for quality improvement. Patients and clinicians largely agreed on important HRQOL domains, including emotional well-being, education, communication, and process of care. The Stakeholder Advisory Panel, composed of 12 clinicians and five patients, reviewed study findings and existing patient-reported outcomes measurement tools. The panel recommended that the BREAST-Q, a flexible tool with independently validated modules designed for research and clinical care, is an ideal tool to begin developing novel quality improvement benchmarks focused on patient-reported outcomes.

Breast Cancer Management Updates: Young and Older, Pregnant, or Male.

Every year, more and more patients fall into rare or extreme categories of breast cancer-young, elderly, pregnant, or male. Contributing factors may be improved risk assessment and screening techniques (especially of dense breast tissue), delayed childbearing, and the aging population. These patients can challenge usual medical decision making because of their unique situation. There might be a concern for the fetus, worry about future fertility, a question of local control in a man, or concern for overdiagnosis or overtreatment in an older patient. Because these populations are seldom included in the large breast cancer trials from which standard treatment recommendations are made, an update on management for young, elderly, pregnant, and male breast cancer patients may be helpful.

Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy in Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: A Population-Based Retrospective Analysis from 2005 to 2012 in the National Cancer Data Base.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant endocrine therapy (AET) has been shown to reduce the risk of second breast cancer events in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). There is no population-level evaluation of AET use in DCIS patients after standardized reporting of estrogen receptor (ER) status in cancer registries in 2004. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of women with DCIS in the National Cancer Data Base between 2005 and 2012. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics as well as temporal trends associated with receipt of AET were evaluated by generalized linear regression. RESULTS: Among 206,255 DCIS patients, 36.5% received AET. Fewer than half of ER-positive patients (n = 62,146, 46.4%) received AET, with a modest but significant increase over time (43.6% in 2005 to 47.5% in 2012; unadjusted p trend <0.001). AET decreased among ER-negative patients (8.9-6.5%, p trend <0.001) over the same time period. On multivariate analysis, younger (<40 years) and older (≥70 years) women were less likely to receive AET than 50- to 59-year-old women (<40 years: relative risk 0.86, 95% confidence interval 0.82-0.89; ≥70 years: relative risk 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.77-0.81). ER-positive status conferred a 6.15-fold higher likelihood of receiving AET compared to ER-negative status (95% confidence interval 5.81-6.50). Women who underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with adjuvant radiotherapy were most likely to receive AET. CONCLUSIONS: Receipt of AET is relatively low in the group of women most likely to benefit from its use, namely ER-positive patients who underwent BCS. Significant variation exists with respect to patient, tumor, site, and treatment factors. More tolerable drugs or clearer guideline recommendations may increase use.

Pleomorphic Lobular Carcinoma In Situ: Radiologic-Pathologic Features and Clinical Management.

BACKGROUND: Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ (PLCIS) is an unusual variant of LCIS for which optimal management remains unclear. METHODS: We conducted a 15-year (2000-2014) retrospective chart review of the radiologic, pathologic, clinical management, and recurrence rates of patients with PLCIS on diagnostic biopsy. Fifty-one patients were found to have PLCIS either alone or with concomitant breast cancer. Of these, 23 were found to have pure PLCIS on diagnostic biopsy. Rates of upstaging after local excision, positive or close margins, mastectomy, and recurrence associated with pure pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ were examined. RESULTS: Of the 21 patients who underwent surgical excision following diagnostic biopsy, 33.3 % (7/21) were found to have invasive carcinoma, and 19 % (4/23) were found to have ductal carcinoma in situ. Extensive or multifocal PLCIS was present in 47.6 % (10/21) of patients, corresponding to at least one PLCIS-positive or close margin in 71.4 % (15/21). In total, there were 11 local re-excisions in nine patients, and 12 mastectomies. No ipsilateral breast cancer events have occurred, including in those with positive or close surgical margins (mean follow-up 4.1 years). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with isolated PLCIS on diagnostic biopsy are at high risk of upgrading to invasive cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ at diagnostic excision. PLCIS often is extensive, with high rates of positive or close surgical resection margins. If negative PLCIS margins are pursued, rates of successful breast conservation are low. In light of this and low recurrence rates, caution should be exercised in aggressively treating PLCIS with excision to clear margins.