Treatment trends for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients affected by breast ductal carcinoma in situ with and without microinvasion: Retrospective observational study

With the introduction of an organized mammographic screening, the incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has experienced an important increase. Our experience with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) among patients with DCIS is reviewed.We collected retrospective data on patients operated on their breasts for DCIS (pTis), DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM) (pT1mi) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) sized ≤2 cm (pT1) between January 2002 and June 2016, focusing on the result of SLNB.543 DCIS, 84 DCISM, and 2111 IDC were included. In cases of DCIS and DCISM, SLNB resulted micrometastatic respectively in 1.7% and 6.0% of cases and macrometastatic respectively in 0.9% and 3.6% of cases. 5-year disease-free survival and overall survival in DCISM and IDC were similar, while significantly longer in DCIS. 5-year local recurrence rate of DCIS and DCISM were respectively 2.5% and 7.9%, and their 5-year distant recurrence rate respectively 0% and 4%. IDC, tumor grading ≥2 and lymph node (LN) macrometastasis were significant predictors for decreased overall survival. Significant predictors for distant metastases were DCISM, IDC, macroscopic nodal metastasis, and tumor grading ≥2. Predictors for the microinvasive component in DCIS were tumor multifocality/multicentricity, grading ≥2, ITCs and micrometastases.Our study suggests that despite its rarity, sentinel node metastasis may also occur in case of DCIS, which in most cases are micrometastases. Even in the absence of an evident invasive component, microinvasion should always be suspected in these cases, and their management should be the same as for IDC.

Subclinical Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast: Treatment with Conservative Surgery and Radiotherapy

Aims and Background

In spite of the fact that ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a frequently encountered clinical problem, there is no consensus about the optimal treatment of clinically occult (i.e., mammographic presentation only) DCIS. Interest in breast conservation therapy has recently increased. Few data are available in Italy on the conservative treatment with surgery and adjuvant postoperative radiotherapy.

Methods

A retrospective multi-institutional study was performed in 15 Radiation Oncology Departments in northern Italy involving 112 women with subclinical DCIS of the breast treated between 1982 and 1993. Age of the patients ranged between 32 and 72 years (median, 50 years). All of them underwent conservative surgery: quadrantectomy in 89, tumorectomy in 11, and wide excision in 12 cases. The most common histologic subtype was comedocarcinoma (37%). The median pathologic size was 10 mm (range 1 to 55 mm). Axillary dissection was performed in 83 cases: all the patients were node negative. All the patients received adjunctive radiation therapy with 60Co units (77%) or 6 MV linear accelerators (23%) for a median total dose to the entire breast of 50 Gy (mean, 49.48 Gy; range, 45-60 Gy). Seventy-six cases (68%) received a boost to the tumor bed at a dose of 8-20 Gy (median 10 Gy) for a minimum tumor dose of 58 Gy.

Results

At a median follow-up of 66 months, 8 local recurrences were observed, 4 intraductal and 4 invasive. All recurrent patients had a salvage mastectomy and are alive and free of disease at this writing. The 10-year actuarial overall, cause-specific, and recurrence-free survival was of 98.8%, 100%, and 91%, respectively.

Conclusions

The retrospective multicentric study, with a local control rate of more than 90% at 10 years with 100% cause-specific survival, showed that conservative surgery and adjuvant radiation therapy is a safe and efficacious treatment for patients with occult, non-palpable DCIS.

Ductal carcinoma in situ: an overview

Advances in methods used to diagnose breast cancer have resulted in the increased detection of ductal carcinoma in situ; most of these are detected by screening mammograms and are confirmed by core needle biopsy. Currently, classification schemas are moving toward a molecular approach. Treatment options for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ are multiple and take into consideration end points such as local, regional or distant recurrence, overall survival and quality of life. Treatment methods continue to be controversial and debated in the oncology community. The quality of local control is multifactorial and depends on adequate surgical clearance, biological characteristics of the tumor, clinical presentation and the possibility of radiation therapies.

[Does molecular biology play any role in ductal carcinoma in situ?]

The natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is not fully elucidated, but it is recognized that DCIS is the true precursor of invasive carcinoma. Studies could show that DCIS is as heterogeneous as invasive ductal carcinoma, yet, they were unable to predict which DCIS will progress to invasion. Several biomarkers were also demonstrated to have a certain prognostic value. However, except for estrogen receptors and HER2, biomarkers are not yet widely used in clinical practice since their predictive value has not proven to be better than the grade and the classical classifying systems of DCIS. Identifying biomarkers for risk of invasiveness in DCIS could be of great value to help high risk patients through the management of their disease and to avoid overtreatment in low risk patients.

Metastatic invasive breast cancer recurrence following curative-intent therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

The development of an invasive breast cancer recurrence outside of the breast parenchyma following curative-intent therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is rare. We describe the patient and tumor characteristics associated with such recurrences.

METHODS

A retrospective review was conducted of 621 patients who were treated for DCIS between 2004 and 2009. Patient, tumor, and treatment characteristics were collected. Descriptive statistics were utilized for data summary and data were compared using χ(2), where appropriate.

RESULTS

Of 621 patients who underwent curative-intent therapy for DCIS, 12 (1.9%) developed an invasive metastatic recurrence. Primary local therapy at the time of the initial DCIS diagnosis included 11 patients who underwent mastectomy and one who had lumpectomy and adjuvant radiotherapy. The metastatic recurrences were in chest wall and/or ipsilateral axillary lymph nodes only (n = 6) or distant sites with or without ipsilateral axillary or supraclavicular lymph nodes (n = 6). Of the 12 patients with invasive recurrence, eight had high grade DCIS with comedo necrosis at initial diagnosis. The biomarker profiles of the invasive recurrences included 55% estrogen receptor positivity, 45% progesterone receptor positivity, and 73% Her2/neu amplification. Patient age, tumor grade, presence of comedo necrosis, biomarker profile, and surgical treatment were not predictive of recurrence.

CONCLUSION

Invasive metastatic recurrence following adequate local therapy for DCIS is uncommon and likely represents progression of unidentified invasive disease at the time of diagnosis. The majority of invasive recurrences were Her2/neu amplified. Further studies are necessary to determine if such a unique biomarker profile correlates with metastatic recurrence.

Receipt of delayed breast reconstruction after mastectomy: do women revisit the decision?

BACKGROUND

Postmastectomy breast reconstruction is an important component of breast cancer care, but few receive it at the time of the mastectomy. Virtually nothing is known about receipt of reconstruction after initial cancer therapy and why treatment might be delayed.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A 5-year follow-up survey was mailed to a population-based cohort of mastectomy-treated breast cancer patients who were initially surveyed at time of diagnosis in 2002 and reported to the Los Angeles and Detroit SEER registries (N = 645, response rate 60%). Outcomes were receipt of reconstruction (immediate [IR], delayed [DR], or none) and patient appraisal of their treatment decisions.

RESULTS

About one-third (35.9%) had IR, 11.5% had DR, and 52.6% had no reconstruction. One-third delayed reconstruction because they focused more on other cancer interventions, and nearly half were concerned about surgical complications and interference with cancer surveillance. Two-thirds of those with no reconstruction said that the procedure was not important to them. A large proportion of all patients were satisfied with their reconstruction decision-making (89.4% IR, 78.4% DR, 80.4% no reconstruction, P = NS). However, only 59.3% of those with no reconstruction felt that they were adequately informed about their reconstructive options (vs 82.7% IR and 78.4% DR, P < .01).

CONCLUSIONS

There was modest uptake of breast reconstruction after initial cancer treatment. Factors associated with delayed reconstruction were primarily related to uncertainty about the procedure, concern about cancer surveillance, and low priority. Those without reconstruction demonstrated significant informational needs, which should be addressed with future research efforts.

The management of ductal intraepithelial neoplasia (DIN): open controversies and guidelines of the Istituto Europeo di Oncologia (IEO), Milan, Italy

