Meshkat B, Prichard RS, Al-Hilli Z, Bass GA, Quinn C, O'Doherty A, Rothwell J, Geraghty J, Evoy D, McDermott EW. A comparison of clinical-pathological characteristics between symptomatic and interval breast cancer.
Breast 2015;
24:278-82. [PMID:
25771080 DOI:
10.1016/j.breast.2015.02.032]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/22/2014] [Revised: 02/09/2015] [Accepted: 02/22/2015] [Indexed: 10/23/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND
An association between interval breast cancers (cancer detected after a normal mammogram and before the next scheduled mammogram) and tumour aggressiveness has been postulated which may reflect their relatively poor overall prognosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate known prognostic features of screen detected breast cancers compared to interval breast cancers.
METHODS
Patients diagnosed with breast cancer between January 2010 and 2013 at a single unit of the National Breast Screening Program (NBSP) in Ireland and those between the ages of 50 and 65 diagnosed at a symptomatic breast clinic were included in the study. Patients who had not had a screening mammogram within the proceeding two years or had a previous history of breast cancer were excluded. Data were retrospectively collected on patient demographics, tumour type, grade, hormone receptor status and stage of disease at presentation.
RESULTS
There were 915 patients included in the study, with 92% (n = 844) diagnosed through the NBSP. Ductal carcinoma in-situ accounted for 19% (n = 160) of screen-detected breast cancers but only 2.8% of interval cancers (p < 0.05). The most common type of invasive cancer was invasive ductal carcinoma. Tumour grade was significantly higher in interval breast cancers (p < 0.05). Interval cancers were identified at a significantly higher stage (Stage 1 versus 2; p < 0.001) than screen-detected cancers. Interval breast cancers were less likely to be ER positive (76% versus 81%; p < 0.05) and significantly more likely to over-express HER2 (20% vs 10%, p < 0.05) than screen-detected cancers.
CONCLUSION
This study highlights the fact that interval cancers appear to have a number of adverse prognostic markers for overall breast cancer survival when compared to women with screen-detected breast cancers. Interval cancers were more likely to be invasive, of a higher grade and stage and with a greater predominance of HER2 and triple negative molecular subtypes. Therefore this heterogeneous group of tumours may be biologically more aggressive and account disproportionately to overall breast cancer mortality.
Collapse