Diagnostic upgrade of atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast based on evaluation of histopathological features and calcification on core needle biopsy

Contrast-enhanced ultrasound to predict malignant upgrading of atypical ductal hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

A malignancy might be found at surgery in cases of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) diagnosed via US-guided core needle biopsy (CNB). The objective of this study was to investigate the diagnostic performance of contrast-enhanced ultrasound (CEUS) in predicting ADH diagnosed by US-guided CNB that was upgraded to malignancy after surgery.

METHODS

In this retrospective study, 110 CNB-diagnosed ADH lesions in 109 consecutive women who underwent US, CEUS, and surgery between June 2018 and June 2023 were included. CEUS was incorporated into US BI-RADS and yielded a CEUS-adjusted BI-RADS. The diagnostic performance of US BI-RADS and CEUS-adjusted BI-RADS for ADH were analyzed and compared.

RESULTS

The mean age of the 109 women was 49.7 years ± 11.6 (SD). The upgrade rate of ADH at CNB was 48.2% (53 of 110). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value of CEUS for identification of malignant upgrading were 96.2%, 66.7%,72.9%, and 95.0%, respectively, based on BI-RADS category 4B threshold. The two false-negative cases were low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. Compared with the US, CEUS-adjusted BI-RADS had better specificity for lesions smaller than 2 cm (76.7% vs. 96.7%, P = 0.031). After CEUS, 16 (10 malignant and 6 nonmalignant) of the 45 original US BI-RADS category 4A lesions were up-classified to BI-RADS 4B, and 3 (1 malignant and 2 nonmalignant) of the 41 original US BI-RADS category 4B lesions were down-classified to BI-RADS 4A.

CONCLUSIONS

CEUS is helpful in predicting malignant upgrading of ADH, especially for lesions smaller than 2 cm and those classified as BI-RADS 4A and 4B on ultrasound.

Active Surveillance for Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are relatively common breast lesions on the same spectrum of disease. Atypical ductal hyperblasia is a nonmalignant, high-risk lesion, and DCIS is a noninvasive malignancy. While a benefit of screening mammography is early cancer detection, it also leads to increased biopsy diagnosis of noninvasive lesions. Previously, treatment guidelines for both entities included surgical excision because of the risk of upgrade to invasive cancer after surgery and risk of progression to invasive cancer for DCIS. However, this universal management approach is not optimal for all patients because most lesions are not upgraded after surgery. Furthermore, some DCIS lesions do not progress to clinically significant invasive cancer. Overtreatment of high-risk lesions and DCIS is considered a burden on patients and clinicians and is a strain on the health care system. Extensive research has identified many potential histologic, clinical, and imaging factors that may predict ADH and DCIS upgrade and thereby help clinicians select which patients should undergo surgery and which may be appropriate for active surveillance (AS) with imaging. Additionally, multiple clinical trials are currently underway to evaluate whether AS for DCIS is feasible for a select group of patients. Recent advances in MRI, artificial intelligence, and molecular markers may also have an important role to play in stratifying patients and delineating best management guidelines. This review article discusses the available evidence regarding the feasibility and limitations of AS for ADH and DCIS, as well as recent advances in patient risk stratification.

Is Surgical Excision of Focal Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia Warranted? Experience at a Tertiary Care Center

BACKGROUND

The core-needle biopsy (CNB) diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) generally mandates follow-up excision, but controversy exists on whether small foci of ADH require surgical management. This study evaluated the upgrade rate at excision of focal ADH (fADH), defined as 1 focus spanning ≤ 2 mm.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified in-house CNBs with ADH as the highest-risk lesion obtained between January 2013 and December 2017. A radiologist assessed radiologic-pathologic concordance. All CNB slides were reviewed by two breast pathologists, and ADH was classified as fADH and nonfocal ADH based on extent. Only cases with follow-up excision were included. The slides of excision specimens with upgrade were reviewed.