The management of ductal intraepithelial neoplasia (DIN) has substantially changed over the past 30 years, as its incidence has increased (from 2-3% to more than 20%), mainly due to the widespread use of mammography screening. This article describes not only the more widespread theoretical concepts on DIN but also the differences in the practical applications of the theory between different countries, different oncology specialists, and different cancer centers. Papers related to the international multicentre-randomized trials and retrospective studies were analyzed. We include articles and papers published between 1993 and 2010 related to patients with DIN, and abstracts and reports from MEDLINE and other sources were indentified. The standard of care for DIN consists of (a) breast conservative surgery (mastectomy is still indicated in large lesions--masses or microcalcifications--in about 30% of cases); (b) radiotherapy (RT) after conservative surgery, and (c) medical treatment in estrogen receptors-positive patients. However, most studies have shown significant differences between theory and practical application. Moreover, there are differences regarding (a) the indications of sentinel lymph node biopsy, (b) the definition and identification of low-risk DIN subgroups that can avoid RT and tamoxifen, and (c) the research into new alternative drugs in adjuvant medical therapy. A general agreement on the best management of DIN does not exist as yet. New large trials are needed in order to define the best management of DIN patients which is (in most respects) still complex and controversial.

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Clinical Perspective

Ductal carcinoma is situ (DCIS) is the fastest growing subtype of breast cancer, mainly because of improved screening activities. In contrast to invasive disease, DCIS is a local process with excellent survival rates. Current treatment strategies include surgery, radiotherapy (RT) and anti-hormonal treatment. The selection of an individual risk-adapted therapeutic approach remains controversial. This relates especially to the extent of surgery and the therapeutic index of adjuvant RT and tamoxifen. Several new trials have been published or updated recently that address important clinical issues. There is an urgent need to get more insight into the biological behaviour of different subtypes of DCIS, and develop more targeted and individualized treatment strategies. So far, surgery appears to be the most effective treatment modality. A morphology-based treatment model that allows complete resection of certain DCIS lesions without further adjuvant measures has not been evaluated prospectively and deserves further evaluation.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy and management of the axilla in ductal carcinoma in situ

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast historically has been a disease detected by physical examination, diagnosed by open surgical biopsy, and treated by mastectomy and axillary dissection. It is now increasingly detected by screening mammography, diagnosed by needle core biopsy, and treated by lumpectomy, with axillary dissection having been abandoned and sentinel node biopsy being used in axillary staging. However, outcomes related to sentinel node biopsy in DCIS have not been validated in well-controlled clinical trials. Current guideline recommendations are to use sentinel node biopsy when needle core biopsy is highly suspicious for invasive cancer or where there is a high-risk DCIS when lumpectomy identifies invasive breast cancer with the DCIS, or when mastectomy is performed for extensive DCIS. Routine use of sentinel node biopsy for DCIS is not supported.

The Use of Radiation As a Component of Breast Conservation Therapy in National Comprehensive Cancer Network Centers

Purpose

Benchmark data regarding quality measures of breast cancer management are needed. We investigated rates of radiation use after breast conservation therapy (BCT) for patients treated for ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS) or invasive breast cancer at National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) centers.

Patients and Methods

We studied 3,333 consecutive patients treated between 1997 and 2002 with BCT for DCIS (n = 587) or for stage I or II breast cancer (n = 2,746) in eight NCCN centers.

Results

The overall rate of radiation therapy use was 91%, with a lower frequency of radiation use in DCIS versus invasive breast cancers (82% v 94%; odds ratio [OR] = 0.31; P < .0001). In a multivariable analysis of the patients with DCIS, the only factor significantly associated with lower rates of radiation use was low/intermediate grade (OR = 0.19; P = .0003). For patients with invasive breast cancer, significant factors were presence of comorbidity (OR = 0.53; P = .0005), tubular histology (OR = 0.39; P = .02), type of health insurance (P = .0072), and the NCCN institution (P = .0005). The model also showed lower rates of radiation use in patients with stage II disease who did not receive systemic therapy (OR = 0.01; P = .0001), younger patients who did not receive systemic therapy (P = .003); and older patients with stage I disease (P < .0001).

Conclusion

Radiation use as a component of BCT was high for patients seen at NCCN centers; however, there was variability in practice patterns noted across institutions. Radiation was most commonly omitted in patients with favorable disease characteristics, patients with comorbidities, and patients who also did not receive guideline-recommended systemic treatment.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in the Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been adopted by some physicians in the evaluation of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). In a review of the current literature, we found no convincing data that SLNB is warranted as standard of care in newly diagnosed DCIS. Although lymph node invasion is present in 2% of women with traditional axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), as a result of the excellent prognosis of DCIS, it is not recommended. However, the detailed evaluation of the lymph node(s) with SLNB raises the issue that perhaps patients at risk for recurrence can be identified early and be treated aggressively without the morbidity associated with ALND. Limited data suggest that, with the use of more sensitive methods for detection of cytokeratin-positive cells, the prevalence of positive lymph nodes in pure DCIS is approximately 2%-13%. In high-risk DCIS or DCIS with microinvasion, the prevalence is 8%-20%. Several limited retrospective studies with long-term follow-up have not demonstrated an adverse relapse-free or overall survival effect for women with immunohistochemically (IHC) positive cells in the lymph nodes compared with those with negative IHC results in the lymph nodes. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in DCIS is associated with known risks, and health care benefits, if any, have not been demonstrated. Sentinel lymph node biopsy is not recommended in patients with DCIS.

