Pre-operative diagnosis of breast cancer in screening: Problems and pitfalls

Pathology

Volumn 41, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 3-17

  Provenzano, Elena ^a   Pinder, Sarah E ^b,c  

^a ADDENBROOKE S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^b KING'S COLLEGE LONDON   (United Kingdom)

^c GUY S HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Breast; Core biopsy; Histopathology; Immunohistochemistry; Pitfalls

Indexed keywords

ADENOSQUAMOUS CARCINOMA; APOCRINE CARCINOMA; BREAST CANCER; BREAST TUMOR; CANCER LOCALIZATION; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; CARCINOMA IN SITU; CELL DAMAGE; CELL PROLIFERATION; CYTODIAGNOSIS; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; EPITHELIUM CELL; FALSE NEGATIVE RESULT; FIBROMATOSIS; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INVASIVE CARCINOMA; LOBULAR NEOPLASIA; LYMPHOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; METASTASIS; MUCOCELE; NEEDLE BIOPSY; PAPILLOMA; PATHOLOGIST; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; REVIEW; SCAR; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; SPINDLE CELL CARCINOMA;

EID: 57749088472     PISSN: 00313025     EISSN: 14653931     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00313020802563478     Document Type: Article

References (83)

1. Ernst MF, Voogd AC, Coebergh JW, Roukema JA. Breast carcinoma diagnosis, treatment, and prognosis before and after the introduction of mass mammographic screening. Cancer 2004; 100: 1337-44.
2. Shen Y, Yang Y, Inoue LY, Munsell MF, Miller AB, Berry DA. Role of detection method in predicting breast cancer survival: analysis of randomized screening trials. JNCI 2005; 97: 1195-203.
3. Fischer U, Baum F, Obenauer S, et al. Comparative study in patients with microcalcifications: full-field digital mammography vs screen-film mammography. Eur Radiol 2002; 12: 2679-83.
4. Carder PJ, Liston JC. Will the spectrum of lesions prompting a 'B3' breast core biopsy increase the benign biopsy rate? J Clin Pathol 2003; 56: 133-8.
5. Dahlstrom JE, Sutton S, Jain S. Histological precision of stereotactic core biopsy in diagnosis of malignant and premalignant breast lesions. Histopathology 1996; 28: 537-41.
6. Hoorntje LE, Peeters PH, Mali WP, Borel Rinkes IH. Vacuumassisted breast biopsy: a critical review. Eur J Cancer 2003; 39: 1676-83.
7. Kettritz U, Rotter K, Schreer I, et al. Stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy in 2874 patients: a multicenter study. Cancer 2004; 100: 245-51.
8. Pinder SE, Provenzano E, Reis-Filho JS. Lobular in situ neoplasia and columnar cell lesions: diagnosis in breast core biopsies and implications for management. Pathology 2007; 39: 208-16.
9. Shah VI, Raju U, Chitale D, Deshpande V, Gregory N, Strand V. False-negative core needle biopsies of the breast: an analysis of clinical, radiologic, and pathologic findings in 27 concecutive cases of missed breast cancer. Cancer 2003; 97: 1824-31.
10. Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Glassman JR, et al. Analysis of cancers not diagnosed at stereotactic core breast biopsy. Radiology 1997; 203: 151-7.
11. Renshaw AA. Adequate histologic sampling of breast core needle biopsies. Arch Path Lab Med 2001; 125: 1055-7.
12. Margolin FR, Kaufman L, Jacobs RP, Denny SR, Schrumpf JD. Stereotactic core breast biopsy of malignant calcifications: diagnostic yield of cores with and cores without calcifications on specimen radiographs. Radiology 2004; 233: 251-4.
13. Schnitt SJ, Vincent-Salomon A. Columnar cell lesions of the breast. Adv Anat Pathol 2003; 10: 113-24.
14. Schnitt SJ. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: flat epithelial atypia-classification, pathologic features and clinical significance. Breast Cancer Res 2003; 5: 263-8.
15. Feeley L, Quinn CM. Columnar cell lesions of the breast. Histopathology 2008; 52: 11-9.
16. Simpson PT, Gale T, Reis-Filho JS, et al. Columnar cell lesions of the breast: the missing link in breast cancer progression? A morphological and molecular analysis. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 734-46.
17. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Rados MS. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast. A long-term follow-up study. Cancer 1985; 55: 2698-708.
18. Pinder SE, Ellis IO. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) - current definitions and classification. Breast Cancer Res 2003; 5: 254-7.
19. Putti TC, Pinder SE, Elston CW, Lee AH, Ellis IO. Breast pathology practice: most common problems in a consultation service. Histopathology 2005; 47: 445-57.
20. Dillon MF, McDermott EW, Hill AD, O'Doherty A, O'Higgins N, Quinn CM. Predictive value of breast lesions of "uncertain malignant potential" and "suspicious for malignancy" determined by needle core biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2007; 14: 704-11.
21. Lee AH, Denley HE, Pinder SE, et al. Excision biopsy findings of patients with breast needle core biopsies reported as suspicious of malignancy (B4) or lesion of uncertain malignant potential (B3). Histopathology 2003; 42: 331-6.
22. Jacobs TW, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ. Nonmalignant lesions in breast core needle biopsies: to excise or not to excise? Am J Surg Pathol 2002; 26: 1095-110.
23. Brem RF, Behrndt VS, Sanow L, Gatewood OM. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: histologic underestimation of carcinoma in tissue harvested from impalpable breast lesions using 11-gauge stereotactically guided directional vacuum-assisted biopsy. AJR 1999; 172: 1405-7.
24. Burbank F. Stereotactic breast biopsy of atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ lesions: improved accuracy with directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 1997; 202: 843-7.
25. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Bilous M, Vezzosi V, Bianchi S. Borderline breast core needle histology: predictive values for malignancy in lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3). Br J Cancer 2007; 96: 1253-7.
26. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Ellis I, Ambrogetti D. Underestimation of malignancy of breast core-needle biopsy: concepts and precise overall and category-specific estimates. Cancer 2007; 109: 487-95.
27. Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology 1997; 204: 485-8.
28. Jackman RJ, Nowels KW, Shepard MJ, Finkelstein SI, Marzoni FA Jr. Stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy of 450 nonpalpable breast lesions with surgical correlation in lesions with cancer or atypical hyperplasia. Radiology 1994; 193: 91-5.
29. Ely KA, Carter BA, Jensen RA, Simpson JF, Page DL. Core biopsy of the breast with atypical ductal hyperplasia: a probabilistic approach to reporting. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 1017-21.
30. Bagnall MJ, Evans AJ, Wilson AR, et al. Predicting invasion in mammographically detected microcalcification. Clin Radiol 2001; 56: 828-32.
31. Renshaw AA. Predicting invasion in the excision specimen from breast core needle biopsy specimens with only ductal carcinoma in situ. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2002; 126: 39-41.
32. Rutstein LA, Johnson RR, Poller WR, et al. Predictors of residual invasive disease after core needle biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Breast J 2007; 13: 251-7.
33. Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, et al. Stereotactic breast biopsy of nonpalpable lesions: determinants of ductal carcinoma in situ underestimation rates. Radiology 2001; 218: 497-502.
34. Won B, Reynolds HE, Lazaridis CL, Jackson VP. Stereotactic biopsy of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using an 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device: persistent underestimation of disease. AJR 1999; 173: 227-9.
35. Yen TW, Hunt KK, Ross MI, et al. Predictors of invasive breast cancer in patients with an initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: a guide to selective use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in management of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Am Coll Surg 2005; 200: 516-26.
