Factors associated with upstaging in patients preoperatively diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ by core needle biopsy

Potential Overtreatment of DCIS in Patients with Limited Life Expectancy

INTRODUCTION

As the benefits of intensive locoregional therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are realized over time in older adults, life expectancy may help to guide treatment decisions. We examined whether life expectancy was associated with extent of locoregional therapy in this population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women ≥ 70 years old with < 5 cm of DCIS diagnosed 2010-2015 were identified in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER)-Medicare dataset and categorized by a life expectancy ≤ 5 or > 5 years, defined by a validated claims-based measure. Differences in locoregional therapy (mastectomy + axillary surgery, mastectomy-only, lumpectomy + radiation therapy (RT) + axillary surgery, lumpectomy + RT, lumpectomy-only, and no treatment) by life expectancy were assessed using Pearson chi-squared tests. Generalized linear mixed models were used to identify factors associated with receipt of lumpectomy-only.

RESULTS

Of 5346 women (median age of 75 years, range 70-97 years), 927 (17.3%) had a life expectancy ≤ 5 years. Of the 4041 patients who underwent lumpectomy, 710 (13.3%) underwent axillary surgery. More patients with life expectancy ≤ 5 years underwent lumpectomy-only (39.4% versus 27%), mastectomy-only (8.1% versus 5.3%), or no treatment (5.8% versus 3.2%; p < 0.001). On multivariable analysis, women with life expectancy ≤ 5 years had a significantly greater likelihood of undergoing lumpectomy-only [OR 1.90, 95% CI (1.63-2.22)].

CONCLUSIONS

Life expectancy is associated with lower-intensity locoregional therapy for older women with DCIS, yet a large proportion of patients with a life expectancy ≤ 5 years received RT and axillary surgery, highlighting potential overtreatment and opportunities to de-escalate locoregional therapy in older adults.

AI analytics can be used as imaging biomarkers for predicting invasive upgrade of ductal carcinoma in situ

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate whether the quantitative abnormality scores provided by artificial intelligence (AI)-based computer-aided detection/diagnosis (CAD) for mammography interpretation can be used to predict invasive upgrade in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) diagnosed on percutaneous biopsy.

METHODS

Four hundred forty DCIS in 420 women (mean age, 52.8 years) diagnosed via percutaneous biopsy from January 2015 to December 2019 were included. Mammographic characteristics were assessed based on imaging features (mammographically occult, mass/asymmetry/distortion, calcifications only, and combined mass/asymmetry/distortion with calcifications) and BI-RADS assessments. Routine pre-biopsy 4-view digital mammograms were analyzed using AI-CAD to obtain abnormality scores (AI-CAD score, ranging 0-100%). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify independent predictive mammographic variables after adjusting for clinicopathological variables. A subgroup analysis was performed with mammographically detected DCIS.

RESULTS

Of the 440 DCIS, 117 (26.6%) were upgraded to invasive cancer. Three hundred forty-one (77.5%) DCIS were detected on mammography. The multivariable analysis showed that combined features (odds ratio (OR): 2.225, p = 0.033), BI-RADS 4c or 5 assessments (OR: 2.473, p = 0.023 and OR: 5.190, p < 0.001, respectively), higher AI-CAD score (OR: 1.009, p = 0.007), AI-CAD score ≥ 50% (OR: 1.960, p = 0.017), and AI-CAD score ≥ 75% (OR: 2.306, p = 0.009) were independent predictors of invasive upgrade. In mammographically detected DCIS, combined features (OR: 2.194, p = 0.035), and higher AI-CAD score (OR: 1.008, p = 0.047) were significant predictors of invasive upgrade.

CONCLUSION

The AI-CAD score was an independent predictor of invasive upgrade for DCIS. Higher AI-CAD scores, especially in the highest quartile of ≥ 75%, can be used as an objective imaging biomarker to predict invasive upgrade in DCIS diagnosed with percutaneous biopsy.

CRITICAL RELEVANCE STATEMENT

Noninvasive imaging features including the quantitative results of AI-CAD for mammography interpretation were independent predictors of invasive upgrade in lesions initially diagnosed as ductal carcinoma in situ via percutaneous biopsy and therefore may help decide the direction of surgery before treatment.

KEY POINTS

• Predicting ductal carcinoma in situ upgrade is important, yet there is a lack of conclusive non-invasive biomarkers. • AI-CAD scores-raw numbers, ≥ 50%, and ≥ 75%-predicted ductal carcinoma in situ upgrade independently. • Quantitative AI-CAD results may help predict ductal carcinoma in situ upgrade and guide patient management.