A national framework for cancer surveillance in the United States

Enhancements to cancer surveillance systems are needed for meeting increased demands for data and for developing effective program planning, evaluation, and research on cancer prevention and control. Representatives from the American Cancer Society, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Cancer Institute, National Cancer Registrars Association, and North American Association of Central Cancer Registries have worked together on the National Coordinating Council for Cancer Surveillance to develop a national framework for cancer surveillance in the United States. The framework addresses a continuum of disease progression from a healthy state to the end of life and includes primary prevention (factors that increase or decrease cancer occurrence in healthy populations), secondary prevention (screening and diagnosis), and tertiary prevention (factors that affect treatment, survival, quality of life, and palliative care). The framework also addresses cross-cutting information needs, including better data to monitor disparities by measures of socioeconomic status, to assess economic costs and benefits of specific interventions for individuals and for society, and to study the relationship between disease and individual biologic factors, social policies, and the environment. Implementation of the framework will require long-term, extensive coordination and cooperation among these major cancer surveillance organizations.

Trends in the Treatment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast

BACKGROUND

An increase in incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast has been documented, and concerns regarding overly aggressive treatment have been raised. This study was designed to evaluate the use of surgery and radiation therapy in treating DCIS.

METHODS

We used the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database to assess treatment of patients with DCIS with no evidence of microinvasion who were diagnosed from January 1, 1992, through December 31, 1999. We assessed the rates of mastectomy, breast reconstruction, radiation therapy after lumpectomy, and axillary dissection. Associations were analyzed by logistic regression.

RESULTS

During the study period, 25 206 patients met selection criteria. The incidence of DCIS dramatically increased with time; however, the incidence of comedo lesions did not change. The rate of mastectomy decreased from 43% in 1992 to 28% in 1999, after controlling for age, race, tumor size, comedo histology, and geographic location. However, because of the increase in the diagnosis of DCIS, the age-adjusted incidence of mastectomy for DCIS in the population did not change (7.8 per 100 000 women in 1992 and 1999). Almost half the patients undergoing lumpectomy did not undergo radiation therapy (55% in 1992 and 46% in 1999); in those with comedo histology, 33% did not undergo radiation therapy after lumpectomy, even in 1999. Overall, patients were less likely to have axillary dissection over time (34% in 1992 versus 15% in 1999), yet the rate of axillary dissection was still high (30%) in patients undergoing mastectomy in 1999. Large, statistically and clinically significant variation by geographic location was found in treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of DCIS changed in a clinically significant fashion between 1992 and 1999. Throughout this study, many patients were found to undergo aggressive surgical therapy, including mastectomy and axillary dissection, whereas others appeared to be undertreated, e.g., not receiving radiation therapy after lumpectomy, even in the presence of adverse histologic features. Variation in demographic and geographic factors indicates that at least some of these treatment differences reflect individual and institutional practice patterns that may be modifiable.

Ductal carcinoma in situ

DCIS is a heterogeneous disease whose natural history is poorly defined. Screening mammography has increased the detection rate of DCIS, but we remain unable to identify cases of DCIS that will not progress to invasive carcinoma during an individual's lifetime. Genomics holds great promise in this regard, but prospective studies with long-term follow-up will be needed before concluding that a subset of DCIS is clinically insignificant. The varying intensity of treatment options for DCIS, ranging from mastectomy to excision, RT, and tamoxifen to excision alone, reflects the uncertainty about the natural history of DCIS as well as differing physician values regarding the impact of local recurrence. The extent of DCIS within the breast is the major determinant of whether the patient is a candidate for a breast-conserving approach, and contraindications to the use of breast conservation treatment and to the use of irradiation have been defined. The clinical decision-making process in DCIS would benefit greatly from improvements in our ability to convey information about the long-term risks and benefits of therapy, as well as the tradeoffs in health-related quality of life, to patients, and to incorporate their preferences into the decision-making process.

