1
|
Park-Simon TW, Müller V, Albert US, Banys Paluchowski M, Bauerfeind I, Blohmer JU, Budach W, Dall P, Ditsch N, Fallenberg EM, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Friedrich M, Gerber B, Gluz O, Harbeck N, Hartkopf AD, Heil J, Huober J, Jackisch C, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Kreipe HH, Krug D, Kühn T, Kümmel S, Loibl S, Lüftner D, Lux MP, Maass N, Mundhenke C, Reimer T, Rhiem K, Rody A, Schmidt M, Schneeweiss A, Schütz F, Sinn HP, Solbach C, Solomayer EF, Stickeler E, Thomssen C, Untch M, Witzel I, Wuerstlein R, Wöckel A, Janni W, Thill M. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2024. Breast Care (Basel) 2024; 19:165-182. [PMID: 38894952 PMCID: PMC11182637 DOI: 10.1159/000538596] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/25/2024] [Accepted: 03/26/2024] [Indexed: 06/21/2024] Open
Abstract
Introduction Each year the interdisciplinary AGO (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie, German Gynecological Oncology Group) Breast Committee on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer provides updated state-of-the-art recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer. Methods The updated evidence-based treatment recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer have been released in March 2024. Results and Conclusion This paper concisely captures the updated recommendations for early breast cancer chapter by chapter.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tjoung-Won Park-Simon
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hanover, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Ute-Susann Albert
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys Paluchowski
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Ingo Bauerfeind
- Frauenklinik und Brustzentrum Klinikum Landshut, AdöR, Landshut, Germany
| | - Jens-Uwe Blohmer
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Brustzentrum, Charité-Universitätsmedizin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Dall
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Nina Ditsch
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Eva M. Fallenberg
- Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, TUM School of Medicine & Health, Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Peter A. Fasching
- Universitätsfrauenklinik, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, CIO ABCD, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Michael Friedrich
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld GmbH, Krefeld, Germany
| | - Bernd Gerber
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- Brustzentrum, Evang, Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Breast Center, BZKF, LMU University Hospital Munich and CCC Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Andreas Daniel Hartkopf
- Department für Frauengesundheit, Forschungsinstitut für Frauengesundheit, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Jörg Heil
- Brustzentrum Heidelberg, Klinik St. Elisabeth und Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Sektion Senologie, Universitäts-Klinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Brustzentrum, Kantonspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | | | | | | | - David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Thorsten Kühn
- Filderklinik, Filderstadt, Brustzentrum und Universitätsklinik Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Sherko Kümmel
- Frauenheilkunde/Brustzentrum Evangelische Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group Forschungs GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Immanuel Klinik Märkische Schweiz (Buckow) and Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf, Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane (Rüdersdorf), Rüdersdorf, Germany
| | - Michael Patrick Lux
- Kooperatives Brustzentrum Paderborn, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn und St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz-Krankenhaus GmbH, Paderborn, Germany
| | - Nicolai Maass
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Christoph Mundhenke
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum Bayreuth, Bayreuth, Germany
| | - Toralf Reimer
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Centrum für Integrierte Onkologie (CIO), Universitätsklinikum Köln, Köln, Germany
| | - Achim Rody
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Geburtshilfe und Frauengesundheit Universitätsmedizin Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen, Universitätsklinikum und Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Florian Schütz
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Diakonissen Krankenhaus Speyer, Speyer, Germany
| | - Hans-Peter Sinn
- Sektion Gynäkopathologie, Pathologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christine Solbach
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Erich-Franz Solomayer
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde, Geburtshilfe und Reproduktionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Homburg, Germany
| | - Elmar Stickeler
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Aachen und CIO ABCD, Aachen, Germany
| | | | - Michael Untch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Rachel Wuerstlein
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Breast Center, BZKF, LMU University Hospital Munich and CCC Munich, Munich, Germany
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Department für Frauengesundheit, Forschungsinstitut für Frauengesundheit, Universitätsklinikum Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Gynäkologische Onkologie, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Harper LK, Carnahan MB, Bhatt AA, Simmons CL, Patel BK, Downs E, Pockaj BA, Yancey K, Eversman SE, Sharpe RE. Imaging Characteristics of and Multidisciplinary Management Considerations for Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Flat Epithelial Atypia: Review of Current Literature. Radiographics 2023; 43:e230016. [PMID: 37768862 DOI: 10.1148/rg.230016] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 09/30/2023]
Abstract
