ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The clinical significance of nonclassic, lobular carcinoma in situ (NC-LCIS) at the surgical margin of excisions for invasive cancer is unknown. We sought to determine whether NC-LCIS at or near the margin in the setting of a concurrent invasive carcinoma is associated with risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) and locoregional recurrence (LRR). METHODS: Patients with stage 0-III breast cancer and NC-LCIS who underwent lumpectomy between January 2010 and January 2022 at a single institution were retrospectively identified. NC-LCIS margins were stratified as <2 mm, ≥2 mm, or within shave margin. Rates of IBTR and LRR were examined. RESULTS: A total of 511 female patients (median age 60 years [interquartile range (IQR) 52-69]) with NC-LCIS and an associated ipsilateral breast cancer with a median follow-up of 3.4 years (IQR 2.0-5.9) were identified. Final margins for NC-LCIS were ≥2 mm in 348 patients (68%), <2 mm in 37 (7.2%), and within shave margin in 126 (24.6%). Crude incidence of IBTR was 3.3% (n = 17) and that of LRR was 4.9% (n = 25). There was no difference in the crude rate of IBTR by NC-LCIS margin status (IBTR rate: 3.7% ≥2 mm, 0% <2 mm, 3.2% within shave margin, p = 0.8) nor in LRR (LRR rate: 4.9% ≥2 mm, 2.7% <2 mm, 5.6% within shave margin, p = 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: For completely excised invasive breast cancers associated with NC-LCIS, extent of margin width for NC-LCIS was not associated with a difference in IBTR or LRR. These data suggest that the decision to perform reexcision of margin after lumpectomy should be driven by the invasive cancer, rather than the NC-LCIS margin.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Female , Humans , Middle Aged , Aged , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Mastectomy, Segmental , Carcinoma in Situ/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/pathology , Retrospective Studies , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/surgery , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathologyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The BREAST-Q is the most used patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) in breast cancer surgery. The purposes of this study were to re-examine the content validity of BREAST-Q cancer modules (mastectomy, lumpectomy and reconstruction) and to determine the need for new scales. METHODS: Interviews were conducted with women with breast cancer (Stage 0-4, any treatment), and were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Deductive (based on original BREAST-Q conceptual framework) and inductive (new codes from the data) content analysis approaches were used to analyze the data. The number of codes that mapped to BREAST-Q were recorded. RESULTS: Dataset included 3948 codes from 58 participants. Most of the breast (n = 659, 96%) and all psychosocial (n = 127, 100%), sexual (n = 179, 100%) and radiation-related (n = 79, 100%) codes mapped to BREAST-Q Satisfaction with Breast, Psychosocial Wellbeing, Sexual Wellbeing and Adverse Effects of Radiation scales, respectively. For the physical wellbeing codes (n = 939) for breast/chest and arm, 34% (n = 321) mapped to the Physical Wellbeing-Chest scale. Most of the abdomen codes (n = 311) mapped to Satisfaction with Abdomen (n = 90, 76%) and Physical Wellbeing-Abdomen (n = 171, 89%) scales. Codes that did not map (n = 697, 30%) covered breast sensation and lymphedema. Concerns related to fatigue, cancer worry, and work impact were most reported and did not map to BREAST-Q. CONCLUSION: The BREAST-Q, which was developed using extensive patient input more than a decade ago, is still relevant. To ensure the BREAST-Q remains comprehensive, new scales for upper extremity lymphedema, breast sensation, fatigue, cancer worry, and work impact were developed.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Lymphedema , Mammaplasty , Female , Humans , Mastectomy/adverse effects , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Patient Satisfaction , Mammaplasty/psychology , Lymphedema/etiology , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgeryABSTRACT
Lobular neoplasia (LN) involves proliferative changes within the breast lobules. LN is divided into lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH). LCIS can be further subdivided into three subtypes: classic LCIS, pleomorphic LCIS, and LCIS with necrosis (florid type). Because classic LCIS is now considered as a benign etiology, current guidelines recommend close follow-up with imaging versus surgical excision. The goal of our study was to determine if the diagnosis of classic LN on core needle biopsy (CNB) merits surgical excision. This is a retrospective, observational study conducted at Mount Auburn Hospital, Cambridge, MA, from May 17, 2017, through June 30, 2020. We reviewed the data of breast biopsies conducted at our hospital over this period and included patients who were diagnosed with classic LN (LCIS and/or ALH) and excluded patients having any other atypical lesions on CNB. All known cancer patients were