Impact of a cancer screening program on breast cancer stage at diagnosis in a medically underserved urban community

BACKGROUND

Our previous report showed that the disparity in breast carcinoma survival between black and white women because of advanced stage of disease at presentation in poor black women is related to their low socioeconomic status and lack of health insurance. This observation led to establishment of a community-oriented free cancer screening service.

STUDY DESIGN

To evaluate the impact of screening on breast cancer stage at diagnosis, analysis of data from the Harlem Hospital Tumor Registry between 1995 and 2000 was performed and compared with our 1964-1986 report.

RESULTS

Twenty-three percent of cancers (324 of 1,405) diagnosed between 1995 and 2000 were breast carcinoma. Data confirm that lack of insurance remains a major problem among poor black women. We observed a marked fall, from 49% in our earlier report to 21% in this study, in late-stage (III and IV) disease at presentation. This fall is associated with significant (p < 0.001) improvement in early detection of breast cancer, with 41% of cancers in stages 0 and I in this data compared with 6% in the previous study. Of note, 53% of women with breast carcinoma had breast-conserving surgery and 45% had modified radical mastectomy in this study; 71% had radical or modified radical mastectomy in the earlier report.

CONCLUSIONS

This study confirms the importance of a free cancer screening program in the improvement of early-stage breast cancer detection, treatment, and survival in a poor urban community.

Correlates of surgical treatment type for women with noninvasive and invasive breast cancer

There is concern that breast-conserving surgery is underused in some breast cancer patient subpopulations, including women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), an early-stage form of the disease. We conducted a population-based study to identify correlates of surgical treatment type and patient satisfaction, comparing women with DCIS and those with invasive disease. We used telephone interview and mailed survey of 183 women recently diagnosed with breast cancer (oversampling for women with DCIS), identified from the Metropolitan Detroit Cancer Surveillance System (response rate 71.2%). Overall, 52.5% of study subjects received a mastectomy (48.9%, 45.8%, and 73.5% of women with DCIS, local disease, and regional disease, respectively, p < 0.05). One third of women did not perceive that they were given a choice between surgical types, and an additional one third of women received a surgeon recommendation, most of whom received the treatment recommended. Patient attitudes, such as concerns about the clinical benefits and risks of specific surgery options, were important correlates of treatment choice but did not vary by stage of disease. Knowledge about differences in clinical benefits and risks between surgery options was low. Finally, satisfaction with the decision-making process was significantly lower in women who did not perceive a choice between surgery options. Correlates of breast cancer surgery type appeared to be similar for women with DCIS and invasive breast cancer, with surgeons playing a dominant role in the process. Results also suggested that the decision-making process may be as important for patient satisfaction as the treatment chosen.

Low-income women with early-stage breast cancer: physician and patient decision-making styles

BACKGROUND

Poor women have low rates of breast conservation therapy not explained by differences in insurance status or treatment preferences. The purpose of this study was to explore how low-income women make decisions about breast cancer treatment.

METHODS

Twenty-five women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer through the Nebraska Every Woman Matters program were interviewed about their experiences selecting treatment options. These interviews were transcribed and then analysed using established qualitative techniques.

RESULTS

More than half of the women (n=16) described playing a passive role in decision making. Choice was determined by medical factors or not offered by their physicians. Intense emotional distress affected some women's ability to compare options. The women who did engage in a rational decision-making process (n=9) based their choices on concerns about body image and fear of recurrence.

CONCLUSIONS

When presented with a choice, and when able to objectively weigh treatment options, low-income women base their treatment decisions on the same issues as those of higher income. Whether differences in income strata alter the doctor-patient power dynamic in favor of physician control over decision making, or whether low-income women are less prepared to engage in a rational deliberative process warrants further study.

Axillary dissection and ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a change in practice

BACKGROUND

Axillary dissection may be associated with significant morbidity and, while it is necessary in the treatment of invasive breast cancer, is not indicated for the treatment of pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), although it is being performed in a significant number of cases. The present study examined the incidence of elective axillary dissection in the treatment of DCIS cases detected in a mammographic screening programme over a 4-year period, and whether surgeons have changed their practice in this respect.