36. Kennedy M, Masterson AV, Kerin M, Flanagan F. Pathology and clinical relevance of radial scars: a review. J Clin Pathol 2003; 56: 721-4.
37. Cawson JN, Malara F, Kavanagh A, Hill P, Balasubramanium G, Henderson M. Fourteen-gauge needle core biopsy of mammographically evident radial scars: is excision necessary? Cancer 2003; 97: 345-51.
38. Douglas-Jones AG, Denson JL, Cox AC, Harries IB, Stevens G. Radial scar lesions of the breast diagnosed by needle core biopsy: analysis of cases containing occult malignancy. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60: 295-8.
39. Berg JC, Visscher DW, Vierkant RA, et al. Breast cancer risk in women with radial scars in benign breast biopsies. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008; 108: 167-74.
40. Doyle EM, Banville N, Quinn CM, et al. Radial scars/complex sclerosing lesions and malignancy in a screening programme: incidence and histological features revisited. Histopathology 2007; 50: 607-14.
41. Brenner RJ, Jackman RJ, Parker SH, et al. Percutaneous core needle biopsy of radial scars of the breast: when is excision necessary? AJR 2002; 179: 1179-84.
42. Douglas-Jones AG, Pace DP. Pathology of R4 spiculated lesions in the breast screening programme. Histopathology 1997; 30: 214-20.
43. Farshid G, Rush G. Assessment of 142 stellate lesions with imaging features suggestive of radial scar discovered during population-based screening for breast cancer. Am J Surg Pathol 2004; 28: 1626-31.
44. Sloane JP, Mayers MM. Carcinoma and atypical hyperplasia in radial scars and complex sclerosing lesions: importance of lesion size and patient age. Histopathology 1993; 23: 225-31.
45. Gobbi H, Jensen RA, Simpson JF, Olson SJ, Page DL. Atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast associated with perineural invasion. Hum Pathol 2001; 32: 785-90.
46. Collins LC, Schnitt SJ. Papillary lesions of the breast: selected diagnostic and management issues. Histopathology 2008; 52: 20-9.
47. Boecker W, Buerger H, Schmitz K, et al. Ductal epithelial proliferations of the breast: a biological continuum? Comparative genomic hybridization and high-molecular-weight cytokeratin expression patterns. J Pathol 2001; 195: 415-21.
48. Otterbach F, Bankfalvi A, Bergner S, Decker T, Krech R, Boecker W. Cytokeratin 5/6 immunohistochemistry assists the differential diagnosis of atypical proliferations of the breast. Histopathol 2000; 37: 232-40.
49. Hoda SA, Rosen PP. Practical considerations in the pathologic diagnosis of needle core biopsies of breast. Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 118: 101-8.
50. Ivan D, Selinko V, Sahin AA, Sneige N, Middleton LP. Accuracy of core needle biopsy diagnosis in assessing papillary breast lesions: histologic predictors of malignancy. Mod Pathol 2004; 17: 165-71.
51. Agoff SN, Lawton TJ. Papillary lesions of the breast with and without atypical ductal hyperplasia: can we accurately predict benign behavior from core needle biopsy? Am J Clin Pathol 2004; 122: 440-3.
52. Ashkenazi I, Ferrer K, Sekosan M, et al. Papillary lesions of the breast discovered on percutaneous large core and vacuum-assisted biopsies: reliability of clinical and pathological parameters in identifying benign lesions. Am J Surg 2007; 194: 183-8.
53. Rizzo M, Lund MJ, Oprea G, Schniederjan M, Wood WC, Mosunjac M. Surgical follow-up and clinical presentation of 142 breast papillary lesions diagnosed by ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15: 1040-7.
54. Douglas-Jones AG, Verghese A. Diagnostic difficulty arising from displaced epithelium after core biopsy in intracystic papillary lesions of the breast. J Clin Pathol 2002; 55: 780-3.
55. Hanby AM, Hughes TA. In situ and invasive lobular neoplasia of the breast. Histopathology 2008; 52: 58-66.
56. Foster MC, Helvie MA, Gregory NE, Rebner M, Nees AV, Paramagul C. Lobular carcinoma in situ or atypical lobular hyperplasia at core-needle biopsy: is excisional biopsy necessary? Radiology 2004; 231: 813-9.