excluded. Of the 2707 CNBs performed during the study period, we identified 68 women who were diagnosed with ALH or LCIS on CNB. CNB was performed for an abnormal mammogram in the majority of patients (60; 88%) while 7(10.3%) had an abnormal breast magnetic resonance imaging study (MRI), and 1 had an abnormal ultrasound (US). A total of 58 patients (85%) underwent excisional biopsy, of which 3 (5.2%) showed malignancy, including 2 cases of DCIS and 1 invasive carcinoma. In addition, there was 1 case (1.7%) with pleomorphic LCIS and 11 cases with ADH (15.5%). The management of LN found on core biopsy is evolving, with some advocating surgical excision and others recommending observation. Our data show a change in diagnosis with excisional biopsy in 13 (22.4%) of patients with 2 cases of DCIS, 1 invasive carcinoma, 1 pleomorphic LCIS, and 9 cases of ADH, diagnosed on excisional biopsy. While ALH and classic LCIS are considered benign, the choice of ongoing surveillance versus excisional biopsy should be made with shared decision making with the patient, with consideration of personal and family history, as well as patient preferences.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Carcinoma, Lobular , Precancerous Conditions , Female , Humans , Biopsy , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/diagnostic imaging , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/diagnosis , Carcinoma in Situ/pathology , Carcinoma in Situ/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Hyperplasia , Observational Studies as Topic , Precancerous Conditions/pathologyABSTRACT
AIMS: To describe a new international dataset for pathology reporting of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), variants of lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and low-grade lesions (encapsulated papillary carcinoma, solid papillary carcinoma in situ, Paget's disease) produced by the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR). METHODS AND RESULTS: The ICCR, a global alliance of pathology bodies, uses a rigorous and efficient process for the development of evidence-based, structured datasets for pathology reporting of common cancers. Their aim is to support quality pathology reporting and engender understanding between the breast surgeon, pathologist, and oncologist for optimal and uniform patient management globally. Here we describe the dataset for DCIS, some variants of LCIS (namely the pleomorphic and the florid variants), and low-grade lesions by a multidisciplinary panel of internationally recognized experts. The agreed dataset comprises 12 core (required) and five noncore (recommended) elements suitable for both developed and low-income jurisdictions, derived from a review of current evidence. Areas of contention were addressed using a pragmatic approach in the absence of evidence. Use of all core elements is the minimum reporting standard for any individual case. Commentary is provided, explaining each element's clinical relevance, definitions to be applied where appropriate for the agreed list of value options and the rationale for considering the element as core or noncore. CONCLUSION: This first internationally agreed dataset for DCIS, variants of LCIS, and low-grade lesions reporting will enable their standardization of pathology reporting and enhance clinicopathological communication leading to improved patient outcomes. Widespread adoption will also facilitate international comparisons, multinational clinical trials, and help to improve the management of breast disease globally.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Carcinoma, Lobular , Carcinoma, Papillary , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Female , Humans , Hyperplasia , PathologistsABSTRACT
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.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Precancerous Conditions , Adult , Aged , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/pathology , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Female , Humans , Hyperplasia/surgery , Middle Aged , Precancerous Conditions/pathology , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Non-classic lobular carcinoma in situ (NC-LCIS) represents a spectrum of lesions, histologically distinct from classic LCIS (C-LCIS) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Several studies have reported on the safety of breast conservation (BCS) in patients with DCIS or invasive breast cancer and concomitant C-LCIS, yet there are no data addressing this question for patients with concomitant NC-LCIS. We evaluated local recurrence (LR) after BCS in patients with DCIS or invasive cancer and concomitant NC-LCIS. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We searched institutional databases using natural language processing to identify patients with DCIS or invasive breast cancer and concomitant NC-LCIS treated with BCS between 2000 and 2015. Charts were reviewed to collect demographics, disease and treatment details, and recurrence events. All results represent descriptive analyses. RESULTS: We identified 71 patients with DCIS (n = 13) or invasive cancer (n = 58) and concomitant NC-LCIS treated with BCS. Median patient age was 59 years (33-77 years), and median invasive tumor size was 1.2 cm (0.1-6.9 cm); 62% of DCIS and 79% of invasive cancer patients had hormone receptor (HR)-positive disease. Among DCIS patients, seven (54%) received radiation and none hormonal therapy. Among those with invasive cancer, 52 (90%) received radiation, 17 (29%) received chemotherapy and 44 of 55 with HR-positive disease (78%) received hormonal therapy. At median follow-up of 79 months (1-265 months), the LR rate was 8% and 2% among patients with DCIS and invasive cancer, respectively. CONCLUSION: NC-LCIS is rarely present in association with DCIS or invasive cancer, and it does not appear to impact LR outcomes following BCS.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Carcinoma, Lobular , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/pathology , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Contraindications , Female , Hormones , Humans , Middle AgedABSTRACT
PURPOSE: There is a potential risk that lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) on preoperative biopsy might be diagnosed as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive carcinoma in the final pathology. This study aimed to evaluate the rate of upgrade of LCIS on preoperative biopsy to DCIS or invasive carcinoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data of 55 patients with LCIS on preoperative biopsy were analyzed. All patients underwent surgery between 1991 and 2016 at Severance Hospital in Seoul, Korea. We analyzed the rate of upgrade of preoperative LCIS to DCIS or invasive cancer in the final pathology. The clinicopathologic features related to the upgrade were evaluated. RESULTS: The rate of upgrade of LCIS to DCIS or invasive carcinoma was 16.4% (9/55). In multivariate analysis, microcalcification and progesterone receptor expression were significantly associated with the upgrade of LCIS (p=0.023 and p=0.044, respectively). CONCLUSION: The current study showed a relatively high rate of upgrade of LCIS on preoperative biopsy to DCIS or invasive cancer. The presence of microcalcification and progesterone receptor expression may be potential predictors of upgradation of LCIS on preoperative biopsy. Surgical excision of the LCIS during preoperative biopsy could be a management option to identify the concealed malignancy.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Calcinosis , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating , Carcinoma, Lobular , Biopsy , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/diagnosis , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/pathology , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Calcinosis/diagnosis , Calcinosis/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Female , Humans , Receptors, ProgesteroneABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Studies report low upgrade rates following excision for classic-type lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) with radiologic-pathologic concordance. Thus, in the absence of other high-risk lesions, observation has become standard. We report long-term outcomes of excision versus observation following a core biopsy diagnosis of classic-type LCIS. METHODS: Women with LCIS treated from 2013-2020 and managed with excision or observation were identified from a prospective database. Women with cancer upgrade at excision or history of cancer were excluded. We compared rates and characteristics of subsequent breast cancers by clinical management strategy. RESULTS: Of 312 women, 170 (54%) underwent excision and 142 (46%) were managed with observation. Among the excision group, 36 of 170 (21%) had radiologic-pathologic concordant LCIS without other high-risk lesions, mass, or symptoms (concordant LCIS excision group). Overall, at 3.1 years median follow-up, 11 (6.5%) women managed with excision and 11 (7.7%) women managed with observation developed cancer. Cancer development was not associated with management choice (overall excision cohort vs. observation group [p = 0.8]) and did not differ between the concordant LCIS excision and observation groups (p > 0.9). The 5-year cancer development rate was 8.9% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.3-31.6%) in the concordant LCIS excision group and 10.3% (95% CI 5.5-18.6%) in the observation group. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in breast cancer rates existed among women with a core-biopsy diagnosis of classic-type LCIS managed with excision or observation. These data support management of LCIS as a risk factor, with consideration of chemoprophylaxis, rather than as an indication for surgical excision.