A clinical radiomics nomogram preoperatively to predict ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion in women with biopsy-confirmed ductal carcinoma in situ: a preliminary study

PURPOSE

To predict ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion (DCISMI) based on clinicopathologic, conventional breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), and dynamic contrast enhanced MRI (DCE-MRI) radiomics signatures in women with biopsy-confirmed ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

METHODS

Eighty-six women with eighty-seven biopsy-proven DCIS who underwent preoperative MRI and underwent surgery were retrospectively identified. Clinicopathologic, conventional MRI, DCE-MRI radiomics, combine (based on conventional MRI and DCE-MRI radiomics), traditional (based on clinicopathologic and conventional MRI) and mixed (based on clinicopathologic, conventional MRI and DCE-MRI radiomics) models were constructed by logistic regression (LR) with a 3-fold cross-validation, all evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis. A clinical radiomics nomogram was then built by incorporating the Radiomics score, significant clinicopathologic and conventional MRI features of mixed model.

RESULTS

The area under the curves (AUCs) of clinicopathologic, conventional MRI, DCE-MRI radiomics, traditional, combine, and mixed model were 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.59-0.94), 0.77 (95%CI 0.59-0.95), 0.74 (95%CI 0.55-0.93), 0.87 (95%CI 0.73-1), 0.8 (95%CI 0.63-0.96), and 0.93 (95%CI 0.84-1) in the validation cohort, respectively. The clinical radiomics nomogram based on mixed model showed higher AUCs than both clinicopathologic and DCE-MRI radiomics models in training/test (all P < 0.05) set and showed the greatest overall net benefit for upstaging according to decision curve analysis (DCA).

CONCLUSION

A nomogram constructed by combining clinicopathologic, conventional MRI features and DCE-MRI radiomics signatures may be useful in predicting DCISMI from DICS preoperatively.

Oncological Safety of Skin-Sparing Mastectomy and Immediate Breast Reconstruction in Extensive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

INTRODUCTION

Skin-sparing mastectomy (SSM) with immediate breast reconstruction is the ideal treatment for interested and suitable patients with extensive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). There is no guideline to indicate on how large DCIS the procedure can be performed safely. The primary target of this study was to define the oncological safety of SSM in extensive pure DCIS. The secondary target was to find predictive factors for DCIS upstaging to invasive disease.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 71 consecutive patients with extensive pure DCIS and undergoing SSM with immediate latissimus dorsi (LD) breast reconstruction were retrospectively evaluated.

RESULTS

The median size of DCIS lesion in preoperative imaging was 60 mm, the median weight of mastectomy specimen was 350 g, and the median resection margin (RM) was 2.0 mm. A total of 20 patients (28%) had an RM less than 0.5 mm and nine patients (13%) had ink positive margins. Six patients having positive RM underwent reoperation. A total of 29 patients (41%) presented invasive cancer foci in final histopathological assessment and nine patients (13%) had an axillary metastasis. Adjuvant therapy was given to 23 patients presenting invasive cancer. There were no local recurrences or distant metastases (0%, 95% confidence interval 0-0.051) during the mean follow-up of 71 mo. None of the factors evaluated predicted upstaging to invasive disease.

CONCLUSIONS

SSM with immediate breast reconstruction in patients with extensive DCIS is oncologically safe even when the margins are close or positive. Additional invasive foci and solitary axillary lymph node metastases are frequent but do not worsen the outcome.

Is conservative management of ductal carcinoma in situ risky?

Nonsurgical management of ductal carcinoma in situ is controversial and little is known about the long-term consequences of this approach. In this study, we aimed to determine the risk of (a) upstaging to invasive carcinoma at excision and (b) ipsilateral breast cancer events in patients who might have been eligible for nonsurgical management of DCIS trials. Data from women aged 20 years or older with a biopsy diagnosis of DCIS between January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2014 were collated. The women underwent biopsy and surgical resection (lumpectomy or mastectomy) and were treated with radiation or endocrine therapy as per treating physicians’ choice. The development of ipsilateral breast cancer events (IBEs) was analyzed in patients with at least 5 years of follow-up after standard of care therapy for DCIS. Subset-analysis was undertaken to identify the incidence of IBEs in patients eligible for nonsurgical management trials. The study population consisted of 378 patients with matched cases of biopsy and surgical excision. The overall upstaging rate to IBC was 14.3 and 12.9% for COMET, 8.8% for LORIS, and 10.7% for LORD trial “eligible” patients. At 5 years of follow-up, ~11.5% of overall and trial eligible patients developed IBEs of which approximately half were invasive IBEs. In conclusion, women with DCIS who would have been eligible for nonsurgical management trials have a significantly high risk of developing ipsilateral breast events within 5 years of diagnosis. Better selection criteria are needed to identify DCIS patients who are at very low risk for the development of IBC.

Influence of rurality on lymph node assessment among women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ and treated with mastectomy, SEER 2000-2015

PURPOSE

Despite recommendations from national organizations supporting the use of lymph node assessment (LNA) among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at time of mastectomy, variation in practice patterns across the United States has been observed. However, few studies have evaluated LNA differences and rurality.

METHODS

Data from the SEER Patterns of Care studies were used to identify women who underwent mastectomy for newly diagnosed DCIS during 2000, 2005, 2010, and 2015. Weighted multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate the association between rural-urban residence and the use of LNA. A subgroup analysis was performed comparing the use of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) versus sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB).

