The prognostic significance of co-existence ductal carcinoma in situ in invasive ductal breast cancer: a large population-based study and a matched case-control analysis

The impact of extensive intraductal component (EIC) on the genomic risk of recurrence in early hormone receptor positive breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Early invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) breast cancer often presents with a coexisting ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component, while about 5 % of cases present with an extensive (>25 %) intraductal component (EIC). The impact of EIC on the genomic risk of recurrence is unclear.

METHODS

Patients with early hormone receptor-positive HER2neu-negative (HR + HER2-) IDC breast cancer and a known OncotypeDX Breast Recurrence Score® (RS) who underwent breast surgery at our institute were included. Using a rule-based text-analysis algorithm, we analyzed pathological reports and categorized patients into three groups: EIC, non-extensive DCIS (DCIS-L), and pure-IDC (NO-DCIS). Genomic risk was determined using OncotypeDX RS.

RESULTS

A total of 33 (4.6 %) EIC cases, 377 (57.2 %) DCIS-L cases and 307 (42.8 %) NO-DCIS cases were identified. Patients in the EIC group were younger and had lower tumor grades than other groups. The distribution of genomic risk varied between the groups, with EIC tumors significantly less likely to have a high RS (>25) compared to DCIS-L and No-DCIS tumors (3 % vs 20 % and 20 %, respectively; p = 0.03). When adjusted to age, tumor size, grade and LNs involvement, both DCIS-L and NO-DCIS groups were significantly correlated with a higher probability of high RS compared to the EIC group (OR 12.3 and OR 13.1, respectively; p < 0.02). Moreover, patients with EIC had a lower likelihood for adjuvant chemotherapy recommendation.

CONCLUSIONS

In early HR + HER2- IDC, an EIC correlates with a reduced genomic recurrence risk. The impact on genomic risk seems to be influenced by the extent, not merely the presence, of DCIS.

Clinicopathological characteristics and prognostic factors in invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast

Introduction

Invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) treatment only relies on the standard treatment of nonspecific invasive breast cancer (NSIBC), and it remains controversial whether the survival of patients improves. Therefore, this study aimed to analyze the clinicopathological features of IMPC and to investigate the factors affecting its prognosis.

Material and methods

This retrospective cohort study included 104 IMPC patients who met the study's inclusion criteria out of a total of 4,532 patients with invasive breast cancer between January 2015 and December 2019. A contemporaneous cohort of 230 patients with non-specific invasive breast cancer (NSIBC) who underwent surgery was identified and matched using propensity scores.

Results

The survival rate for patients with IMPC ranged from 1.12% to 7.03%. Statistically significant differences were observed in the proportion of endocrine treatment, lymphatic invasion, estrogen receptor (ER)-positive rate, molecular subtypes, molecular typing, and 5-year loco-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) between the two cohorts (p < 0.05). The univariate analysis showed that T stage, N stage, lymphatic invasion, vascular invasion, ER-positive rate, and progesterone receptor (PR)-negative rate were all prognosis risk factors (p < 0.05) for IMPC. Furthermore, the multivariate analysis indicated that lymphatic invasion and N stage were independent prognostic factors (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

The incidence of micropapillary IMPC, among other pathological subtypes, is steadily increasing. ER-positive and PR-positive rates, as well as luminal subtypes, are frequent, with a concurrent increase in the 5-year locoregional recurrence rate. It would be interesting to compare the effect following these therapeutic modifications in larger cohorts in future studies.

Predictive factors for complete pathological response in hormone receptor-negative breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy

Complete pathological response (pCR) is a pivotal predictor of enhanced disease-free and overall survival rates in breast cancer patients. Accurate prediction of pCR is therefore of paramount clinical significance. This retrospective study aimed to delineate the factors associated with pCR through a comprehensive analysis encompassing clinical, pathological, and immunohistochemical profiling of patients diagnosed with hormone receptor-negative invasive ductal carcinomas. The study cohort was composed of 73 female patients. The cases were reviewed retrospectively using data from University Hospital "Tsaritsa Yoanna" in Sofia, spanning the ten-year period from 2010 to 2020. Univariate analyses demonstrated that patients diagnosed with a higher disease stage, specifically stage IIIb, exhibited a notable association with an unfavorable response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) [OR 4.5455 (95%CI 1.6810 - 12.2910); p = 0.0029]. Invasive carcinomas containing a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) component [OR 0.3333 (95%CI 0.1226 - 0.9063); p = 0.0313] or were classified as poorly differentiated [OR 0.3056 (95%CI 0.1159 - 0.8055); p = 0.0165] demonstrated an enhanced likelihood of achieving pCR. Tumors expressing CD10 [OR 0.1452 (95%CI 0.0515 - 0.4093); p = 0.0003] and tumors lacking EGFR [OR 3.9722 (95%CI 1.4691 - 10.7399); p = 0.0066] exhibited a markedly elevated rate of pCR. Multivariate regression analysis supported findings. In conclusion, hormone receptor-negative breast tumors stand to benefit from increased pCR rates if they encompass a DCIS component and exhibit CD10 expression while lacking EGFR expression. These findings underscore the importance of comprehensive profiling in predicting pCR outcomes in hormone receptor-negative breast cancer patients undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy.

Clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of triple-negative breast cancer invasive ductal carcinoma with ductal carcinoma in situ

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to compare and analyze the clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of patients with invasive ductal carcinoma coexisting with ductal carcinoma in situ (IDC-DCIS) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), and to explore the factors affecting the prognosis, so as to provide new ideas for clinical diagnosis and treatment of these patients.

METHODS

The patients with TNBC underwent surgery in the Department of Breast Surgery of Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital from October 2012 to December 2018 were retrospectively analyzed and divided into IDC-DCIS group and IDC group. The clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis of the two groups were compared. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

A total of 358 patients were enrolled. There were significant differences in age (P = 0.002), family history (P = 0.016), menopausal status (P = 0.003), KI-67% (P < 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.010), histologic grade of IDC (P < 0.001) and multifocal (P < 0.001) between the two groups. The disease-free survival (DFS) of the IDC-DCIS group was better than that of the IDC group (the 5-year DFS was 87.9% vs. 82.6%, P = 0.045), but the overall survival (OS) of the two groups was not statistically significant (the 5-year OS was 96.2% vs. 96.0%, P = 0.573). In addition, the coexistence of DCIS (P = 0.030), lymph node pathologic stage (P = 0.001), tumor location (P = 0.011), and adjuvant chemotherapy (P < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for DFS.

CONCLUSION

In TNBC, the IDC-DCIS group had less invasive biological characteristics. The DFS of the IDC-DCIS group was better than that of the IDC group, but there was no statistical difference in OS between the two groups. In addition, the coexistence of DCIS, lymph node stage, tumor location and adjuvant chemotherapy may be independent prognostic factors for DFS.

Imaging findings for response evaluation of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

In approximately 45% of invasive breast cancer (IBC) patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST), ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is present. Recent studies suggest response of DCIS to NST. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to summarise and examine the current literature on imaging findings for different imaging modalities evaluating DCIS response to NST. More specifically, imaging findings of DCIS pre- and post-NST, and the effect of different pathological complete response (pCR) definitions, will be evaluated on mammography, breast MRI, and contrast-enhanced mammography (CEM).

METHODS

PubMed and Embase databases were searched for studies investigating NST response of IBC, including information on DCIS. Imaging findings and response evaluation of DCIS were assessed for mammography, breast MRI, and CEM. A meta-analysis was conducted per imaging modality to calculate pooled sensitivity and specificity for detecting residual disease between pCR definition no residual invasive disease (ypT0/is) and no residual invasive or in situ disease (ypT0).

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies were included. Calcifications on mammography are related to DCIS, but can persist despite complete response of DCIS. In 20 breast MRI studies, an average of 57% of residual DCIS showed enhancement. A meta-analysis of 17 breast MRI studies confirmed higher pooled sensitivity (0.86 versus 0.82) and lower pooled specificity (0.61 versus 0.68) for detection of residual disease when DCIS is considered pCR (ypT0/is). Three CEM studies suggest the potential benefit of simultaneous evaluation of calcifications and enhancement.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Calcifications on mammography can remain despite complete response of DCIS, and residual DCIS does not always show enhancement on breast MRI and CEM. Moreover, pCR definition effects diagnostic performance of breast MRI. Given the lack of evidence on imaging findings of response of the DCIS component to NST, further research is demanded.

KEY POINTS

• Ductal carcinoma in situ has shown to be responsive to neoadjuvant systemic therapy, but imaging studies mainly focus on response of the invasive tumour. • The 31 included studies demonstrate that after neoadjuvant systemic therapy, calcifications on mammography can remain despite complete response of DCIS and residual DCIS does not always show enhancement on MRI and contrast-enhanced mammography. • The definition of pCR has impact on the diagnostic performance of MRI in detecting residual disease, and when DCIS is considered pCR, pooled sensitivity was slightly higher and pooled specificity slightly lower.