High-risk lesions of the breast are frequently encountered in percutaneous biopsy specimens. While benign, these lesions have historically undergone surgical excision due to their potential to be upgraded to malignancy. However, there is emerging evidence that a tailored management approach should be considered to reduce overtreatment of these lesions. Flat epithelial atypia (FEA) and atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) are two of the most commonly encountered high-risk lesions. FEA has been shown to have a relatively low rate of progression to malignancy, and some guidelines are now recommending observation over routine excision in select cases. Selective observation may be reasonable in cases where the target lesion is small and completely removed at biopsy and when there are no underlying risk factors, such as a history of breast cancer or genetic mutation or concurrent ADH. ADH has the highest potential upgrade rate to malignancy of all the high-risk lesions. Most society guidelines continue to recommend surgical excision of this lesion. More recently, some literature suggests that ADH lesions that appear completely removed at biopsy, involve limited foci (less than two or three) with no necrosis or significant atypia, manifest as a small group of mammographic calcifications, or demonstrate no enhancement at MRI may be reasonable for observation. Ultimately, management of all high-risk lesions must be based on a multidisciplinary approach that considers all patient, radiologic, clinical, and histopathologic factors. ©RSNA, 2023 Quiz questions for this article are available in the supplemental material.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Laura K Harper
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Molly B Carnahan
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Asha A Bhatt
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Curtis L Simmons
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Bhavika K Patel
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Erinn Downs
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Barbara A Pockaj
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Kristina Yancey
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Sarah E Eversman
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| | - Richard E Sharpe
- From the Departments of Radiology (L.K.H., M.B.C., B.K.P., K.Y., S.E.E., R.E.S.), Pathology (E.D.), and Surgery (B.A.P.), Mayo Clinic, 5777 E Mayo Blvd, Phoenix, AZ 85054; Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn (A.A.B.); and Department of Radiology, Phoenix Children's Hospital, Phoenix, Ariz (C.L.S.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Xie CL, Whitman GJ, Middleton LP, Bevers TB, Bedrosian I, Chung HL. Isolated Flat Epithelial Atypia: Upgrade Outcomes After Multidisciplinary Review-Based Management Using Excision or Imaging Surveillance. JOURNAL OF BREAST IMAGING 2023; 5:575-584. [PMID: 37744722 PMCID: PMC10516722 DOI: 10.1093/jbi/wbad049] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/13/2023] [Indexed: 09/26/2023]
Abstract
Objective To compare flat epithelial atypia (FEA) upgrade rates after excision versus surveillance and to identify variables associated with upgrade. Methods This single-institution retrospective study identified isolated FEA cases determined by percutaneous biopsy from April 2005 through July 2022 with excision or ≥2 years surveillance. All cases were recommended for excision or surveillance based on multidisciplinary discussion of clinical, imaging, and pathologic variables with emphasis on sampling adequacy and significant atypia. Truth was determined by pathology at excision or the absence of cancer on surveillance. Upgrade was defined as cancer occurring ≤2 cm from the biopsy site. Demographic, imaging, and biopsy variables were compared between those that did and did not upgrade. Results Among 112 cases of isolated FEA, imaging findings included calcifications in 81.3% (91/112), MRI lesions in 11.6% (13/112), and distortions or masses in 7.1% (8/112). Excision was recommended in 12.5% (14/112) and surveillance in 87.5% (98/112) of cases. Among those recommended for excision, 28.6% (4/14) of cases were upgraded, all to ductal carcinoma in situ. In those recommended for surveillance, 1.0% (1/98) were upgraded to invasive cancer. Overall, FEA had a 4.5% (5/112) upgrade rate, and 2.7% (3/112) also developed cancer >2 cm from the FEA. There were no significant differences in demographic, imaging, and biopsy variables between those that did and did not upgrade to cancer. Conclusion Multidisciplinary management of isolated FEA distinguishes those at higher risk of upgrade to cancer (28.6%) in whom surgery is warranted from those at low risk of upgrade (1.0%) who can be managed non-operatively.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Charlies L Xie
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Breast Imaging, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Gary J Whitman
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Breast Imaging, Houston, TX, USA
| | | | - Therese B Bevers
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Clinical Cancer Prevention, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Isabelle Bedrosian
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Breast Surgical Oncology, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Hannah L Chung
- MD Anderson Cancer Center, Department of Breast Imaging, Houston, TX, USA
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Park-Simon TW, Müller V, Jackisch C, Albert US, Banys-Paluchowski M, Bauerfeind I, Blohmer JU, Budach W, Dall P, Ditsch N, Fallenberg EM, Fasching PA, Fehm T, Friedrich M, Gerber B, Gluz O, Harbeck N, Hartkopf AD, Heil J, Huober J, Kolberg-Liedtke C, Kreipe HH, Krug D, Kühn T, Kümmel S, Loibl S, Lüftner D, Lux MP, Maass N, Mundhenke C, Reimer T, Rhiem K, Rody A, Schmidt M, Schneeweiss A, Schütz F, Sinn HP, Solbach C, Solomayer EF, Stickeler E, Thomssen C, Untch M, Witzel I, Wöckel A, Wuerstlein R, Janni W, Thill M. Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2023. Breast Care (Basel) 2023; 18:289-305. [PMID: 37900552 PMCID: PMC10601667 DOI: 10.1159/000531578] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2023] [Accepted: 06/12/2023] [Indexed: 10/31/2023] Open