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/diagnostic imaging , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Female , HumansABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Based on modern series demonstrating low upgrade rates for pure lobular neoplasia (LN) diagnosed on core needle biopsy (CNB), our institution no longer recommends routine excision, provided imaging is concordant. This study describes outcomes in patients managed without surgical excision. METHODS: From an institutional database, we identified all patients with a diagnosis of pure atypical lobular hyperplasia and/or classic lobular carcinoma in situ on CNB managed without surgical excision (i.e., conservative management) from 2015 to 2019. The primary outcome of interest was failure of conservative management, defined as development of ipsilateral same-quadrant ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive breast cancer within 2 years of CNB, or need for ipsilateral same-quadrant excisional biopsy. We also evaluated rates of ipsilateral same-quadrant CNB during follow-up. RESULTS: Among 96 pure LN lesions on CNB since 2015, 80 (83%) were managed without surgical excision. Median follow-up was 27 months (IQR: 16-28), with only 2 (2%) patients lost to follow-up. No patients developed an ipsilateral, same-quadrant breast cancer. The 3-year risk of conservative management failure was 6.2% (95% CI 2.3-15.7%). All failures were a result of need for excisional biopsy due to progressive imaging abnormalities at the initial CNB site, with benign final pathology. The 3-year risk of ipsilateral same-quadrant CNB was 9.2% (95% CI 3.8-21.5%). CONCLUSION: Non-surgical management of pure LN is safe, and the likelihood of requiring subsequent surgical excision or repeat CNB during follow-up is low. These data provide reassurance that routine excision of pure LN in the setting of radiologic-pathologic concordance is not required.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/diagnostic imaging , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma in Situ/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Female , Humans , Hyperplasia/surgeryABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: To determine upgrade rates of lobular neoplasia (LN) to malignancy and evaluate factors that may predict upgrade. METHODS: From 5/1/2003 to 12/30/2015, breast lesions diagnosed as LN (atypical lobular hyperplasia [ALH] or classic lobular carcinoma in-situ [LCIS]) on core biopsy that underwent surgical excision or at least 2 years imaging follow-up were identified. A subspecialty trained breast radiologist and pathologist reviewed imaging and pathology slides to confirm diagnosis and to determine if LN represented the target lesion, part of the target lesion, or an incidental finding. Imaging features, original BI-RADS final assessment category, biopsy method, biopsy device and final pathologic diagnosis were documented. Cases with both ALH and LCIS were classified as LCIS for analysis. Reason for biopsy of BI-RADS 2-3 was patient or referring physician preference. Upgrade rates to malignancy were determined for all cases. RESULTS: In this study 73.7% (115/156) lesions were ALH and 26.3% (41/156) were LCIS+/-ALH. Surgical excision and imaging follow-up were performed in 71.2% (111/156) and 28.8% (45/156), respectively. Upgrade rates for ALH and LCIS were 0.0% (0/115) and 7.3% (3/41), respectively. Cancer developed at a site separate from core biopsy in 1.7% (2/115) ALH and 7.3% (3/41) LCIS cases. We found no association of upgrade rate with biopsy type, BI-RADS or target/part of target lesion versus incidental. CONCLUSION: Our study supports consideration of excision for LCIS, given 7.3% upgrade rate. Conversely, imaging surveillance might be appropriate following diagnosis of ALH alone.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Precancerous Conditions , Radiology , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/diagnostic imaging , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/diagnosis , Carcinoma in Situ/pathology , Carcinoma in Situ/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/diagnostic imaging , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Female , Humans , Hyperplasia , Precancerous Conditions/pathology , Precancerous Conditions/surgeryABSTRACT
The management of borderline or high-risk breast lesions (HRLs) remains controversial. We propose a pragmatic evidence-based approach based on lesion type. For lobular carcinoma in situ with pleomorphism, papilloma with atypia, atypical ductal hyperplasia, and fibroepithelial lesions, surgical consultation and excision are recommended. Patients with other borderline or HRLs are referred for surgical consultation to discuss excision versus surveillance. Our recommendations align with American Society of Breast Surgeons guidelines, which aim to reduce unnecessary surgery and ensure appropriate follow-up.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Evidence-Based Medicine/methods , Mammography/methods , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/diagnostic imaging , Female , Humans , Risk , Unnecessary ProceduresABSTRACT