Isogenic Mammary Models of Intraductal Carcinoma Reveal Progression to Invasiveness in the Absence of a Non-Obligatory In Situ Stage

In breast cancer, progression to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) involves interactions between immune, myoepithelial, and tumor cells. Development of IDC can proceed through ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), a non-obligate, non-invasive stage, or IDC can develop without evidence of DCIS and these cases associate with poorer prognosis. Tractable, immune-competent mouse models are needed to help delineate distinct mechanisms of local tumor cell invasion and prognostic implications. To address these gaps, we delivered murine mammary carcinoma cell lines directly into the main mammary lactiferous duct of immune-competent mice. Using two strains of immune-competent mice (BALB/c, C57BL/6), one immune-compromised (severe combined immunodeficiency; SCID) C57BL/6 strain, and six different murine mammary cancer cell lines (D2.OR, D2A1, 4T1, EMT6, EO771, Py230), we found early loss of ductal myoepithelial cell differentiation markers p63, α-smooth muscle actin, and calponin, and rapid formation of IDC in the absence of DCIS. Rapid IDC formation also occurred in the absence of adaptive immunity. Combined, these studies demonstrate that loss of myoepithelial barrier function does not require an intact immune system, and suggest that these isogenic murine models may prove a useful tool to study IDC in the absence of a non-obligatory DCIS stage-an under-investigated subset of poor prognostic human breast cancer.

Proteomics-Based Identification of Dysregulated Proteins and Biomarker Discovery in Invasive Ductal Carcinoma, the Most Common Breast Cancer Subtype

Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) is the most common histological subtype of malignant breast cancer (BC), and accounts for 70–80% of all invasive BCs. IDC demonstrates great heterogeneity in clinical and histopathological characteristics, prognoses, treatment strategies, gene expressions, and proteomic profiles. Significant proteomic determinants of the progression from intraductal pre-invasive malignant lesions of the breast, which characterize a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), to IDC, are still poorly identified, validated, and clinically applied. In the era of “6P” medicine, it remains a great challenge to determine which patients should be over-treated versus which need to be actively monitored without aggressive treatment. The major difficulties for designating DCIS to IDC progression may be solved by understanding the integrated genomic, transcriptomic, and proteomic bases of invasion. In this review, we showed that multiple proteomics-based techniques, such as LC–MS/MS, MALDI-ToF MS, SELDI-ToF-MS, MALDI-ToF/ToF MS, MALDI-MSI or MasSpec Pen, applied to in-tissue, off-tissue, BC cell lines and liquid biopsies, improve the diagnosis of IDC, as well as its prognosis and treatment monitoring. Classic proteomics strategies that allow the identification of dysregulated protein expressions, biological processes, and interrelated pathway analyses based on aberrant protein–protein interaction (PPI) networks have been improved to perform non-invasive/minimally invasive biomarker detection of early-stage IDC. Thus, in modern surgical oncology, highly sensitive, rapid, and accurate MS-based detection has been coupled with “proteome point sampling” methods that allow for proteomic profiling by in vivo “proteome point characterization”, or by minimal tissue removal, for ex vivo accurate differentiation and delimitation of IDC. For the detection of low-molecular-weight proteins and protein fragments in bodily fluids, LC–MS/MS and MALDI-MS techniques may be coupled to enrich and capture methods which allow for the identification of early-stage IDC protein biomarkers that were previously invisible for MS-based techniques. Moreover, the detection and characterization of protein isoforms, including posttranslational modifications of proteins (PTMs), is also essential to emphasize specific molecular mechanisms, and to assure the early-stage detection of IDC of the breast.

A multi-omics signature to predict the prognosis of invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast

BACKGROUND

Precisely evaluating the prognosis of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the breast is challenging as most prognostic signatures use single-omics data based on gene or clinical information.

METHODS

Whole-slide images (WSIs), transcriptome, and clinical data of breast IDC were collected from the Cancer Genome Atlas Database. The cancer-associated fibroblast (CAF) gene sets were downloaded from the Molecular Signatures Database. The WSI feature was extracted by artificial feature engineering. The CAF prognostic genes were determined by the Gene Set Enrichment Analysis, the Wilcoxon test, and univariate Cox regression. The IDC patients were divided into the training and test sets. The prognostic signatures based on WSIs, IDC-CAFs, bi-omics, and tri-omics were constructed using multivariate Cox regression. The samples were divided into low- and high-risk groups according to the median risk score. The Kaplan-Meier survival and receiver operating characteristic curves were applied to validate the prediction performance of the four signatures.