RESULTS

The final study cohort consisted of 208 radiologic-pathologic concordant CNBs, including 98 fADH and 110 nonfocal ADH. The imaging targets were calcifications (n = 157), a mass (n = 15), nonmass enhancement (n = 27), and mass enhancement (n = 9). Excision of fADH yielded seven (7%) upgrades (5 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 2 invasive carcinoma) versus 24 (22%) upgrades (16 DCIS, 8 invasive carcinoma) at excision of nonfocal ADH (p = 0.01). Both invasive carcinomas found at excision of fADH were subcentimeter tubular carcinomas away from the biopsy site and deemed incidental.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show a significantly lower upgrade rate at excision of focal ADH than nonfocal ADH. This information can be valuable if nonsurgical management of patients with radiologic-pathologic concordant CNB diagnosis of focal ADH is being considered.

Identifying women with increased risk of breast cancer and implementing risk-reducing strategies and supplemental imaging

Breast cancer (BC) is the second most common cancer in women, affecting 1 in 8 women in the United States (12.5%) in their lifetime. However, some women have a higher lifetime risk of BC because of genetic and lifestyle factors, mammographic breast density, and reproductive and hormonal factors. Because BC risk is variable, screening and prevention strategies should be individualized after considering patient-specific risk factors. Thus, health care professionals need to be able to assess risk profiles, identify high-risk women, and individualize screening and prevention strategies through a shared decision-making process. In this article, we review the risk factors for BC, risk-assessment models that identify high-risk patients, and preventive medications and lifestyle modifications that may decrease risk. We also discuss the benefits and limitations of various supplemental screening methods.

Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia after Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy: Can We Reduce the Upgrade to Breast Cancer to an Acceptable Rate?

(1) Background: to evaluate which factors can reduce the upgrade rate of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) to in situ or invasive carcinoma in patients who underwent vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) and subsequent surgical excision. (2) Methods: 2955 VABBs were reviewed; 141 patients with a diagnosis of ADH were selected for subsequent surgical excision. The association between patients’ characteristics and the upgrade rate to breast cancer was evaluated in both univariate and multivariate analyses. (3) Results: the upgrade rates to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive carcinoma (IC) were, respectively, 29.1% and 7.8%. The pooled upgrade rate to DCIS or IC was statistically lower at univariate analysis, considering the following parameters: complete removal of the lesion (p-value < 0.001); BIRADS ≤ 4a (p-value < 0.001); size of the lesion ≤15 mm (p-value: 0.002); age of the patients <50 years (p-value: 0.035). (4) Conclusions: the overall upgrade rate of ADH to DCIS or IC is high and, as already known, surgery should be recommended. However, ADH cases should always be discussed in multidisciplinary meetings: some parameters appear to be related to a lower upgrade rate. Patients presenting these parameters could be strictly followed up to avoid overtreatment.

Development and Validation of a Simple-to-Use Nomogram for Predicting the Upgrade of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia on Core Needle Biopsy in Ultrasound-Detected Breast Lesions

Background

The rate of carcinoma upgrade for atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) diagnosed on core needle biopsy (CNB) is variable on open excision. The purpose of the present study was to develop and validate a simple-to-use nomogram for predicting the upgrade of ADH diagnosed with ultrasound (US)-guided core needle biopsy in patients with US-detected breast lesions.

Methods

Two retrospective sets, the training set (n = 401) and the validation set (n = 186), from Fudan University Shanghai Cancer Center between January 2014 and December 2019 were retrospectively analyzed. Clinicopathological and US features were selected using univariate and multivariable logistic regression, and the significant features were incorporated to build a nomogram model. Model discrimination and calibration were assessed in the training set and validation set.

Results

Of the 587 ADH biopsies, 67.7% (training set: 267/401, 66.6%; validation set: 128/186, 68.8%) were upgraded to cancers. In the multivariable analysis, the risk factors were age [odds ratio (OR) 2.739, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.525–5.672], mass palpation (OR 3.008, 95% CI: 1.624–5.672), calcifications on US (OR 4.752, 95% CI: 2.569–9.276), ADH extent (OR 3.150, 95% CI: 1.951–5.155), and suspected malignancy (OR 4.162, CI: 2.289–7.980). The model showed good discrimination, with an area under curve (AUC) of 0.783 (95% CI: 0.736–0.831), and good calibration (p = 0.543). The application of the nomogram in the validation set still had good discrimination (AUC = 0.753, 95% CI: 0.666–0.841) and calibration (p = 0.565). Instead of surgical excision of all ADHs, if those categorized with the model to be at low risk for upgrade were surveillanced and the remainder were excised, then 63.7% (37/58) of surgeries of benign lesions could have been avoided and 78.1% (100/128) malignant lesions could be treated in time.