Abstract
Background Each year the interdisciplinary Arbeitsgemeinschaft Gynäkologische Onkologie (AGO), German Gynecological Oncology Group Breast Committee on Diagnosis and Treatment of Breast Cancer provides updated state-of-the-art recommendations for early and metastatic breast cancer. Summary The updated evidence-based treatment recommendation for early and metastatic breast cancer has been released in March 2023. Key Messages This paper concisely captures the updated recommendations for early breast cancer chapter by chapter.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Tjoung-Won Park-Simon
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - Volkmar Müller
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Gynäkologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Christian Jackisch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Sana Klinikum Offenbach GmbH, Offenbach, Germany
| | - Ute-Susann Albert
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Maggie Banys-Paluchowski
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Kiel, Germany
| | - Ingo Bauerfeind
- Frauenklinik, Klinikum Landshut gemeinnützige GmbH, Landshut, Germany
| | - Jens-Uwe Blohmer
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums der Charite, Berlin, Germany
| | - Wilfried Budach
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie Düsseldorf, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Peter Dall
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Städtisches Klinikum Lüneburg, Lüneburg, Germany
| | - Nina Ditsch
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Augsburg, Augsburg, Germany
| | - Eva Maria Fallenberg
- Institut für diagnostische und Interventionelle Radiologie, Klinikum der Technischen Universität München, Rechts der Isar, Munich, Germany
| | - Peter A. Fasching
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Erlangen, Erlangen, Germany
| | - Tanja Fehm
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany
| | - Michael Friedrich
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Krefeld GmbH, Krefeld, Germany
| | - Bernd Gerber
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Oleg Gluz
- Brustzentrum, Evang. Krankenhaus Bethesda, Mönchengladbach, Germany
| | - Nadia Harbeck
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Andreas D. Hartkopf
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Joerg Heil
- Brustzentrum Heidelberg, Klinik St. Elisabeth und Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Sektion Senologie, Universitäts-Klinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Jens Huober
- Brustzentrum, Kantonspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - Cornelia Kolberg-Liedtke
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Phaon GmbH, Wiesbaden, Germany
| | - Hans H. Kreipe
- Institut für Pathologie, Medizinische Hochschule Hannover, Hannover, Germany
| | - David Krug
- Klinik für Strahlentherapie, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | - Thorsten Kühn
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum Esslingen, Esslingen, Germany
| | - Sherko Kümmel
- Klinik für Senologie, Evangelische Kliniken Essen Mitte, Essen, Germany
| | - Sibylle Loibl
- German Breast Group Forschungs GmbH, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Diana Lüftner
- Immanuel Klinik Märkische Schweiz (Buckow) & Immanuel Klinik Rüdersdorf/Medizinische Hochschule Brandenburg Theodor Fontane (Rüdersdorf), Rüdersdorf, Germany
| | - Michael Patrick Lux
- Kooperatives Brustzentrum Paderborn, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Frauenklinik St. Louise, Paderborn und St. Josefs-Krankenhaus, Salzkotten, St. Vincenz-Krankenhaus GmbH, Paderborn, Germany
| | - Nicolai Maass
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany
| | | | - Toralf Reimer
- Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik am Klinikum Südstadt, Rostock, Germany
| | - Kerstin Rhiem
- Zentrum Familiärer Brust- und Eierstockkrebs, Centrum für Integrierte Onkologie (CIO), Universitätsklinikum Köln, Cologne, Germany
| | - Achim Rody
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Lübeck, Kiel, Germany
| | - Marcus Schmidt
- Klinik und Poliklinik für Geburtshilfe und Frauengesundheit der Johannes-Gutenberg-Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany
| | - Andreas Schneeweiss
- Nationales Centrum für Tumorerkrankungen, Universitätsklinikum und Deutsches Krebsforschungszentrum, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Florian Schütz
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Diakonissen Krankenhaus Speyer, Speyer, Germany
| | - Hans Peter Sinn
- Sektion Gynäkopathologie, Pathologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Christine Solbach
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Erich-Franz Solomayer
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde, Geburtshilfe und Reproduktionsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum des Saarlandes, Homburg, Germany
| | - Elmar Stickeler
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtsmedizin, Universitätsklinikum Aachen, Aachen, Germany
| | | | - Michael Untch
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Helios Klinikum Berlin-Buch, Berlin, Germany
| | - Isabell Witzel
- Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Zurich, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Achim Wöckel
- Klinik für Frauenheilkunde und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany
| | - Rachel Wuerstlein
- Brustzentrum, Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Klinikum der Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, Germany
| | - Wolfgang Janni
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe, Universitätsklinikum Ulm, Ulm, Germany
| | - Marc Thill