RESULTS

In total, 508 IDC patients with complete data were included. The area under the curve (AUC) of single-omics signature based on WSI characteristics and CAFs was 0.765 and 0.775, whereas the AUC of bi-omics was 0.823. The tri-omics signature based on WSIs, CAFs, and lymph node status demonstrated the best predictive value with an AUC of 0.897.

CONCLUSION

The multi-omics signature based on WSIs, CAFs, and clinical characteristics showed excellent prediction ability in breast IDC patients, whose risk factors can also provide a valuable diagnostic reference for the clinical course.

Does concomitant ductal carcinoma in situ affect the clinical outcome in breast cancer patients with invasive ductal carcinoma: An Asian perspective

Background

Aim

Methods and Results

Conclusion

A comparative clinicopathological and survival analysis of synchronous bilateral breast cancers

OBJECTIVE

The present study aimed to explore the clinicopathological characteristics, potential heterogeneity and prognostic factors in synchronous bilateral breast cancer (SBBC).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review and paired comparison of the clinicopathological characteristics of 114 patients with SBBC in the Peking Union Medical College Hospital from January 2008 to September 2019. The prognostic significance of triple negativity status and coexistence ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with bilateral invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type (IDC-NST) was analyzed in SBBC.

RESULTS

Most bilateral lesions on both sides were of IDC-NST, grade 2, luminal subtype, and stage I. Although most lesions were concordant between the left and right side, discordances were observed in histological type (25 cases, 21.9%), histological grade (31 cases, 27.2%), pTNM (61 cases, 53.5%), molecular subtypes (20 cases, 17.5%), and immunohistochemical staining of ER (18 cases, 15.8%), PR (26 cases, 22.8%), and HER2 (12 cases, 10.5%). Moreover, there was no significant difference in disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) between IDC-NST with coexisting DCIS on both sides and IDC-NST with coexisting DCIS on one side or pure IDC-NST. SBBC with triple negativity on both sides exhibited a significantly shorter DFS and OS when compared with triple negativity on one side or non-triple negativity on both sides (p<0.001), and remained an independent prognostic factor by multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

A considerable proportion of discordance in clinicopathological characteristics is observed in SBBC, supporting the necessity of comprehensive pathological examination including immunohistochemical testing on both sides in clinical practice. Moreover, SBBC with triple negativity on both sides is a prognostic for poor survival.

Pathological underestimation and biomarkers concordance rates in breast cancer patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ at preoperative biopsy

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) often upgrade to invasive breast cancer at surgery. The current study aimed to identify factors associated with pathological underestimation and evaluate concordance rates of biomarkers between biopsy and surgery. Patients diagnosed with DCIS at needle biopsy from 2009 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify factors associated with pathological underestimation. Concordance rates between paired biopsy samples and surgical specimens were evaluated. A total of 735 patients with pure DCIS at biopsy were included, and 392 patients (53.3%) underwent pathological underestimation at surgery. Multivariate analysis demonstrated that tumor size > 5.0 cm [odds ratio (OR) 1.79], MRI BI-RADS ≥ 5 categories (OR 2.03), and high nuclear grade (OR 2.01) were significantly associated with pathological underestimation. Concordance rates of ER, PR, HER2 status and Ki-67 between biopsy and surgery were 89.6%, 91.9%, 94.8%, and 76.4% in lesions without pathological underestimation, and were 86.4%, 93.2%, 98.2% and 76.3% for in situ components in lesions with pathological underestimation. Meanwhile, in situ components and invasive components at surgery had concordance rates of 92.9%, 93.8%, 97.4%, and 86.5% for those biomarkers, respectively. In conclusion, lesions diagnosed as DCIS at biopsy have a high rate of pathological underestimation, which was associated with larger tumor size, higher MRI BI-RADS category, and higher nuclear grade. High concordances were found in terms of ER, PR, and HER2 status evaluation between biopsy and surgery, regardless of the pathological underestimation.

Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: State-of-the-Art Review

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a nonobligate precursor of invasive cancer, and its detection, diagnosis, and management are controversial. DCIS incidence grew with the expansion of screening mammography programs in the 1980s and 1990s, and DCIS is viewed as a major driver of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. For pathologists, the diagnosis and classification of DCIS is challenging due to undersampling and interobserver variability. Understanding the progression from normal breast tissue to DCIS and, ultimately, to invasive cancer is limited by a paucity of natural history data with multiple proposed evolutionary models of DCIS initiation and progression. Although radiologists are familiar with the classic presentation of DCIS as asymptomatic calcifications at mammography, the expanded pool of modalities, advanced imaging techniques, and image analytics have identified multiple potential biomarkers of histopathologic characteristics and prognosis. Finally, there is growing interest in the nonsurgical management of DCIS, including active surveillance, to reduce overtreatment and provide patients with more personalized management options. However, current biomarkers are not adept at enabling identification of occult invasive disease at biopsy or accurately predicting the risk of progression to invasive disease. Several active surveillance trials are ongoing and are expected to better identify women with low-risk DCIS who may avoid surgery.