Conclusions

This study developed a simple-to-use nomogram by incorporating clinicopathological and US features with the overarching goal of predicting the probability of upgrade in women with ADH. The nomogram could be expected to decrease unnecessary surgery by nearly two-third and to identify most of the malignant lesions, helping guide clinical decision making with regard to surveillance versus surgical excision of ADH lesions.

Pure Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: Analysis of 270 Consecutive Patients Treated in a 9-Year Period

Simple Summary

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) accounts for 20 to 25% of all breast cancers and its incidence of progression to invasive ductal carcinoma is at least 13 to 50%. The aim of our retrospective observational analysis is to review the issues of this histological type of cancer. We confirmed in a wide population of 270 consecutive patients who underwent surgery in a single institute that the management of DCIS can be difficult and particularly complex. There are many variables to be taken into consideration such as the choice of the diagnostic and bioptical technique. This delicate management must be carried out in specialized centres such as Breast Units involving multiple professional figures to define and guarantee the best possible treatment for each patient.

Abstract

Introduction: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is an intraductal neoplastic proliferation of epithelial cells that are confined within the basement membrane of the breast ductal system. This retrospective observational analysis aims at reviewing the issues of this histological type of cancer. Materials and methods: Patients treated for DCIS between 1 January 2009 and 31 December 2018 were identified from a retrospective database. The patients were divided into two groups of 5 years each, the first group including patients treated from 2009 to 2013, and the second group including patients treated from 2014 to 2018. Once the database was completed, we performed a statistical analysis to see if there were significant differences among the 2 periods. Statistical analyses were performed using GraphPad Prism software for Windows, and the level of significance was set at p < 0.05. Results: 3586 female patients were treated for breast cancer over the 9-year study period (1469 patients from 2009 to 2013 and 2117 from 2014 to 2018), of which 270 (7.53%) had pure DCIS in the final pathology. The median age of diagnosis was 59-year-old (range 36–86). In the first period, 81 (5.5%) women out of 1469 had DCIS in the final pathology, in the second, 189 (8.9%) out of 2117 had DCIS in the final pathology with a statistically significant increase (p = 0.0001). From 2009 to 2013, only 38 (46.9%) were in stage 0 (correct DCIS diagnosis) while in the second period, 125 (66.1%) were included in this stage. The number of patients included in clinical stage 0 increased significantly (p = 0.004). In the first period, 48 (59.3%) specimen margins were at a greater or equal distance than 2 mm (negative margins), between 2014 and 2018; 137 (72.5%) had negative margins. Between 2014 and 2018 the number of DCIS patients with positive margins decreased significantly (p = 0.02) compared to the first period examined. The mastectomies number increased significantly (p = 0.008) between the 2 periods, while the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) numbers had no differences (p = 0.29). For both periods analysed all the 253 patients who underwent the follow up are currently living and free of disease. We have conventionally excluded the 17 patients whose data were lost. Conclusion: The choice of the newest imaging techniques and the most suitable biopsy method allows a better pre-operative diagnosis of the DCIS. Surgical treatment must be targeted to the patient and a multidisciplinary approach discussed in the Breast Unit centres.

Management of high-risk breast lesions diagnosed on core biopsies and experiences from prospective high-risk breast lesion conferences at an academic institution

BACKGROUND

The management of high-risk breast lesions diagnosed on image-guided core biopsy remains controversial. We implemented a high-risk breast conference attended by breast pathologists, imagers, and surgeons to prospectively review all contemporary cases in order to provide a consensus recommendation to either surgically excise or follow on imaging at 6-month intervals for a minimum of 2 years.