- Klinik für Gynäkologie und Gynäkologische Onkologie, Agaplesion Markus Krankenhaus, Frankfurt, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Oktay A, Aslan Ö, Taşkın F, Tunçbilek N, Esen İçten SG, Balcı P, Arıbal ME, Çelik L, Örgüç İŞ, Başaran Demirkazık F, Gültekin S, Aydın AM, Durmaz E, Kul S, Binokay F, Çetin M, Emlik GD, Akpınar MG, Kadıoğlu Voyvoda SN, Polat AV, Başara Akın I, Yıldız Ş, Poyraz N, Özsoy A, Öztekin PS, Elverici E, Bayrak İK, İkizceli T, Dinç F, Sezgin G, Gülşen G, Tunçbilek I, Yalçın SR, Çolakoğlu G, Ağlamış S, Yılmaz R, Rona G, Durhan G, Güner DC, Çelik Yabul F, Günbey Karabekmez L, Tutar B, Göktaş M, Buğdaycı O, Suner A, Özdemir N. Outcomes of high-risk breast lesions diagnosed using image-guided core needle biopsy: results from a multicenter retrospective study. Diagn Interv Radiol 2023; 29:579-587. [PMID: 36994925 PMCID: PMC10679644 DOI: 10.4274/dir.2022.221790] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/25/2022] [Accepted: 08/27/2022] [Indexed: 01/15/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE The clinical management of high-risk lesions using image-guided biopsy is challenging. This study aimed to evaluate the rates at which such lesions were upgraded to malignancy and identify possible predictive factors for upgrading high-risk lesions. METHODS This retrospective multicenter analysis included 1.343 patients diagnosed with high-risk lesions using an image-guided core needle or vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB). Only patients managed using an excisional biopsy or with at least one year of documented radiological follow-up were included. For each, the Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) category, number of samples, needle thickness, and lesion size were correlated with malignancy upgrade rates in different histologic subtypes. Pearson's chi-squared test, the Fisher-Freeman-Halton test, and Fisher's exact test were used for the statistical analyses. RESULTS The overall upgrade rate was 20.6%, with the highest rates in the subtypes of intraductal papilloma (IP) with atypia (44.7%; 55/123), followed by atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) (38.4%; 144/375), lobular neoplasia (LN) (12.7%; 7/55), papilloma without atypia (9.4%; 58/611), flat epithelial atypia (FEA) (8.7%; 10/114), and radial scars (RSs) (4.6%; 3/65). There was a significant relationship between the upgrade rate and BI-RADS category, number of samples, and lesion size Lesion size was the most predictive factor for an upgrade in all subtypes. CONCLUSION ADH and atypical IP showed considerable upgrade rates to malignancy, requiring surgical excision. The LN, IP without atypia, pure FEA, and RS subtypes showed lower malignancy rates when the BI-RADS category was lower and in smaller lesions that had been adequately sampled using VAB. After being discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting, these cases could be managed with follow-up instead of excision.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ayşenur Oktay
- Department of Radiology, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Özge Aslan
- Department of Radiology, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Füsun Taşkın
- Department of Radiology, Acıbadem MAA University Faculty of Medicine; Acıbadem MAA University Senology Research Institute, Acıbadem Atakent Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Nermin Tunçbilek
- Department of Radiology, Trakya University Faculty of Medicine, Edirne, Turkey
| | - Selma Gül Esen İçten
- Department of Radiology, Acıbadem MAA University Faculty of Medicine; Acıbadem MAA University Senology Research Institute, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Pınar Balcı
- Department of Radiology, Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Mustafa Erkin Arıbal
- Department of Radiology, Acıbadem MAA University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Levent Çelik
- Department of Radiology, Maltepe University Faculty of Medicine; İstanbul, Turkey
| | - İhsan Şebnem Örgüç
- Department of Radiology, Manisa Celal Bayar University Faculty of Medicine, Manisa, Turkey
| | | | - Serap Gültekin
- Department of Radiology, Gazi University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Ayşe Murat Aydın
- Department of Radiology, Fırat University Faculty of Medicine, Elazığ, Turkey
| | - Emel Durmaz
- Department of Radiology, Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine, Antalya, Turkey
| | - Sibel Kul
- Department of Radiology, Karadeniz Techinal University Faculty of Medicine, Trabzon, Turkey
| | - Figen Binokay
- Department of Radiology, Çukurova University Faculty of Medicine, Adana, Turkey
| | - Meltem Çetin
- Department of Radiology, Süleyman Demirel University Faculty of Medicine, Isparta, Turkey
| | - Ganime Dilek Emlik
- Department of Radiology, Necmettin Erbakan University Meram Faculty of Medicine, Konya, Turkey
| | | | - Sadiye Nuray Kadıoğlu Voyvoda
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Kartal Dr. Lütfi Kırdar City Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Ahmet Veysel Polat
- Department of Radiology, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey
| | - Işıl Başara Akın
- Department of Radiology, Dokuz Eylül University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Şeyma Yıldız
- Department of Radiology, Bezmialem Vakıf University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Necdet Poyraz
- Department of Radiology, Necmettin Erbakan University Meram Faculty of Medicine, Konya, Turkey
| | - Arzu Özsoy
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Pelin Seher Öztekin
- Department of Radiology, Ankara Training and Research Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Eda Elverici
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Ankara City Hospital, Ankara, Turkey
| | - İlkay Koray Bayrak
- Department of Radiology, Ondokuz Mayıs University Faculty of Medicine, Samsun, Turkey
| | - Türkan İkizceli
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, İstanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Funda Dinç
- Department of Radiology, Muğla Sıtkı Koman University Faculty of Medicine, Muğla Turkey
| | - Gülten Sezgin
- Department of Radiology, İzmir Katip Çelebi University, Atatürk Training and Research Hospital, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Gökçe Gülşen
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, İstanbul Haseki Training and Research Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Işıl Tunçbilek
- Department of Radiology, Medsentez Private Clinic, Ankara, Turkey
| | | | - Gül Çolakoğlu
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, İzmir Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Serpil Ağlamış