METHODS

BreastScreen Victoria records were examined retrospectively for the period from January 1995 to December 1998 to identify patients treated for DCIS. The incidence and indications for axillary surgery were investigated.

RESULTS

There were 579 cases of DCIS and 93 (16%) had some form of axillary surgery, which was thought to be inappropriate in 57 (10%), the latter being performed by 21 city surgeons and 20 rural surgeons. Before surgery, 36 (63%) cases were diagnosed by core biopsy or excision, and 21 (37%) had imaging and cytology alone for diagnosis. The rate of unnecessary axillary dissections dropped steadily from 14% in 1995 to 4% in 1998, a significant reduction (P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The incidence of axillary dissection for DCIS has dropped significantly over the last 4 years in Victoria, possibly due to increased awareness through education and guidelines. Surgeons are now more aware that in situ lesions do not need axillary dissection, and that axillary dissection should not be performed for breast cancer unless invasion has been proved histologically.

Cancer surgery in the elderly

The incidence of most cancers increases with age. Although the risk for surgery increases in elderly patients who have comorbidities, evaluations of risk can allow interventions that may decrease morbidity and mortality. Appropriate treatments should be offered to the elderly until studies demonstrate the elderly can safely be managed differently from younger patients. The elderly should not be denied adequate treatment simply because of age.

Management of ductal carcinoma in situ

The dramatic increase in the incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast has made it imperative for all clinicians to develop a better understanding of this disease. Although this preinvasive form of breast cancer is not life-threatening, treatment options may include mastectomy, breast-conserving surgery, radiotherapy, or tamoxifen. Current treatment modalities may be overly aggressive because many cases of DCIS may not recur or progress to invasive cancer. Until we are better able to identify those patients at low risk for progression, it is unlikely that current treatment will change. The adequate understanding of risk assessment is fundamental to the treatment planning for DCIS, and physicians are encouraged to include patients in the decision-making process.

Use of keratin 35betaE12 as an adjunct in the diagnosis of mammary intraepithelial neoplasia-ductal type--benign and malignant intraductal proliferations

A variety of studies have investigated the role of low molecular weight (LMW) and high molecular weight (HMW) cytokeratin (CK) expression in the normal breast and invasive breast carcinomas. A few studies with small numbers of cases have addressed this issue in intraductal proliferations of the breast. This study investigates the expression of these CKs in a large series of ductal intraepithelial neoplasias of the breast. We examined 150 ductal carcinomas in situ (DCIS), 35 cases of intraductal hyperplasia (IDH), and 15 cases of atypical intraductal hyperplasia (AIDH). Immunohistochemistry was performed using monoclonal antibodies against CK-34betaE12 (HMW CK), CK-8, and CK-19 (LMW CK) on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue. The intensity (0, +1, +2, +3) and percentage of positive intraductal cells (0-100%) were multiplied to obtain a score from 0 to 300. The immunoprofiles of IDH, AIDH, and DCIS were categorized into four groups showing negative or low (0-60), moderate (61-100), high (101-200), and very high (201-300) scores. All cases of IDH showed an intensely positive reaction (high to very high scores) for CK-34betaE12. In contrast, 90% of the DCIS showed a negative or only focal and weak reaction (negative or low score) for this antigen. The remaining 10% of DCIS showed a positive immunoreaction for CK-34betaE12 with moderate to high scores. All cases of florid IDH and 96% of cases of DCIS expressed CK-8 intensely with high to very high scores. Although CK-19 was strongly expressed in 97% of cases of IDH (high to very high scores), a very high score was also found in 80% of cases of DCIS that were positive for CK-19. Of the 15 AIDHs, 80% had a negative or only focal reaction (negative or low score) for CK-34betaE12 and the remaining 20% had a moderate to high score for this antigen. Although CK-8 was strongly positive in 87% of cases of AIDH (high to very high scores), only 53.5% of AIDHs showed intense positivity for CK-19. The present study clearly shows that the immunoprofile of IDH is different from DCIS as far as HMW CK is concerned. Although florid IDH is characterized by a diffuse and intense immunoreaction for HMW CK, the lack of or only weak positivity for HMW CK (CK-34betaE12) is, in most cases, a hallmark of ductal carcinoma in situ. The immunoprofile of AIDH is very similar to that of DCIS. The expression of CK-8 and CK-19 is not useful in separating the various categories of ductal intraepithelial proliferations of the breast. We recommend the use of CK-34betaE12 as an adjunct in the diagnosis of a variety of problematic intraductal proliferations of the breast.

