Archive for the Breast Cancer category.

New Treatments for Breast Cancer 2

Posted on October 20th, 2007 by admin in Breast Cancer

Papillary and Micropapillary

Papillary or micropapillary DCIS is a low- to moderate-grade subtype of intraductal carcinoma composed of a uniform population of cells that forms papillary extensions into the ductal spaces. These projections may coalesce to create an “arcuate” or “Roman bridge” pattern. This subtype is well-differentiated and is only rarely seen in conjunction with cellular necrosis.
Cribriform

The cribriform subtype is the most commonly encountered architectural pattern of DCIS and is identified by ductal epithelium organized into extracellular lumina, often creating a “lacy” appearance. The cells are usually of uniform size and shape with a large, centrally placed nucleus. Occasionally, the cribriform pattern may be associated with cellular necrosis, and the nuclear grade can range from well- to poorly differentiated.
Solid

The solid pattern of DCIS is characterized by complete obliteration of the ductal lumen by cellular proliferation. Although the cellular pattern is often monotonous, the tumor grade can range from very well-differentiated lesions to the more frequently seen high-grade neoplasms.
Comedocarcinoma

Comedocarcinoma has been shown to carry the worst prognosis among all architectural subtypes. It is identified by the presence of necrotic cellular debris within the ductal lumen. Although the presence of comedo histology was once thought to be the most important histologic determinant of prognosis, it has recently been realized that nuclear grade is probably the more important factor. In comedocarcinoma, the cells are typically large, with marked nuclear atypia, and calcifications are often present in association with the necrosis. Microinvasion, when present, is most likely to occur in conjunction with dense, high-grade, comedo-type lesions, and often necessitates treatment as a T1a invasive carcinoma.

Multicentricity in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

Multicentricity is defined as disease present in more than one quadrant of the breast and was historically used to justify mastectomy for DCIS. Serial sub gross analysis of breast specimens following mastectomy for intraductal carcinomas has, however, demonstrated a low incidence of true multicentricity. Holland’s data showed that only 1 patient in 60 had multiple foci of tumor separated by 4 or more cm. The incidence of multifocal disease, defined as distinct tumor foci separated by at least 1 cm of intervening tissue, was somewhat higher, at 8%. Interestingly, the well-differentiated DCIS were more likely to demonstrate a multifocal distribution pattern than the poorly differentiated tumors (70% versus 10%). It has been postulated that this finding may reflect a field-defect phenomenon in well-differentiated DCIS that may not apply to poorly differentiated intraductal cancers or to invasive disease.

In the literature, estimates of multicentricity in DCIS range widely, from 2% to 78%. This discrepancy is attributable to differences in both the definition and mode of detection, with some authors defining multicentric disease as foci of tumor found in more than one quadrant, regardless of proximity to the index lesion. What has become clear, however, is that, contrary to initial dogma, treatment of DCIS with breast-conserving surgery can be oncologically appropriate in many patients, and higher grade intraductal lesions may be more amenable to lumpectomy because of their lower likelihood of multifocality. This question has not been specifically addressed in the large prospective randomized trials, which have excluded patients with either large or high-grade tumors. Some higher grade DCIS lesions, however, are still more optimally treated with mastectomy, as poorly differentiated intraductal cancers are often larger at diagnosis and frequently span more than one quadrant.

New Treatments for Breast Cancer

Posted on October 18th, 2007 by admin in Breast Cancer

Management of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

The optimal management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is one of the greatest challenges in breast disease faced by clinicians today. Ductal carcinoma in situ comprises 20% to 40% of all mammogram-directed biopsies. The National Cancer Database reports that DCIS comprised 7% of all newly diagnosed breast cancers in 1985; a decade later, this number had doubled to 14%, and this trend is expected to continue.

Confusion surrounding the optimal treatment of DCIS continues. Ductal carcinoma in situ is not life-threatening per se unless it progresses to invasive cancer. DCIS may, however, be treated even more aggressively (i.e., with mastectomy) than might be recommended for invasive cancers. In fact, from 1985 to 1992, the mastectomy rate for breast cancer increased largely because it was the primary treatment for women with DCIS. The use of breast-conserving treatment for infiltrating carcinomas of the breast has become well-established, but a similar body of knowledge is only now being gathered for DCIS. Thus, the roles of lumpectomy, adjuvant radiation, and chemoprevention in the treatment algorithm for DCIS are only beginning to be understood. There is a growing body of research in molecular markers for DCIS, and the incorporation of such data into clinical decision making will be one of the challenges entering the next decade.

Histopathologic Considerations

Intraductal carcinoma of the breast, or DCIS, is defined as a group of neoplasms arising from the ductal epithelium of breast tissue confined by the basement membrane and therefore not invading the surrounding stroma. As such, it is largely a malignancy confined to the breast itself, with little or no risk of regional or distant spread.

The histologic diagnosis of intraductal carcinoma is made on standard hematoxylin and eosin staining without routine analysis of tumor markers or hormone receptors. Although initially there was no clear consensus regarding the histologic classification of DCIS, seminal work by Lagios, Page, and others has established a common working lexicon. Nevertheless, in a recent study where six independent pathologists were asked to classify 16 cases of DCIS as low- or high-grade, there was disagreement in 44% of the cases. Addition of an intermediate grade of intraductal carcinoma improved the concordance to 94%, but this study does suggest that there remain significant discrepancies in the diagnosis and histopathologic characterization of DCIS. Although numerous pathologic categories and grading systems have been proposed, there have historically been four distinct architectural subtypes of DCIS, and these merit brief discussion.