- Department of Radiology, Fırat University Faculty of Medicine, Elazığ, Turkey
| | - Ravza Yılmaz
- Department of Radiology, İstanbul University, İstanbul Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Günay Rona
- Department of Radiology, University of Health Sciences Turkey, Kartal Dr. Lütfi Kırdar City Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Gamze Durhan
- Department of Radiology, Hacettepe University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Davut Can Güner
- Department of Radiology, Maltepe University Faculty of Medicine; İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Fatma Çelik Yabul
- Department of Radiology, Bezmialem Vakıf University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Leman Günbey Karabekmez
- Department of Radiology, Ankara Yıldırım Beyazıt University Faculty of Medicine, Ankara, Turkey
| | - Burçin Tutar
- Department of Radiology, Acıbadem Maslak Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Muhammet Göktaş
- Department of Radiology, Ministry of Health Çerkezköy State Hospital, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Onur Buğdaycı
- Department of Radiology, Marmara University Faculty of Medicine, İstanbul, Turkey
| | - Aslı Suner
- Department of Biostatistics and Medical Informatics, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey
| | - Necmettin Özdemir
- Department of Medical Pathology, Ege University Faculty of Medicine, İzmir, Turkey
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Elfgen C, Leo C, Kubik-Huch RA, Muenst S, Schmidt N, Quinn C, McNally S, van Diest PJ, Mann RM, Bago-Horvath Z, Bernathova M, Regitnig P, Fuchsjäger M, Schwegler-Guggemos D, Maranta M, Zehbe S, Tausch C, Güth U, Fallenberg EM, Schrading S, Kothari A, Sonnenschein M, Kampmann G, Kulka J, Tille JC, Körner M, Decker T, Lax SF, Daniaux M, Bjelic-Radisic V, Kacerovsky-Strobl S, Condorelli R, Gnant M, Varga Z. Third International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions). Virchows Arch 2023:10.1007/s00428-023-03566-x. [PMID: 37330436 DOI: 10.1007/s00428-023-03566-x] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 14.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/14/2023] [Revised: 05/01/2023] [Accepted: 05/17/2023] [Indexed: 06/19/2023]
Abstract
The heterogeneous group of B3 lesions in the breast harbors lesions with different malignant potential and progression risk. As several studies about B3 lesions have been published since the last Consensus in 2018, the 3rd International Consensus Conference discussed the six most relevant B3 lesions (atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), flat epithelial atypia (FEA), classical lobular neoplasia (LN), radial scar (RS), papillary lesions (PL) without atypia, and phyllodes tumors (PT)) and made recommendations for diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Following a presentation of current data of each B3 lesion, the international and interdisciplinary panel of 33 specialists and key opinion leaders voted on the recommendations for further management after core-needle biopsy (CNB) and vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB). In case of B3 lesion diagnosis on CNB, OE was recommended in ADH and PT, whereas in the other B3 lesions, vacuum-assisted excision was considered an equivalent alternative to OE. In ADH, most panelists (76%) recommended an open excision (OE) after diagnosis on VAB, whereas observation after a complete VAB-removal on imaging was accepted by 34%. In LN, the majority of the panel (90%) preferred observation following complete VAB-removal. Results were similar in RS (82%), PL (100%), and FEA (100%). In benign PT, a slim majority (55%) also recommended an observation after a complete VAB-removal. VAB with subsequent active surveillance can replace an open surgical intervention for most B3 lesions (RS, FEA, PL, PT, and LN). Compared to previous recommendations, there is an increasing trend to a de-escalating strategy in classical LN. Due to the higher risk of upgrade into malignancy, OE remains the preferred approach after the diagnosis of ADH.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Constanze Elfgen
- Breast-Center Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
- University of Witten-Herdecke, Witten, Germany.
| | - Cornelia Leo
- Breast Center, Kantonsspital Baden, Baden, Switzerland
| | | | - Simone Muenst
- Institute of Medical Genetics and Pathology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Noemi Schmidt
- Department of Radiology, University Hospital Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Cecily Quinn
- Irish National Breast Screening Program & Department of Histopathology, St. Vincent's University Hospital Dublin and School of Medicine, University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Sorcha McNally
- Radiology Department, St. Vincent University Hospital, Dublin, Ireland
| | - Paul J van Diest
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Ritse M Mann
- Department of Radiology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
- Department of Radiology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | | | - Maria Bernathova
- Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Peter Regitnig
- Diagnostic and Research Institute of Pathology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | - Michael Fuchsjäger
- Division of General Radiology, Department of Radiology, Medical University Graz, Graz, Austria
| | | | - Martina Maranta
- Department of Gynecology, County Hospital Chur, Chur, Switzerland
| | - Sabine Zehbe
- Radiology Section, Breast Center Stephanshorn, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | | | - Uwe Güth
- Breast-Center Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Eva Maria Fallenberg
- Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, School of Medicine & Klinikum Rechts der Isar, Technical University of Munich (TUM), Munich, Germany
| | - Simone Schrading
- Department of Radiology, County Hospital Lucerne, Lucerne, Switzerland
| | - Ashutosh Kothari
- Breast Surgery Unit, Guy's and St Thomas's NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | | | - Gert Kampmann
- Centro di Radiologia e Senologia Luganese, Lugano, Switzerland