Quality of life in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated with conservative surgery and postoperative irradiation

AIM OF THE STUDY

To evaluate the quality of life (QL) in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated with conservative surgery and postoperative irradiation.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A self-completed questionnaire covering many disease-, symptom-, and treatment-specific issues was administered to 106 conservatively treated patients affected by non-infiltrating breast cancer. The questionnaire was based on a series of 34 items assessing five main fields of post-treatment adjustment: physical well being, sexual adaptation, aesthetic outcome, emotional/psychological well being, relational behaviour. Furthermore, the patients were requested to evaluate the degree of information provided by the medical staff concerning surgical procedures and radiation therapy, and to evaluate the effects of the treatment on their social and overall life.

RESULTS

The questionnaire was completed by 83 patients (78%), who had a median follow-up of 54.5 months. This final sample had a median age of 50 years (range 29-88) at the time of treatment and 54 years (range 32-94) at the time of study. The patients claimed to be in good physical condition. Data relating to sexual life were provided by 93% of the sample. Some limitations in sexuality, some interference with sexual desire, and some modifications during intercourse were reported by 5, 6, and 5 patients, respectively. The subjective evaluations of the cosmetic results of the therapies were generally good. Only 13 patients (16%) reported the perception of a worsened body image. Forty-six percent of the sample (38 patients) declared that they felt tense, 48% (39 patients) nervous, 29% (38 patients) lonely, 59% (41 patients) anxious, and 41% (34 patients) depressed. Only seven patients (8%) declared that the treatment had had a bad effect on their social life, and 15 (18%) thought that their current life had been affected by the treatment. The amount of information received concerning the disease and treatment (surgery and radiotherapy) was considered sufficient by 79%, 75%, and 79% of the sample, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

This study revealed a good QL in patients treated with breast conservation and postoperative irradiation, with a preserved favourable body image and a lack of negative impact on sexuality. Radiation therapy did not lead to any significant additional problems capable of affecting the QL.

The National Cancer Data Base 10-year survey of breast carcinoma treatment at hospitals in the United States

BACKGROUND

The National Cancer Data Base (NCDB), a joint project of the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer and the American Cancer Society, is a cancer management and outcome data base for health care organizations. It provides a comparative summary of patient care that is used by participating hospitals and communities for self-assessment. The most current (1995) data are described herein.

METHODS

Since 1989, seven calls for data have been issued, yielding reports on a total of 240,031 breast carcinoma patients for the years included in this analysis. A total of 1849 hospital cancer registries responded to at least 1 of the calls for data.

RESULTS

A continuous improvement in care was reported. By 1995, 45.8% (nearly one-half) of breast carcinoma patients were diagnosed early as Stage 0 or I, and early stage patients (Stage 0 or I) were most often treated with partial mastectomy (in 58% of cases). Favorable 10-year relative survival rates for Stage 0 (95%) and Stage I (88%) breast carcinoma patients were reported. Patients who were presumed to be Stage I and were not selected for axillary dissection had poorer survival. Survival differences were reported for different treatment groups within individual stage strata. Over the 10-year observation period, fewer patients from lower-income neighborhoods were diagnosed with early stage breast carcinoma. In general, the annual relative survival rate remained constant over the 10-year observation period (with no plateau after 5 years) within each stage and for all stages combined.

CONCLUSIONS

Improvements in diagnosis and treatment during the period 1985-1995 were demonstrated by these data. The NCDB breast carcinoma data are appropriate norms for formal quality assurance purposes, such as those specified by the Standards of the Commission on Cancer published by the American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer. Cancer committees and other clinicians working within the hospital setting should assess and compare stage distribution, stage specific treatment patterns, and the correlations between the outcomes of patients and both disease stage and treatment.