RESULTS

Of the 504 patients included in the analysis, approximately 81% underwent LNA at time of mastectomy with lower rates of use observed among rural patients (66%) versus urban patients (82%). In multivariate analysis, LNA increased over time (p < 0.0001), and rural patients were less likely to receive LNA compared to urban patients [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) = 0.19; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.06-0.66]. However, the likelihood of undergoing ALND relative to SLNB was lower among rural compared to urban patients (aOR = 0.16; 95% CI 0.03-0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Over time, the use of LNA with mastectomy has increased among DCIS patients. However, significant rural-urban differences in the use and type of LNA persist. The findings of this study highlight the importance of continued research aimed at examining the impact of rurality on the receipt of high-quality cancer care.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy may be unnecessary for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast that is small and diagnosed by preoperative biopsy

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines do not recommend that sentinel lymph node biopsy is routinely performed for ductal carcinoma in situ; thus, indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ remain controversial. In this study, we investigated whether sentinel lymph node biopsy can be safely omitted when ductal carcinoma in situ has been diagnosed by preoperative biopsy.

METHODS

We retrospectively analysed sentinel lymph node metastasis rates and upstaging to invasive cancer in surgical specimens, performed receiver operating characteristic analysis for ductal carcinoma in situ lesion size and assessed correlations with preoperative clinicopathological factors of 277 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed by preoperative biopsy at our institution.

RESULTS

Among 277 patients with sentinel lymph node biopsy, six (2.2%) had sentinel lymph node metastasis. All six were upstaged to invasive cancer by pathological examination of surgical specimens. In total, 69 patients (24.9%) were upstaged to invasive cancer. The mean size of ductal carcinoma in situ lesions on preoperative imaging was significantly larger for the 69 upstaged patients (50.0 mm) than for the non-upstaged patients (34.4 mm; P < 0.0001). Of the 277 patients with sentinel lymph node biopsy, 117 (42.2%) had preoperative ductal carcinoma in situ lesions <31.8 mm, which was identified as the optimal cut-off size by receiver operating characteristic analysis. Of these 117 patients, 96 (82.1%, 95% confidence interval: 73.9-88.5%) could be safely omitted from sentinel lymph node biopsy because all of them remained as ductal carcinoma in situ and had negative sentinel lymph nodes at surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Size of ductal carcinoma in situ lesions on preoperative diagnostic imaging is a predictor of diagnosis of invasive cancer on pathological examination of surgical specimens. Sentinel lymph node biopsy may be unnecessary in ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed by preoperative biopsy in patients with small lesions.

Multiple Microinvasion Foci in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Is Associated With an Increased Risk of Recurrence and Worse Survival Outcome

Background

Ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion (DCISM) was defined as one or more foci of invasion beyond the basement membrane within 1 mm. The size of primary lesion is associated with axillary status and prognosis in patients with invasive breast cancer; thus, it is of interest to determine whether multiple foci of microinvasion are associated with a higher risk of positive axillary status or worse long-term outcomes in patients with DCISM.

Methods

This study identified 359 patients with DCISM who had undergone axillary evaluation at our institute from January 2006 to December 2015. Patients were categorized as one focus or multiple foci (≥2 foci) according to the pathological results. Clinicopathological features, axillary status, and disease-free survival rate were obtained and analyzed.

Results

Of 359 patients, 233 (64.90%) had one focus of microinvasion and 126 (35.10%) had multiple foci. Overall, 242 (67.41%) and 117 (32.59%) patients underwent sentinel lymph nodes biopsy (SLNB) and axillary lymph nodes dissection (ALND), respectively. Isolated tumor cells were found in four (1.11%) patients and axillary metastasis rate was 2.51%. Neither axillary evaluation methods (P = 0.244) nor axillary metastasis rate (P = 0.559) was significantly different between patients with one focus and multiple foci. In univariate analysis, patients with multiple foci tended to have larger tumor size (P < 0.001), higher nuclear grade (P = 0.001), and higher rate of lymphatic vascular invasion (P = 0.034). Also, the proportion of positive HER2 (P = 0.027) and Ki67 level (P = 0.004) increased in patients with multiple foci, while in multivariate analysis, only tumor size showed significant difference (P = 0.009). Patients with multiple foci were more likely to receive chemotherapy (56.35 vs 40.77%; P = 0.028). At median 5.11 years follow-up, overall survival rate was 99.36%. Patients with multiple microinvasive foci had worse disease-free survival rate compared with one-focus patients (98.29 vs 93.01%, P = 0.032).

Conclusion

Even though the numbers of microinvasion were different and patients with multiple foci of microinvasion tended to have larger tumor size, there was no higher risk of axillary involvement compared with patients with one focus of microinvasion, while patients with multiple microinvasive foci had worse DFS rate. Thus, DCISM patients with multiple foci of microinvasion may be the criterion for more aggressive local–regional treatment. Optimization of adjuvant therapy in DCISM patients is required.