| | - Janina Kulka
- Department of Pathology, Forensic and Insurance Medicine, Semmelweis University Budapest, Budapest, Hungary
| | | | | | - Thomas Decker
- Breast Pathology, Reference Centers Mammography Münster, University Hospital Münster, Münster, Germany
| | - Sigurd F Lax
- Department of Pathology, Hospital Graz II, Graz, and School of Medicine, Johannes Kepler University Linz, Linz, Austria
| | - Martin Daniaux
- BrustGesundheitZentrum Tirol, University Hospital Innsbruck, Innsbruck, Austria
| | - Vesna Bjelic-Radisic
- University of Witten-Herdecke, Witten, Germany
- Breast Unit, Helios University Hospital, University Witten/Herdecke, Witten, Germany
| | | | | | - Michael Gnant
- Comprehensive Cancer Center, Medical University Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | - Zsuzsanna Varga
- Department of Pathology and Molecular Pathology, University Hospital Zürich, Zürich, Switzerland
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Fraker JL, Clune CG, Sahni SK, Yaganti A, Vegunta S. Prevalence, Impact, and Diagnostic Challenges of Benign Breast Disease: A Narrative Review. Int J Womens Health 2023; 15:765-778. [PMID: 37223067 PMCID: PMC10202205 DOI: 10.2147/ijwh.s351095] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/19/2022] [Accepted: 05/05/2023] [Indexed: 05/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Benign breast diseases, which are commonly seen in clinical practice, have various clinical presentations and implications, as well as management strategies. This article describes common benign breast lesions, presentations of these lesions, and typical radiographic and histologic findings. Also included in this review are the most recent data and guideline-based recommendations for the management of benign breast diseases at diagnosis, including surgical referral, medical management, and ongoing surveillance.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Jessica L Fraker
- Division of Women’s Health Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
| | - Caroline G Clune
- Center for Breast Care, Mayo Clinic Health System — Southwest Wisconsin Region, La Crosse, WI, USA
- Division of General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA
| | - Sabrina K Sahni
- Jacoby Center for Breast Health, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA
| | - Avani Yaganti
- Southern Illinois University School of Medicine, Springfield, IL, USA
| | - Suneela Vegunta
- Division of Women’s Health Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Warwar S, Kulkarni S. Selective surgical excision of high-risk lesions. Surgery 2023:S0039-6060(23)00117-4. [PMID: 37059651 DOI: 10.1016/j.surg.2023.02.028] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/01/2023] [Revised: 02/17/2023] [Accepted: 02/23/2023] [Indexed: 04/16/2023]
Abstract
Intraductal papilloma, flat epithelial atypia, radial scar, atypical lobular hyperplasia, and lobular carcinoma in situ have historically been referred to as high-risk lesions and managed with routine surgical excision after diagnosis on core needle biopsy. The misnomer high-risk stems from high rates of upgrade to malignancy reported in historic literature. However, recent studies have found much lower upgrade rates, <2%, than previously thought. These findings are explained by advances in imaging technology, larger-bore biopsy needles, and emphasis on radiology-pathology concordance. Concordant lesions have a low upgrade risk and can be managed with radiographic and clinical surveillance instead of surgical excision. Surgical de-escalation is feasible for many of these lesions with careful multidisciplinary review and a detailed risk-benefit discussion with patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Samantha Warwar
- Department of Surgery, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL
| | - Swati Kulkarni
- Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center, Feinberg School of Medicine, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
de Boer M, van Diest PJ. Dimorphic cells: a common feature throughout the low nuclear grade breast neoplasia spectrum. Virchows Arch 2023; 482:369-375. [PMID: 36378325 PMCID: PMC9931813 DOI: 10.1007/s00428-022-03438-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/06/2022] [Revised: 10/14/2022] [Accepted: 10/17/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022]
Abstract
Columnar cell lesions (CCLs) are recognized precursor lesions of the low nuclear grade breast neoplasia family. CCLs are cystic enlarged terminal duct lobular units with monotonous (monoclonal) columnar-type luminal cells. CCLs without atypia are regarded as benign and CCLs with atypia as true precursor lesions with clonal molecular changes, a certain progression risk, and an association with more advanced lesions. However, reproducibility of designating atypia in CCL is not optimal, and no objective markers of atypia have been identified, although 16q loss seems to be associated with atypical CCLs. Dimorphic ("pale") cell populations have been described in low nuclear grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) but not in CCLs and atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH). Therefore, we searched for pale cells in CCL (N = 60), ADH (N = 41), and DCIS grade 1 (N = 84). Diagnostic criteria were derived from the WHO, and atypia was designated according to the Schnitt criteria. Pale cells occurred in 0% (0/30), 73% (22/30), 56% (23/41), and 76% (64/84) of CCLs without atypia, CCLs with atypia, ADH, and DCIS grade 1, respectively. Pale cells expressed ERα, E-cadherin and p120 and variably cyclin D1, and lacked expression of CK5 and p63. In conclusion, dimorphic "pale" cells occur throughout the low nuclear grade progression spectrum, increasing in frequency with progression. Interestingly, CCL lesions without atypia do not seem to bear showed pale cells, indicating that the presence of pale cells may serve as a diagnostic morphological feature of atypia in CCLs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mirthe de Boer
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, Netherlands
| | - Paul J van Diest
- Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX, Utrecht, Netherlands.
