Practice protocol for the examination of specimens removed from patients with cancer of the breast: A publication of the Cancer Committee, College of American Pathologists

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 121, Issue 1, 1997, Pages 27-33

  Henson, Donald Earl ^c   Oberman, Harold A ^a   Hutter, Robert V P ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

^b Saint Barnabas Healthcare System   (United States)

^c NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BREAST BIOPSY; BREAST CANCER; CANCER CLASSIFICATION; CANCER SURGERY; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; CYTOLOGY; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; MASTECTOMY; MEDICAL SOCIETY; PATHOLOGIST; PATIENT INFORMATION; REVIEW;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; FEMALE; HUMANS; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; SPECIMEN HANDLING; TISSUE FIXATION; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0030935530     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Review

References (13)

1. Leitner S, Swern AS, Weinberger D, Duncan LJ, Hutter RVP. Predictors of recurrence for patients with small (one centimeter or less) localized breast cancer (T1a,b N0 M). Cancer. 1995;76:2266-2274.
2. Rosen PP, Oberman HA. Tumors of the mammary gland. In: Atlas of Tumor Pathology. 3rd ed, fascicle 7. Washington, DC: Armed Forces Institute of Pathology, American Registry of Pathology; 1993.
3. Histological typing of breast tumours. 2nd ed. In: International Classification of Tumours. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1981.
4. Henson DE, Ries L, Freedman LS, Carriaga M. Relationship among outcome, stage of disease, and histologic grade for 22,616 cases of breast cancer. Cancer. 1991;68:2142-2149.
5. Bloom HJG, Richardson WW. Histological grading and prognosis in breast carcinoma: a study of 1049 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer, 1957;11:359-377.
6. Elston CW, Ellis JO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I: the value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a long study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology, 1991;19:403-410.
7. Holland R, Peterse J, Millis RR, et al. Ductal Carcinoma in situ: a proposal for a new classification. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1994;11:167-180.
8. Lee A, DeLellis R, Silverman M, Heatley GJ, Wolfe H. Prognostic significance of peritumoral lymphatic and blood vessel invasion in node-negative carcinoma of the breast. J Clin Oncol. 1990;8:1457-1465.
9. Bonnier P, Charpin C, Lejeune C, et al. Inflammatory carcinomas of the breast: a clinical, pathological, or a clinical and pathological definition. Int J Cancer. 1995;62:382-385.
10. Battifora H, Mehta P, Ahn C, Estaban JM. Estrogen receptor immunohistochemical assay in paraffin embedded tissue: a better gold standard? Appl Immunohistochem. 1993;1:39-45.
11. Smitt MC, Nowels KW, Zdeblick MJ, et al. The importance of the lumpectomy surgical margin status in long term results of breast conservation. Cancer. 1995;76:259-267.
12. Beahrs O, Henson DE, Hutter RVP, Kennedy BJ. American Joint Committee on Cancer. In: Manual for Staging of Cancer. 4th ed. Philadelphia, Pa: JB Lippin-cott Co; 1992.
13. Hermanek P, Sobin LH. TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. 4th ed. New York, NY: Springer-Verlag; 1987.