1
|
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
|
2
|
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
|
3
|
Flat epithelial atypia: What the radiologist needs to know in 2021. Clin Imaging 2021; 75:150-156. [PMID: 33592394 DOI: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.01.035] [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: 10/25/2020] [Revised: 01/10/2021] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/22/2022]
Abstract
The World Health Organization defines flat epithelial atypia (FEA), as a "presumably neoplastic intraductal alteration characterized by the replacement of native epithelial cells by a single layer or three to five layers of mildly atypical cells.". In this article, we will review FEA and compare its characteristics and differences with other atypical high-risk breast lesions. In addition, the imaging appearance of FEA will be described. Finally, we will discuss current outcomes and provide an update on its management based on the last recommendations.
Collapse
|
4
|
Wahab RA, Lee SJ, Mulligan ME, Zhang B, Mahoney MC. Upgrade Rate of Pure Flat Epithelial Atypia Diagnosed at Core Needle Biopsy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Radiol Imaging Cancer 2021; 3:e200116. [PMID: 33778758 PMCID: PMC7983762 DOI: 10.1148/rycan.2021200116] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/10/2020] [Revised: 11/11/2020] [Accepted: 11/19/2020] [Indexed: 11/11/2022]
Abstract
Purpose To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis to calculate the pooled upgrade rate of pure flat epithelial atypia (FEA) diagnosed at core needle biopsy (CNB). Materials and Methods A PubMed and Embase database search was performed in December 2019. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines were followed. Study quality and publication bias were assessed. The upgrade rate of pure FEA to cancer, invasive carcinoma, and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), as well as the co-occurrence rate of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), with 95% CIs were calculated. A random effect model was used to integrate the proportions and their corresponding 95% CI. Study heterogeneity was calculated using τ2 and I 2 . Results A total of 2482 cases of pure FEA across 42 studies (mean age range, 46-59 years) met inclusion criteria to be analyzed. Significant study heterogeneity was identified (τ2 = 0.001, I 2 = 67%). The pooled upgrade rates reported for pure FEA were 5% (95% CI: 3%, 6%) for breast cancer, 1% (95% CI: 0%, 2%) for invasive carcinoma, and 2% (95% CI: 1%, 3%) for DCIS. When more than 90% of calcifications were removed at CNB, the pooled upgrade rate was 0% (95% CI: 0%, 2%). The pooled co-occurrence rate of ADH at surgical excision was 17% (95% CI: 12%, 21%). Study quality was medium to high with a risk of publication bias (P < .01). Conclusion Pure FEA diagnosed at CNB should be surgically excised due to the pooled upgrade rate of 5% for breast cancer. If more than 90% of the targeted calcifications are removed by CNB for pure FEA, close imaging follow-up is recommended.Keywords: Biopsy/Needle Aspiration, Breast, MammographySupplemental material is available for this article.© RSNA, 2021.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Rifat A. Wahab
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 234 Goodman St, ML 0761, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0761 (R.A.W., S.J.L., M.E.M., M.C.M.); and Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (B.Z.)
| | - Su-Ju Lee
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 234 Goodman St, ML 0761, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0761 (R.A.W., S.J.L., M.E.M., M.C.M.); and Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (B.Z.)
| | - Margaret E. Mulligan
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 234 Goodman St, ML 0761, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0761 (R.A.W., S.J.L., M.E.M., M.C.M.); and Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (B.Z.)
| | - Bin Zhang
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 234 Goodman St, ML 0761, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0761 (R.A.W., S.J.L., M.E.M., M.C.M.); and Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (B.Z.)
| | - Mary C. Mahoney
- From the Department of Radiology, University of Cincinnati Medical Center, 234 Goodman St, ML 0761, Cincinnati, OH 45267-0761 (R.A.W., S.J.L., M.E.M., M.C.M.); and Division of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio (B.Z.)
| |
Collapse
|