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Varga Z, Sinn P, Lebeau A. [B3 lesions of the breast: histological, clinical, and epidemiological aspects : Update]. PATHOLOGIE (HEIDELBERG, GERMANY) 2023; 44:5-16. [PMID: 36635403 PMCID: PMC9877091 DOI: 10.1007/s00292-022-01180-3] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 12/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/14/2023]
Abstract
B3 lesions of the breast are a heterogeneous group of lesions with uncertain malignant potential encompassing a broad spectrum of histologically distinct alterations that often pose challenging decisions if diagnosed on the preoperative core or vacuum biopsies. B3 lesions are mostly detected due to mammographic calcifications or mass lesions and, in most cases, encompass a spectrum of atypical lesions such as atypical ductal hyperplasia, classic lobular neoplasia, flat epithelial atypia, papillomas, fibroepithelial tumors, and rarely other lesions such as mucocele-like lesions, atypical apocrine lesions, and rare stromal proliferations. The use of immunohistochemical stains (estrogen receptors, basal cytokeratin, myoepithelial markers, and stromal marker panel) is useful in the differentiation of these lesions and allowing proper classification. Regarding clinical management of B3 lesions, the radiological-pathological correlation of the given entity plays the most important key element for the proper next diagnostic and therapeutic step.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Zsuzsanna Varga
- Institut für Pathologie und Molekularpathologie, Universitätsspital Zürich, Schmelzbergstr. 12, 8091 Zürich, Schweiz
| | - Peter Sinn
- Pathologisches Institut, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland
| | - Annette Lebeau
- Institut für Pathologie, Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Deutschland ,Gemeinschaftspraxis für Pathologie, Lübeck, Deutschland
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Accuracy and Utility of Preoperative Ultrasound-Guided Axillary Lymph Node Biopsy for Invasive Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. COMPUTATIONAL INTELLIGENCE AND NEUROSCIENCE 2022; 2022:3307627. [PMID: 36203726 PMCID: PMC9532070 DOI: 10.1155/2022/3307627] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/23/2022] [Revised: 09/07/2022] [Accepted: 09/10/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022]
Abstract
Background With the acceleration of the pace of life and work, the incidence rate of invasive breast cancer is getting higher and higher, and early diagnosis is very important. This study screened and analyzed the published literature on ultrasound-guided biopsy of invasive breast cancer and obtained the accuracy and practicality of preoperative biopsy. Method The four databases were screened for the literature. There was no requirement for the start date of retrieval, and the deadline was July 2, 2022. Two researchers screened the literature, respectively, and included the literature on preoperative ultrasound-guided biopsy and intraoperative and postoperative pathological diagnosis of invasive breast cancer. The diagnostic data included in the literature were extracted and meta-analyzed with RevMan 5.4 software, and the bias risk map, forest map, and summary receiver operating characteristic curves (SROC) were drawn. Results The included 19 studies involved about 18668 patients with invasive breast cancer. The degree of bias of the included literature is low. The distribution range of true positive, false positive, true negative, and false negative in the forest map is large, which may be related to the large difference in the number of patients in each study. Most studies in the SROC curve are at the upper left, indicating that the accuracy of ultrasound-guided axillary biopsy is very high. Conclusion For invasive breast cancer, preoperative ultrasound-guided biopsy can accurately predict staging and grading of breast cancer, which has important reference value for surgery and follow-up treatment.
Collapse
|
12
|
Strickland S, Turashvili G. Are Columnar Cell Lesions the Earliest Non-Obligate Precursor in the Low-Grade Breast Neoplasia Pathway? Curr Oncol 2022; 29:5664-5681. [PMID: 36005185 PMCID: PMC9406596 DOI: 10.3390/curroncol29080447] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/15/2022] [Revised: 08/09/2022] [Accepted: 08/09/2022] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Columnar cell lesions (CCLs) of the breast comprise a spectrum of morphologic alterations of the terminal duct lobular unit involving variably dilated and enlarged acini lined by columnar epithelial cells. The World Health Organization currently classifies CCLs without atypia as columnar cell change (CCC) and columnar cell hyperplasia (CCH), whereas flat epithelial atypia (FEA) is a unifying term encompassing both CCC and CCH with cytologic atypia. CCLs have been increasingly recognized in stereotactic core needle biopsies (CNBs) performed for the assessment of calcifications. CCLs are believed to represent the earliest non-obligate precursor of low-grade invasive breast carcinomas as they share molecular alterations and often coexist with entities in the low-grade breast neoplasia pathway. Despite this association, however, the risk of progression of CCLs to invasive breast carcinoma appears low and may not exceed that of concurrent proliferative lesions. As the reported upgrade rates of pure CCL/FEA when identified as the most advanced high-risk lesion on CNB vary widely, the management of FEA diagnosed on CNB remains controversial. This review will include a historical overview of CCLs and will examine histologic diagnostic criteria, molecular alterations, prognosis and issues related to upgrade rates and clinical management.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Sarah Strickland
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada
| | - Gulisa Turashvili
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Emory University Hospital, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA 30322, USA
- Correspondence:
| |
Collapse
|
13
|
