RESUMO
Multigene prognostic genomic assays have become indispensable in managing early breast cancer (EBC), offering crucial information for risk stratification and guiding adjuvant treatment strategies in conjunction with traditional clinicopathological parameters. The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) guidelines endorse these assays, though some clinical contexts still lack definitive recommendations. The dynamic landscape of EBC management demands further refinement and optimization of genomic assays to streamline their incorporation into clinical practice. The breast cancer community is poised at the brink of transformative advances in enhancing the clinical utility of genomic assays, aiming to significantly improve the precision and effectiveness of both diagnosis and treatment for women with EBC. This article methodically examines the testing methodologies, clinical validity and utility, costs, diagnostic frameworks, and methodologies of the established genomic tests, including the Oncotype Dx Breast Recurrence Score®, MammaPrint, Prosigna®, EndoPredict®, and Breast Cancer Index (BCI). Among these tests, Prosigna and EndoPredict® have at present been validated only on a prognostic level, while Oncotype Dx, MammaPrint, and BCI hold both a prognostic and predictive role. Oncologists and pathologists engaged in the management of EBC will find in this review a thorough comparison of available genomic assays, as well as strategies to optimize the utilization of the information derived from them.
Assuntos
Neoplasias da Mama , Genômica , Humanos , Neoplasias da Mama/genética , Neoplasias da Mama/diagnóstico , Neoplasias da Mama/terapia , Feminino , Prognóstico , Genômica/métodos , Biomarcadores Tumorais/genética , Testes Genéticos/métodosRESUMO
This retrospective study investigates the histopathological outcomes, upgrade rates, and disease-free survival (DFS) of high-risk breast lesions, including atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH or DIN1b) and lobular in situ neoplasms (LIN), following Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy (VABB) and surgical excision. The study addresses the challenge posed by these lesions due to their association with synchronous or adjacent Breast Cancer (BC) and increased future BC risk. The research, comprising 320 patients who underwent stereotactic VABB, focuses on 246 individuals with a diagnosis of ADH (120) or LIN (126) observed at follow-up. Pathological assessments, categorized by the UK B-coding system, were conducted, and biopsy samples were compared with corresponding excision specimens to determine upgrade rates for in situ or invasive carcinoma. Surgical excision was consistently performed for diagnosed ADH or LIN. Finally, patient follow-ups were assessed and compared between LIN and ADH groups to identify recurrence signs, defined as histologically confirmed breast lesions on either the same or opposite side. The results reveal that 176 (71.5%) patients showed no upgrade post-surgery, with ADH exhibiting a higher upgrade rate to in situ pathology than LIN1 (Atypical Lobular Hyperplasia, ALH)/LIN2 (Low-Grade Lobular in situ Carcinoma, LCIS) (38% vs. 20%, respectively, p-value = 0.002). Considering only patients without upgrade, DFS at 10 years was 77%, 64%, and 72% for ADH, LIN1, and LIN2 patients, respectively (p-value = 0.92). The study underscores the importance of a multidisciplinary approach, recognizing the evolving role of VABB. It emphasizes the need for careful follow-up, particularly for lobular lesions, offering valuable insights for clinicians navigating the complex landscape of high-risk breast lesions. The findings advocate for heightened awareness and vigilance in managing these lesions, contributing to the ongoing refinement of clinical strategies in BC care.