Display options
Cite
Fadare O, Clement NF, Ghofrani M. High and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in-situ of the breast: a comparison of pathologic features in core biopsies and excisions and an evaluation of core biopsy features that may predict a close or positive margin in the excision. Diagn Pathol. 2009;4:26doi: 10.1186/1746-1596-4-26.
Fadare, O., Clement, N. F., & Ghofrani, M. (2009). High and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in-situ of the breast: a comparison of pathologic features in core biopsies and excisions and an evaluation of core biopsy features that may predict a close or positive margin in the excision. Diagnostic pathology, 426. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-4-26
Fadare, Oluwole, et al. "High and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in-situ of the breast: a comparison of pathologic features in core biopsies and excisions and an evaluation of core biopsy features that may predict a close or positive margin in the excision." Diagnostic pathology vol. 4 (2009): 26. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-4-26
Fadare O, Clement NF, Ghofrani M. High and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in-situ of the breast: a comparison of pathologic features in core biopsies and excisions and an evaluation of core biopsy features that may predict a close or positive margin in the excision. Diagn Pathol. 2009 Aug 19;4:26. doi: 10.1186/1746-1596-4-26. PMID: 19691836; PMCID: PMC2740842.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Diagn Pathol. 2009 Aug 19;4:26. doi: 10.1186/1746-1596-4-26.

High and intermediate grade ductal carcinoma in-situ of the breast: a comparison of pathologic features in core biopsies and excisions and an evaluation of core biopsy features that may predict a close or positive margin in the excision.

Diagnostic pathology

Oluwole Fadare, Nathan F Clement, Mohiedean Ghofrani

Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, Wilford Hall Medical Center, Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio, Texas, USA. [email protected]

PMID: 19691836 PMCID: PMC2740842 DOI: 10.1186/1746-1596-4-26

Abstract

Low and high-grade ductal carcinoma in-situ (DCIS) are known to be highly disparate by a multitude of parameters, including progression potential, immunophenotype, gene expression profile and DNA ploidy. In this study, we analyzed a group of intermediate and high-grade DCIS cases to determine how well the core biopsy predicts the maximal pathology in the associated excisions, and to determine if there are any core biopsy morphologic features that may predict a close (< or = 0.2 cm) or positive margin in the subsequent excision. Forty-nine consecutive paired specimens [core biopsies with a maximal diagnosis of DCIS, and their corresponding excisions, which included 20 and 29 specimens from mastectomies and breast conserving surgeries respectively] were evaluated in detail. In 5 (10%) of 49 cases, no residual carcinoma was found in the excision. In another 4 cases, the changes were diagnostic only of atypical ductal hyperplasia. There were 4 and 3 respective cases of invasive and microinvasive carcinoma out of the 49 excision specimens, for an overall invasion frequency of 14%. In 28 cases where a sentinel lymph node evaluation was performed, only 1 was found to be positive. Among the 40 cases with at least residual DCIS in the excision, there were 5 cases in which comedo-pattern DCIS was present in the excision but not in the core biopsy, attributed to the lower maximal nuclear grade in the biopsy proliferation in 4 cases and the absence of central necrosis in the 5th. For the other main histologic patterns, in 8 (20%) of 40 cases, there were more patterns identified in the core biopsy than in the corresponding excision. For the other 32 cases, 100%, 66%, 50%, 33% and 25% of the number of histologic patterns in the excisions were captured in 35%, 5%, 17.5%, 15% and 7.5% of the preceding core biopsies respectively. Therefore, the core biopsy reflected at least half of the non-comedo histologic patterns in 77.5% of cases. In 6(15%) of the 40 cases, the maximum nuclear grade of the excision (grade 3) was higher than that seen in the core biopsy (grade 2). Overall, however, the maximum nuclear grade in the excision was significantly predicted by maximum nuclear grade in the core biopsy (p = 0.028), with a Phi of 0.347, indicating a moderately strong association. At a size threshold of 2.7 cm, there was no significant association between lesional size and core biopsy features. Furthermore, the clear margin width of the cases with lesional size < or = 2.7 cm (mean 0.69 cm) was not significantly different (p = 0.4) from the cases with lesional size > 2.7 cm (mean 0.56 cm). Finally, among a variety of core biopsy features that were evaluated, including maximum nuclear grade, necrosis, cancerization of lobules, number of tissue cores with DCIS, number of DCIS ducts per tissue core, total DCIS ducts, or comedo-pattern, only necrosis was significantly associated with a positive or close (< or = 0.2 cm) margin on multivariate analysis (Phi of 0.350). It is concluded that a significant change [to invasive disease (14%) or to no residual disease (10%)] is seen in approximately 24% of excisions that follow a core biopsy diagnosis of intermediate or high-grade DCIS. Core biopsy features are of limited value in predicting a close or positive margin in these lesions.