PURPOSE: We analysed incidence, treatment, survival, occurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive breast cancer (IBC) after lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) in the Netherlands. METHODS: All women diagnosed with classic LCIS between 1989 and 2017 were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. We calculated overall (OS), relative survival (RS) and cumulative incidence functions (CIF, accounting for competing risks) of mortality, DCIS and IBC. For IBC, standardised incidence ratios (SIR) of IBC were calculated. Analyses were stratified for surgical treatment. RESULTS: We included 1890 patients. Median age was 51 years. Median follow-up was 8.5 years. In 1989-2017, LCIS incidence increased from 41 to 124, surgical treatment decreased from 100% to 41.1 % - mostly BCS. 10-year OS and 20-year RS exceeded 90 % in all subgroups. Overall, 48 (2.5 %) and 270 (14.3 %) patients were diagnosed with DCIS and IBC. IBCs were mostly early-stage. After mastectomy, 13 of 14 IBCs presented contralaterally. In the other groups, 64.8-70.9 % of IBCs presented ipsilaterally, 34.5-53.9 % of these were lobular. The SIR of ipsilateral IBC was highest after no surgery (6.9, 95%CI:4.9-9.4), lowest after mastectomy (0.2, 95%CI:0.4-0.8). CONCLUSION: LCIS incidence increased, surgical treatment decreased. The low mortality risks support consideration of active surveillance. However, the increased IBC incidence suggests careful monitoring.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/epidemiology , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Carcinoma in Situ/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/therapy , Female , Humans , Incidence , Mastectomy , Middle Aged , Netherlands/epidemiologyABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Radiation-induced acute coronary events (ACEs) may occur as a treatment-related late adverse effect of breast cancer (BC) radiation. However, the underlying mechanisms behind this radiation-induced cardiac disease remain to be determined. The objective of this study was to test the hypothesis that radiation dose to calcified atherosclerotic plaques in the left anterior descending coronary artery (LAD) is a better predictor for ACEs than radiation dose to the whole heart or left ventricle in patients with BC treated with radiation therapy. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The study cohort consisted of 910 patients with BC treated with postoperative radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery. In total, 163 patients had an atherosclerotic plaque in the LAD. The endpoint was the occurrence of an ACE after treatment. For each individual patient, the mean heart dose, volume of the left ventricle receiving ≥5 Gy (LV-V5), mean LAD dose, and mean dose to calcified atherosclerotic plaques in the LAD, if present, were acquired based on planning computed tomography scans. Cox regression analysis was used to analyze the effects on the cumulative incidence of ACEs. RESULTS: The median follow-up time was 9.2 years (range, 0.1-14.3 years). In total, 38 patients (4.2%) developed an ACE during follow-up. For patients with an atherosclerotic plaque (nâ¯=â¯163), the mean dose to the atherosclerotic plaque was the strongest predictor for ACEs, even after correction for cardiovascular risk factors (hazard ratio [HR], 1.269; 95% CI, 1.090-1.477; Pâ¯=â¯.002). The LV-V5 was associated with ACEs in patients without atherosclerotic plaques in the LAD (nâ¯=â¯680) (HR, 1.021; 95% CI, 1.003-1.039; Pâ¯=â¯.023). CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study suggest that radiation dose to pre-existing calcified atherosclerotic plaques in the LAD is strongly associated with the development of ACEs in patients with BC.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Coronary Disease/etiology , Coronary Vessels/radiation effects , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/radiotherapy , Adenocarcinoma/radiotherapy , Adenocarcinoma/surgery , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/radiotherapy , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Cardiotoxicity/epidemiology , Cardiotoxicity/etiology , Cohort Studies , Coronary Disease/epidemiology , Coronary Vessels/diagnostic imaging , Dose-Response Relationship, Radiation , Female , Follow-Up Studies , Heart/diagnostic imaging , Heart/radiation effects , Heart Ventricles/diagnostic imaging , Heart Ventricles/radiation effects , Humans , Kaplan-Meier Estimate , Mastectomy, Segmental , Middle Aged , Plaque, Atherosclerotic/diagnostic imaging , Radiation Dosage , Radiotherapy, Conformal , Regression Analysis , Time Factors , Tomography, X-Ray Computed , Vascular Calcification/diagnostic imaging , Vascular Calcification/radiotherapyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is a known risk factor for breast cancer of unclear significance when detected in association with invasive carcinoma. This meta-analysis aims to determine the impact of LCIS on local recurrence risk for individuals with breast cancer treated with breast conservation therapy to help guide appropriate management strategies. METHODS: We identified relevant studies from five electronic databases. Studies were deemed suitable for inclusion where they compared patients with invasive breast cancer and concurrent LCIS to those with breast cancer alone, all patients underwent breast conservation therapy (lumpectomy with adjuvant radiation therapy) and local recurrence was evaluated. Recurrence data were pooled by use of a random-effects model. RESULTS: From 1488 citations screened by our search, nine studies were deemed suitable for inclusion. These studies comprised 990 cases and 12 870 controls. Median follow-up time was 104 months. There was a significantly increased risk of overall local recurrence of breast cancer for individuals with LCIS in association with breast cancer following breast conservation therapy (pooled odds ratio (pOR) 1.