METHODS

Between May, 2015 and June, 2019, 127 high-risk lesions were discussed. Of these 127 cases, 116 had concordant radiology-pathology (rad-path) findings. The remaining 11 patients had discordant rad-path findings. Of the 116 concordant cases, 6 were excluded due to lack of the first imaging follow-up until analysis. Of the remaining 110 patients, 43 had atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), 12 had lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), 19 had atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH), 33 had radial scar (RS), 2 had flat epithelial atypia (FEA), and 1 had mucocele-like lesion (ML). We recommended excision for ADH if there were > 2 ADH foci or < 90% of the associated calcifications were removed. For patients with LCIS or ALH, we recommended excision if the LCIS or ALH was associated with microcalcifications or the LCIS was extensive. We recommended excision of RS when < 1/2 of the lesion was biopsied. We recommended all patients with FEA and ML for 6-month follow-up.

RESULTS

Following conference-derived consensus for excision, of the 27 ADH excised, 9 were upgraded to invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ. Of the six LCIS cases recommended for excision, none were upgraded. Nine excised radial scars revealed no upgrades. Additionally, 3 patients with ADH, 2 with ALH, 1 with LCIS, and 2 with RS underwent voluntary excision, and none were upgraded. All other patients (13 with ADH, 5 LCIS, 17 ALH, 22 RS, 2 FEA and 1 ML) were followed with imaging, and none revealed evidence of disease progression during follow-up (187-1389 days). All 11 rad-path discordant cases were excised with 2 upgraded to carcinoma.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this prospective study indicate that high-risk breast lesions can be successfully triaged to surgery versus observation following establishment of predefined firm guidelines and performance of rigorous rad-path correlation.

Performance of a clinical and imaging-based multivariate model as decision support tool to help save unnecessary surgeries for high-risk breast lesions

PURPOSE

To investigate the performance of an imaging and biopsy parameters-based multivariate model in decreasing unnecessary surgeries for high-risk breast lesions.

METHODS

In an IRB-approved study, we retrospectively reviewed all high-risk lesions (HRL) identified at imaging-guided biopsy in our institution between July 1, 2014-July 1, 2017. Lesions were categorized high-risk-I (HR-I = atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical papillary lesion) and II (HR-II = Flat epithelial atypia, radial scar, benign papilloma). Patient risk factors, lesion features, detection and biopsy modality, excision and cancer upgrade rates were collected. Reference standard for upgrade was either excision or at least 2-year imaging follow-up. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a multivariate model using HRL type, lesion and biopsy needle size for surgical cancer upgrade with performance assessed using ROC analysis.

RESULTS

Of 699 HRL in 652 patients, 525(75%) had reference standard available, and 48/525(9.1%) showed cancer at surgical excision. Excision (84.5% vs 51.1%) and upgrade (17.6%vs1.8%) rates were higher in HR-I compared to HR-II (p < 0.01). In HR-I, small needle size < 12G vs ≥ 12G [32.1% vs 13.2%, p < 0.01] and less cores [< 6 vs ≥ 6, 28.6%vs13.7%, p = 0.01] were significantly associated with higher cancer upgrades. Our multivariate model had an AUC = 0.87, saving 28.1% of benign surgeries with 100% sensitivity, based on HRL subtype, lesion size(mm, continuous), needle size (< 12G vs ≥ 12G) and biopsy modality (US vs MRI vs stereotactic) CONCLUSION: Our multivariate model using lesion size, needle size and patient age had a high diagnostic performance in decreasing unnecessary surgeries and shows promise as a decision support tool.

B3 lesion upgrade rates in a tertiary Australian breast centre: a 8-year experience (2012-2019)

BACKGROUND

B3 breast lesions identified on core needle biopsy have uncertain malignant potential. Traditional management of these lesions has been surgical excision, but there is growing interest in less invasive and more cost-effective alternatives such as vacuum-assisted excisional biopsy (VAEB). Determining the rate of malignant upgrade for B3 lesions is important as it may identify low-risk lesions where VAEB could be considered.

METHODS

A retrospective study was conducted of women undergoing an elective excisional biopsy for a B3 lesion identified on core needle biopsy at a tertiary Australian breast centre. The pre-operative biopsy diagnosis and subsequent excisional biopsy diagnosis were used to calculate the proportion of cases where the diagnosis was upgraded to malignancy.