References

  1. J Surg Oncol. 2009 Feb 1;99(2):99-103 - PubMed
  2. J Clin Pathol. 2009 Jun;62(6):534-8 - PubMed
  3. Am J Surg Pathol. 1999 Nov;23(11):1340-8 - PubMed
  4. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 May;14(5):1638-43 - PubMed
  5. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1994 Aug;11(3):181-92 - PubMed
  6. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008 Nov 15;72(4):1016-20 - PubMed
  7. Eur J Cancer. 2007 Apr;43(6):993-1001 - PubMed
  8. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. 2008 Mar;8(3):433-41 - PubMed
  9. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Jan;35(1):43-7 - PubMed
  10. Int J Clin Pract. 2008 Nov;62(11):1730-5 - PubMed
  11. Acta Oncol. 2007;46(6):798-802 - PubMed
  12. Cancer. 2004 Jan 15;100(2):245-51 - PubMed
  13. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009 Jan;133(1):26-30 - PubMed
  14. Breast J. 2006 Jan-Feb;12(1):20-7 - PubMed
  15. J Surg Oncol. 2008 Dec 15;98(8):585-7 - PubMed
  16. Radiology. 1997 Apr;203(1):151-7 - PubMed
  17. Eur J Cancer. 2009 May;45(7):1162-1167 - PubMed
  18. Mod Pathol. 2008 Jan;21(1):39-45 - PubMed
  19. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007 Mar;101(3):335-47 - PubMed
  20. Acad Radiol. 2004 Mar;11(3):293-308 - PubMed
  21. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001 May;115(5):709-18 - PubMed
  22. Cancer. 2002 Apr 1;94(7):1917-24 - PubMed
  23. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2006 Jan-Mar;7(1):69-74 - PubMed
  24. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000 Jan;24(1):123-8 - PubMed
  25. ANZ J Surg. 2006 Dec;76(12):1064-7 - PubMed
  26. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 May;14(5):1618-28 - PubMed
  27. Breast J. 2007 May-Jun;13(3):251-7 - PubMed
  28. Can Assoc Radiol J. 1999 Aug;50(4):235-40 - PubMed
  29. J Surg Oncol. 2005 May 1;90(2):71-6 - PubMed
  30. JAMA. 1996 Mar 27;275(12):913-8 - PubMed
  31. Breast Cancer Res. 2003;5(6):313-9 - PubMed
  32. J Am Coll Surg. 2005 Apr;200(4):516-26 - PubMed
  33. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997 Sep 17;89(18):1356-60 - PubMed
  34. J Pathol. 1999 Mar;187(4):383-4 - PubMed
  35. J Clin Oncol. 2009 Jan 10;27(2):279-88 - PubMed
  36. Am J Surg Pathol. 2000 Aug;24(8):1058-67 - PubMed
  37. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002 Oct 16;94(20):1546-54 - PubMed
  38. Br J Surg. 2008 May;95(5):547-54 - PubMed
  39. Am J Surg. 2003 Oct;186(4):371-7 - PubMed
  40. Clin Radiol. 2001 Oct;56(10):828-32 - PubMed
  41. J Surg Oncol. 2001 Apr;76(4):245-54 - PubMed
  42. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006 Aug;98(3):311-4 - PubMed
  43. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008 Mar;15(3):833-42 - PubMed
  44. Acta Oncol. 2008;47(2):225-31 - PubMed
  45. Lancet. 1990 Mar 3;335(8688):519-22 - PubMed
  46. Clin Radiol. 2009 Feb;64(2):178-83 - PubMed
  47. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Apr;14(4):1458-71 - PubMed
  48. Br J Radiol. 2000 Sep;73(873):938-44 - PubMed
  49. J Pathol. 2005 Jan;205(2):248-54 - PubMed
  50. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2000 Nov;26(7):646-51 - PubMed
  51. Histopathology. 1991 Nov;19(5):403-10 - PubMed
  52. Clin Breast Cancer. 2008 Jun;8(3):269-74 - PubMed
  53. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2006 Jun;25(2):223-7 - PubMed
  54. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Oct;14(10):2953-60 - PubMed
  55. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2000 May;61(2):151-9 - PubMed
  56. J Clin Pathol. 2006 Jul;59(7):740-3 - PubMed
  57. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008 Jan;15(1):235-43 - PubMed
  58. ANZ J Surg. 2003 Jun;73(6):404-6 - PubMed
  59. Ann Ital Chir. 2008 May-Jun;79(3):151-5 - PubMed
  60. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005 Dec;29(12):1625-32 - PubMed
  61. Breast J. 2008 Mar-Apr;14(2):135-40 - PubMed
  62. Eur J Radiol. 2005 Apr;54(1):55-61 - PubMed
  63. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009 May;115(1):181-3 - PubMed
  64. Pathol Res Pract. 2005;201(11):713-25 - PubMed

Publication Types