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.10-2.71; P = 0.018). The risk of local recurrence was not significantly increased at 5 years (pOR 1.00; 95% CI 0.49-2.04; P = 0.995) and 10 years (pOR 1.52; 95% CI 0.72-3.23; P = 0.275). CONCLUSION: Individuals with LCIS in association with invasive breast cancer have an increased risk of local recurrence following breast conservation therapy. This supports consideration of increased medical surveillance and exploration of further risk reduction strategies for such patients.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/epidemiology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Female , Humans , Mastectomy, Segmental , Neoplasm Recurrence, Local/epidemiology , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
Intraductal papilloma of the breast is a benign, mass-forming, proliferative lesion with a papillary architecture confined within a duct. Lobular neoplasia can rarely arise from an intraductal papilloma of the breast. In this article, we report the morphologic features of a rare case of classical LCIS (lobular carcinoma in situ) arising from an intraductal papilloma in a 76-year-old woman. The monomorphic dyscohesive cells were present between the myoepithelial and luminal epithelial layer in the periphery of the papilloma. These cells partially obliterated the spaces between the papillae forming solid sheets. The monomorphic dyscohesive cells showed lack of E-cadherin expression and uniform staining for estrogen receptor. We review the histologic differential diagnosis and stress the importance of correct classification to ensure optimal care for patients. We also propose a new criterion for the distinction of lobular neoplasia within a papilloma.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Lobular/diagnosis , Neoplasms, Second Primary/diagnosis , Papilloma, Intraductal/diagnosis , Aged , Antigens, CD/analysis , Biomarkers, Tumor/analysis , Breast/pathology , Breast/surgery , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/pathology , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Cadherins/analysis , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Female , Humans , Mastectomy , Neoplasms, Second Primary/pathology , Neoplasms, Second Primary/surgery , Papilloma, Intraductal/pathology , Papilloma, Intraductal/surgeryABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: In order to minimise the risk of breast cancer patients for COVID-19 infection related morbidity and mortality prioritisation of care has utmost importance since the onset of the pandemic. However, COVID-19 related risk in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery has not been studied yet. We evaluated the safety of breast cancer surgery during COVID-19 pandemic in the West of Scotland region. METHODS: A prospective cohort study of patients having breast cancer surgery was carried out in a geographical region during the first eight weeks of the hospital lockdown and outcomes were compared to the regional cancer registry data of pre-COVID-19 patients of the same units (n = 1415). RESULTS: 188 operations were carried out in 179 patients. Tumour size was significantly larger in patients undergoing surgery during hospital lockdown than before (cT3-4: 16.8% vs. 7.4%; p < 0.001; pT2 - pT4: 45.5% vs. 35.6%; p = 0.002). ER negative and HER-2 positive rate was significantly higher during lockdown (ER negative: 41.3% vs. 17%, p < 0.001; HER-2 positive: 23.4% vs. 14.8%; p = 0.004). While breast conservation rate was lower during lockdown (58.6% vs. 65%; p < 0.001), level II oncoplastic conservation was significantly higher in order to reduce mastectomy rate (22.8% vs. 5.6%; p < 0.001). No immediate reconstruction was offered during lockdown. 51.2% had co-morbidity, and 7.8% developed postoperative complications in lockdown. There was no peri-operative COVID-19 infection related morbidity or mortality. CONCLUSION: breast cancer can be safely provided during COVID-19 pandemic in selected patients.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/surgery , COVID-19/epidemiology , Cross Infection/epidemiology , Mastectomy/methods , Postoperative Complications/epidemiology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/pathology , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/pathology , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/pathology , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , Cohort Studies , Female , Humans , Male , Mastectomy/statistics & numerical data , Mastectomy, Segmental/methods , Mastectomy, Segmental/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Prospective Studies , SARS-CoV-2 , Scotland/epidemiology , State Medicine , Tumor BurdenABSTRACT