RESULTS

A total of 299 eligible patients were identified. Pre-operative diagnosis of papillary lesion with atypia was associated with the highest upgrade rate (50%, n = 12). The next highest upgrade rates occurred in those with flat epithelial atypia (37.50%, n = 8); atypical ductal hyperplasia (24.71%, n = 85); lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS)/atypical lobular hyperplasia with calcification (17.65%, n = 17); and papillary lesion without atypia (4.72%, n = 106). Patients with radial scar (n = 51), classical LCIS without calcification (n = 7) and mucocoele-like lesion (n = 8) had a 0% upgrade rate.

CONCLUSION

VAEB may be appropriate for low malignant risk lesions such as papillary lesion without atypia, mucocoele-like lesion and radial scar lesion without atypia. Open-surgical-excisional biopsy remains appropriate for high upgrade lesions such as atypical ductal hyperplasia, papillary lesion with atypia, flat epithelial atypia and classical LCIS with calcification. Long-term prospective randomized multicentre studies and continuing multidisciplinary approach is recommended for future clinical implementation.

Preneoplasia of the Breast and Molecular Landscape

The current model of human breast cancer progression proposes a linear multi-step process which initiates as flat epithelial atypia (FEA), progresses to atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), evolves into ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and culminates in the potentially lethal stage of invasive ductal carcinoma. FEA commonly coexists with well-developed examples of ADH, low-grade DCIS, lobular neoplasia and tubular carcinoma. These findings and those of recent genetic studies suggest that FEA is a neoplastic lesion that may represent a precursor to or the earliest morphologic manifestation of ductal carcinoma in situ. At the same time, many of the genomic changes of ADH are also shared by common sporadic breast cancer, consistent with a high risk for future development of metachronous breast cancer.

Prospective Analysis Using a Novel CNN Algorithm to Distinguish Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia From Ductal Carcinoma in Situ in Breast

INTRODUCTION

We previously developed a convolutional neural networks (CNN)-based algorithm to distinguish atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) from ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) using a mammographic dataset. The purpose of this study is to further validate our CNN algorithm by prospectively analyzing an unseen new dataset to evaluate the diagnostic performance of our algorithm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this institutional review board-approved study, a new dataset composed of 280 unique mammographic images from 140 patients was used to test our CNN algorithm. All patients underwent stereotactic-guided biopsy of calcifications and underwent surgical excision with available final pathology. The ADH group consisted of 122 images from 61 patients with the highest pathology diagnosis of ADH. The DCIS group consisted of 158 images from 79 patients with the highest pathology diagnosis of DCIS. Two standard mammographic magnification views (craniocaudal and mediolateral/lateromedial) of the calcifications were used for analysis. Calcifications were segmented using an open source software platform 3D slicer and resized to fit a 128 × 128 pixel bounding box. Our previously developed CNN algorithm was used. Briefly, a 15 hidden layer topology was used. The network architecture contained 5 residual layers and dropout of 0.25 after each convolution. Diagnostic performance metrics were analyzed including sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve. The "positive class" was defined as the pure ADH group in this study and thus specificity represents minimizing the amount of falsely labeled pure ADH cases.

RESULTS

Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.90 (95% confidence interval, ± 0.04). Diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity was 80.7%, 63.9%, and 93.7%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Prospectively tested on new unseen data, our CNN algorithm distinguished pure ADH from DCIS using mammographic images with high specificity.

Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Lobular Neoplasia: Update and Easing of Guidelines

OBJECTIVE. Atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH), and lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) are among high-risk lesions that have been previously recommended for surgical excision when diagnosed on core needle biopsy. Recent studies have examined whether imaging surveillance is a reasonable alternative to surgical management for these lesions. This article synthesizes the evidence regarding management of atypical hyperplasia and LCIS diagnosed on core needle biopsy and clinical implications of these diagnoses on future breast cancer risk as well as highlights areas of further research needed to improve practice guidelines for these high-risk lesions. CONCLUSION. Although surgical excision is still recommended after diagnosis of ADH on core needle biopsy, in specific circumstances ALH and LCIS can safely be managed by imaging surveillance.