Ferre R, Kuzmiak CM. Upgrade rate of percutaneously diagnosed pure flat epithelial atypia: systematic review and meta-analysis of 1,924 lesions. J Osteopath Med 2022; 122:253-262. [PMID: 35150124 DOI: 10.1515/jom-2021-0206] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/22/2021] [Accepted: 12/14/2021] [Indexed: 12/29/2022]
Abstract
CONTEXT Management remains controversial due to the risk of upgrade for malignancy from flat epithelial atypia (FEA). Data about the frequency and malignancy upgrade rates are scant. Namely, observational follow-up is advised by many studies in cases of pure FEA on core biopsy and in the absence of an additional surgical excision. For cases of pure FEA, the American College of Surgeons no longer recommends surgical excision but rather recommends observation with clinical and imaging follow-up. OBJECTIVES The aim of this study is to perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to calculate the pooled upgrade of pure FEA following core needle biopsies. METHODS A search of MEDLINE and Embase databases were conducted in December 2020. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines were followed. A fixed- or random-effects model was utilized. Heterogeneity among studies was estimated by utilizing the I2 statistic and considered high if the I2 was greater than 50%. The random-effects model with the DerSimonian and Laird method was utilized to calculate the pooled upgrade rate and its 95% confidence interval. RESULTS A total of 1924 pure FEA were analyzed among 59 included studies. The overall pooled upgrade rate to malignancy was 8.8%. The pooled upgrade rate for mammography only was 8.9%. The pooled upgrade rate for ultrasound was 14%. The pooled upgrade rate for mammography and ultrasound combined was 8.8%. The pooled upgrade rate for MRI-only cases was 27.3%. CONCLUSIONS Although the guidelines for the management of pure FEA are variable, our data support that pure FEA diagnosed at core needle biopsy should undergo surgical excision since the upgrade rate >2%.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Romuald Ferre
- Centre hospital de la Sarre, 679 Route 111, La Sarre, QC J9Z 2Y9, Canada
- Department of Radiology, Hopital du Grand Portage, Riviere du Loup, QC, Canada
| | - Cherie M Kuzmiak
- Department of Radiology, UNC School of Medicine, Chapel Hill, NC, USA
| |
Collapse
|
14
|
Girardi V, Guaragni M, Ruzzenenti N, Palmieri F, Fogazzi G, Cozzi A, Lucchini D, Buffoli A, Schiaffino S, Sardanelli F. B3 Lesions at Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy under Ultrasound or Mammography Guidance: A Single-Center Experience on 3634 Consecutive Biopsies. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:5443. [PMID: 34771606 PMCID: PMC8582448 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13215443] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/03/2021] [Revised: 10/22/2021] [Accepted: 10/26/2021] [Indexed: 11/30/2022] Open
Abstract
The rate of upgrade to cancer for breast lesions with uncertain malignant potential (B3 lesions) diagnosed at needle biopsy is highly influenced by several factors, but large series are seldom available. We retrospectively assessed the upgrade rates of a consecutive series of B3 lesions diagnosed at ultrasound- or mammography-guided vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) at an EUSOMA-certified Breast Unit over a 7-year timeframe. The upgrade rate was defined as the number of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) or invasive cancer at pathology after excision or during follow-up divided by the total number of B3 lesions. All lesions were reviewed by one of four pathologists with a second opinion for discordant assessments of borderline cases. Excision or surveillance were defined by the multidisciplinary tumor board, with 6- and 12-month follow-up. Out of 3634 VABs (63% ultrasound-guided), 604 (17%) yielded a B3 lesion. After excision, 17/604 B3 lesions were finally upgraded to malignancy (2.8%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.8-4.5%), 10/17 (59%) being upgraded to DCIS and 7/17 (41%) to invasive carcinoma. No cases were upgraded during follow-up. B3a lesions showed a significantly lower upgrade rate (0.4%, 95% CI 0.1-2.1%) than B3b lesions (4.7%, 95% CI 2.9-7.5%, p = 0.001), that had a 22.0 adjusted odds ratio for upgrade (95% CI 2.1-232.3). No significant difference was found in upgrade rates according to imaging guidance or needle caliper. Surveillance-oriented management can be considered for B3a lesions, while surgical excision should be pursued for B3b lesions.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Veronica Girardi
- Breast Radiology, EUSOMA-Certified Breast Unit, Istituto Clinico Sant’Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Monica Guaragni
- Breast Pathology, EUSOMA-Certified Breast Unit, Istituto Clinico Sant’Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127 Brescia, Italy; (M.G.); (N.R.)
| | - Nella Ruzzenenti
- Breast Pathology, EUSOMA-Certified Breast Unit, Istituto Clinico Sant’Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127 Brescia, Italy; (M.G.); (N.R.)
| | - Fabrizio Palmieri
- Breast Surgery, EUSOMA-Certified Breast Unit, Istituto Clinico Sant’Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Gianluca Fogazzi
- Breast Medical Oncology, EUSOMA-Certified Breast Unit, Istituto Clinico Sant’Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Andrea Cozzi
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133 Milano, Italy;
| | - Diana Lucchini
- Breast Psycho-Oncology, EUSOMA-Certified Breast Unit, Istituto Clinico Sant’Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Alberto Buffoli
- Radiation Oncology, EUSOMA-Certified Breast Unit, Istituto Clinico Sant’Anna, Via del Franzone 31, 25127 Brescia, Italy;
| | - Simone Schiaffino
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy;
| | - Francesco Sardanelli
- Department of Biomedical Sciences for Health, Università degli Studi di Milano, Via Mangiagalli 31, 20133 Milano, Italy;
- Unit of Radiology, IRCCS Policlinico San Donato, Via Morandi 30, 20097 San Donato Milanese, Italy;
| |
Collapse
|