Is Carboxypeptidase B1 a Prognostic Marker for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ?

Simple Summary

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is an early-stage breast cancer (BC), in which tumor cells are growing in a localized duct of the mammary gland. DCIS is considered a precursor disease for invasive BC and, therefore, treated as soon as it is identified. However, low-grade DCIS can be confused with atypical ductal hyperplasia, which is not a malignant lesion, leading to unnecessary surgery in around 70% of women with suspected DCIS. On the other hand, if left untreated, a DCIS has the potential to progress to IDC. In this retrospective study, we identified a gene signature, carboxypeptidase B1 (CPB1), the expression of which could help differentiate DCIS from an ADH lesion and DCIS that may progress to an invasive BC.

Abstract

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is considered a non-obligatory precursor for invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). Around 70% of women with atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) undergo unnecessary surgery due to the difficulty in differentiating ADH from low-grade DCIS. If untreated, 14–60% of DCIS progress to IDC, highlighting the importance of identifying a DCIS gene signature. Human transcriptome data of breast tissue samples representing each step of BC progression were analyzed and high expression of carboxypeptidase B1 (CPB1) expression strongly correlated with DCIS. This was confirmed by quantitative PCR in breast tissue samples and cell lines model. High CPB1 expression correlated with better survival outcome, and mRNA level was highest in DCIS than DCIS adjacent to IDC and IDC. Moreover, loss of CPB1 in a DCIS cell line led to invasive properties associated with activation of HIF1α, FN1, STAT3 and SPP1 and downregulation of SFRP1 and OS9. The expression of CPB1 could predict 90.1% of DCIS in a cohort consisting of DCIS and IDC. We identified CPB1, a biomarker that helps differentiate DCIS from ADH or IDC and in predicting if a DCIS is likely to progress to IDC, thereby helping clinicians in their decisions.

Comparison of clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis among patients with pure invasive ductal carcinoma, invasive ductal carcinoma coexisted with invasive micropapillary carcinoma, and invasive ductal carcinoma coexisted with ductal carcinoma in situ: A retrospective cohort study

This paper aimed to analyze the clinicopathological characteristics of invasive ductal carcinoma with an invasive micropapillary carcinoma component (IDC + IMPC), invasive ductal carcinoma with a ductal carcinoma in situ component (IDC + DCIS), and compare the clinicopathological characteristics and prognosis to those of IDC.A total of 1713 patients (130 IDC + IMPC cases, 352 IDC + DCIS cases, and 1231 pure IDC cases) who underwent appropriate surgery from June 2011 to September 2017 were retrospectively selected.Compared to the pure IDC and IDC + DCIS patients, the IDC + IMPC patients presented with more aggressive characteristics, such as a higher proportion of vascular invasion (P < .001), fewer progesterone receptor (PR)-positive patients (P < .001), a lower proportion of cases in American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I (P < .001), a higher recurrence risk (P < .001), more deaths (P < .001), and more metastatic cases (P < .001). Compared to the pure IDC and IDC + IMPC patients, the IDC+DCIS patients presented with less aggressive characteristics, such as a higher proportion of estrogen receptor-positive patients (P < .001) and PR-positive patients (P < .001), a lower proportion of cases with nerve invasion (P < .001) and vascular invasion (P < .001), a higher proportion of cases in American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I (P < .001), fewer deaths (P < .001), and fewer metastatic cases (P < .001). The patients with IDC + DCIS had significantly better disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) compared to those with pure IDC and IDC + IMPC (P < .001). The patients with IDC + IMPC had significantly worse DFS and OS compared to those with pure IDC and IDC + DCIS (P < .001). In univariate analysis, the presence of an IMPC component in IDC (P = .007), estrogen receptor status (P = .05), and PR status (P = .003) were factors associated with OS. In multivariate analysis, coexisting IMPC (P = .04) was the only independent prognostic factor associated with OS.Compared to IDC and IDC + DCIS, IDC + IMPC had more aggressive characteristics and significantly worse DFS and OS. Compared to IDC and IDC + IMPC, IDC + DCIS had less aggressive characteristics and significantly better DFS and OS.