CONTEXT.: In recent years, there has been a shift to less aggressive surgical management of the axilla in breast cancer. Consequently, sentinel lymph node evaluation by frozen section (FS) has declined. Additionally, there has been an impetus to decrease efforts in identifying small sentinel lymph node metastases. OBJECTIVES.: To critically evaluate our enterprise performance in evaluating axillary sentinel lymph nodes submitted for FS prior to considering changes in processing. DESIGN.: A retrospective review (August 1, 2017-July 31, 2019) was conducted to identify sentinel and nonsentinel lymph nodes from 1 academic institution and 2 community sites. Cases were evaluated for grossing technique and discordance between FS and permanent section (PS) due to sampling and/or interpretive error. Clinicopathologic features were assessed. RESULTS.: Lymph nodes from 426 patients with 432 neoplasms were sent for FS. Serial sectioning at 2-mm intervals was adhered to in 338 of 432 (78.2%). Serial sectioning was significantly lower at the community sites (14 of 60; 23.3%) versus at the academic institution (324 of 372; 87.1%; P < .001). Discordant cases were all false negatives (21 of 432; 4.8%). A total of 7 of 21 false negatives (33.3%) had macrometastatic (>2 mm) disease; of these, 3 were post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy, 3 were neither serially sectioned nor posttherapy, and 1 was a small (0.3-cm) focus. A total of 15 of 16 false negatives due to sampling error were detected on the first permanent section level. CONCLUSIONS.: Standard serial sectioning of sentinel lymph nodes at 2-mm intervals resulted in infrequent false negatives due to macrometastatic disease. A single additional permanent section level is reasonable, given adherence to serial sectioning.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ/secondary , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/secondary , Carcinoma, Lobular/secondary , Frozen Sections , Lymph Nodes/pathology , Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy , Adult , Aged , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/secondary , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Carcinoma, Lobular/surgery , False Negative Reactions , Female , Humans , Lymph Nodes/surgery , Lymphatic Metastasis , Medical Audit , Middle Aged , Neoplasm Staging , Predictive Value of Tests , Reproducibility of Results , Retrospective Studies , Staining and LabelingABSTRACT
The lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) subtypes include classic (CLCIS), pleomorphic (PLCIS), and florid LCIS (FLCIS). The CLCIS is considered a breast cancer risk factor, but clinical significance and natural history of other LCIS subtypes are unclear. The outcome data on PLCIS and FLCIS is limited. The aim of current study is to compare excision and follow-up findings of CLCIS and nonclassic LCIS (NCLCIS). The breast needle biopsies (NBs) with LCIS during 01/2007-12/2017 were identified. The imaging, clinical findings, and outcome were compared between CLCIS and NCLCIS. A total of 36 NBs from 32 patients with NCLCIS (14 PLCIS & 22 FLCIS) and 73 NBs from 68 patients with CLCIS were identified. The NCLCIS patients were older (57 vs 52 years; P = .02) and presented more often with calcifications (78% vs 44%; P = .01). Seven (19%) PLCIS were initially diagnosed as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The microscopic invasion was frequent with NCLCIS (25%). No invasion was identified in NBs with CLCIS. A separate concurrent NBs with a carcinoma (29% vs 6%; P = .018) or ductal atypia (12% vs 3%; P = .1) was more frequent with CLCIS. The upgrade rate (invasion or DCIS) was higher with NCLCIS (25% vs 4%). Four NCLCIS developed ipsilateral recurrences: 2 NCLCIS, 1 IDC, and 1 ILC (50; 10-96 months). No breast event was reported in 24 pure CLCIS (60; 8-144 months). Invasive carcinoma with NCLCIS, unlike CLCIS, is always lobular type. Recurrences following NCLCIS are ipsilateral lobular tumors. NCLCIS subtypes are nonobligate precursors to invasive lobular carcinoma.
Subject(s)
Breast Carcinoma In Situ , Breast Neoplasms , Carcinoma in Situ , Carcinoma, Lobular , Biopsy, Large-Core Needle , Breast Carcinoma In Situ/surgery , Carcinoma in Situ/surgery , Female , Humans , Neoplasm Recurrence, LocalABSTRACT
Proliferative epithelial lesions are risk factors for breast cancer. They are a heterogeneous group of lesions in which the presence of atypia is related to varying degrees of risk. They should be considered in the differential diagnosis with benign lesions, in situ ductal carcinoma and infiltrating carcinoma. An accurate histopathological diagnosis is important in choosing the best therapeutic option, including vacuum assisted biopsy and surgery. We revise diagnostic criteria and the differential diagnosis of usual ductal hyperplasia, radial scar and complex sclerosing lesions, distinct types of adenosis, papillary lesions, atypical ductal hyperplasia, flat epithelial atypia and lobular neoplasia in situ. Furthermore, we summarize the degree of risk associated with the different conditions and management possibilities.