Results of conservative surgery and radiation for mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)

PURPOSE

The role of conservative surgery and radiation for mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is controversial. In particular, there is little data for outcome with radiation in a group of patients comparable to those treated with local excision and surveillance (mammographic calcifications < or = 2.5 cm, negative resection margins, negative postbiopsy mammogram). This study reports outcome of conservative surgery and radiation for mammographically detected DCIS with an emphasis on results in patients considered candidates for excision alone.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

From 1983 to 1992, 110 women with mammographically detected DCIS (77% calcifications +/- mass) and no prior history of breast cancer underwent needle localization and biopsy with (55%) or without a reexcision and radiation. Final margins of resection were negative in 62%, positive 7%, close 11%, and unknown 20%. The median patient age was 56 years. The most common histologic subtype was comedo (54%), followed by cribriform (22%). The median pathologic tumor size was 8 mm (range 2 mm to 5 cm). Forty-seven percent of patients with calcifications only had a negative postbiopsy mammogram prior to radiation. Radiation consisted of treatment to the entire breast (median 50.00 Gy) and a boost to the primary site (97%) for a median total dose of 60.40 Gy.

RESULTS

With a median follow-up of 5.3 years, three patients developed a recurrence in the treated breast. The median interval to recurrence was 8.8 years and all were invasive cancers. Two (67%) occurred outside the initial quadrant. The 5- and 10-year actuarial rates of recurrence were 1 and 15%. Cause-specific survival was 100% at 5 and 10 years. Contralateral breast cancer developed in two patients. There were too few failures for statistical significance to be achieved with any of the following factors: patient age, family history, race, mammographic findings, location primary, pathologic size, histologic subtype, reexcision, or final margin status. However, young age, positive or close margins, and the presence of a mass without calcifications had a trend for an increased risk of recurrence. There were no recurrences in the subset of 16 patients who would be candidates for surveillance by Lagios' criteria.

CONCLUSION

For selected patients, conservative surgery and radiation for mammographically detected DCIS results in a low risk of recurrence in the treated breast and 100% 5- and 10-year cause-specific survival. Improved mammographic and pathologic evaluation results in better patient selection and reduces the risk of the subsequent appearance of DCIS in the biopsy site. The identification of risk factors for an ipsilateral invasive breast recurrence is evolving.

Ductal carcinoma in situ. Part 2: Treatment

Several dilemmas exist when treating a patient with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): the high rate of inter-observer variation for pathologists who must diagnose these tumours; the potential for over- and under-treatment; and the uncertainty about the best way to inform a patient who must often make a decision between breast conservation and mastectomy. Mastectomy is nearly 100% curative, is expedient, but may represent over-treatment for many women, particularly those with asymptomatic mammographically detected lesions. Axillary dissection is not recommended as a routine except for patients with lesions over 5 cm in whom the risk of micro-invasion and lymph node involvement increases. Conservative surgery (CS) alone is associated with a local recurrence rate of approximately 20%, and half of these recurrences (10% overall) are invasive, with a potential long-term cure rate of at least 90%. The addition of radiation to CS reduces the risk of local recurrence to approximately 10%, half of these recurrences (5%) are invasive for a potential long-term cure rate of 95%. Several randomized trials comparing CS with or without radiation therapy (RT) are in progress. The factors that increase the rate of local recurrence after CS alone for DCIS include close or involved margins, and the presence of necrosis or high-grade tumours. Patients with these features should have radiation therapy if breast conservation is preferred. Patients with low-grade tumours (without necrosis) up to 15 mm, with clear margins of at least 10 mm, who agree to be closely observed may be good candidates for CS alone. A critical review of the literature is presented.

Controversies in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ

In summary, certain subgroups of DCIS appear not to require radiation. Corroboration of these results from retrospective reviews and prospective trials is necessary to confirm the safety and efficacy of individualized treatment strategies. Even though the current standard of treatment is (1) lumpectomy with radiation therapy, (2) mastectomy, or (3) mastectomy with reconstruction, it is possible in the future to say that patients with low-grade DCIS (the exact criteria to be defined) may be eligible for breast conservation without radiation, and all patients with high-grade DCIS or perhaps low-grade DCIS with necrosis would be treated best by lumpectomy plus radiation. It is possible that a small subgroup of patients may be best treated by mastectomy, or perhaps, as the results of B-24 become available, by radiation therapy plus tamoxifen. The use of tumor markers such as c-erbB-2, cathepsin D, and NM 23 may help us to better define these subgroups, but much study is necessary before a definite treatment strategy is reached.