57. Cohen MA. Cancer upgrades at excisional biopsy after diagnosis of atypical lobular hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ at core-needle biopsy: some reasons why. Radiology 2004; 231: 617-21.
58. Elsheikh TM, Silverman JF. Follow-up surgical excision is indicated when breast core needle biopsies show atypical lobular hyperplasia or lobular carcinoma in situ: a correlative study of 33 patients with review of the literature. Am J Surg Pathol 2005; 29: 534-43.
59. Menon S, Porter GJ, Evans AJ, et al. The significance of lobular neoplasia on needle core biopsy of the breast. Virchows Arch 2008; 452: 473-9.
60. Page DL, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD, Jensen RA, Plummer WD Jr, Simpson JF. Atypical lobular hyperplasia as a unilateral predictor of breast cancer risk: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2003; 361: 125-9.
61. Da Silva L, Parry S, Reid L, et al. Aberrant expression of E-cadherin in lobular carcinomas of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol 2008; 32: 773-83.
62. Shin SJ, Rosen PP. Excisional biopsy should be performed if lobular carcinoma in situ is seen on needle core biopsy. Arch Path Lab Med 2002; 126: 697-701.
63. Fadare O, Dadmanesh F, Alvarado-Cabrero I, et al. Lobular intraepithelial neoplasia [lobular carcinoma in situ] with comedo-type necrosis: A clinicopathologic study of 18 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 2006; 30: 1445-53.
64. Brem RF, Lechner MC, Jackman RJ, et al. Lobular neoplasia at percutaneous breast biopsy: variables associated with carcinoma at surgical excision. AJR 2008; 190: 637-41.
65. Wells CA, El-Ayat GA. Non-operative breast pathology: apocrine lesions. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60: 1313-20.
66. O'Malley FP, Bane A. An update on apocrine lesions of the breast. Histopathology 2008; 52: 3-10.
67. Leal C, Henrique R, Monteiro P, et al. Apocrine ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: histologic classification and expression of biologic markers. Hum Pathol 2001; 32: 487-93.
68. Hoda SA, Rosen PP. Observations on the pathologic diagnosis of selected unusual lesions in needle core biopsies of breast. Breast J 2004; 10: 522-7.
69. Renshaw AA. Can mucinous lesions of the breast be reliably diagnosed by core needle biopsy? Am J Clin Pathol 2002; 118: 82-4.
70. Renshaw AA. Minimal (< or = 0.1 cm) invasive carcinoma in breast core needle biopsies. Incidence, sampling, associated findings, and follow-up. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2004; 128: 996-9.
71. Adem C, Reynolds C, Adlakha H, Roche PC, Nascimento AG. Wide spectrum screening keratin as a marker of metaplastic spindle cell carcinoma of the breast: an immunohistochemical study of 24 patients. Histopathology 2002; 40: 556-62.
72. Al-Nafussi A. Spindle cell tumours of the breast: practical approach to diagnosis. Histopathology 1999; 35: 1-13.
73. Lee AH. Recent developments in the histological diagnosis of spindle cell carcinoma, fibromatosis and phyllodes tumour of the breast. Histopathology 2008; 52: 45-57.
74. Sneige N, Yaziji H, Mandavilli SR, et al. Low-grade (fibromatosis-like) spindle cell carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 1009-16.
75. Khan HN, Wyld L, Dunne B, et al. Spindle cell carcinoma of the breast: a case series of a rare histological subtype. Eur J Surg Oncol 2003; 29: 600-3.
76. Ho BC, Tan HW, Lee VK, Tan PH. Preoperative and intraoperative diagnosis of low-grade adenosquamous carcinoma of the breast: potential diagnostic pitfalls. Histopathology 2006; 49: 603-11.
77. Denley H, Pinder SE, Tan PH, et al. Metaplastic carcinoma of the breast arising within complex sclerosing lesion: a report of five cases. Histopathology 2000; 36: 203-9.
78. Gobbi H, Simpson JF, Jensen RA, Olson SJ, Page DL. Metaplastic spindle cell breast tumors arising within papillomas, complex sclerosing lesions, and nipple adenomas. Mod Pathol 2003; 16: 893-901.
79. Reis-Filho JS, Milanezi F, Steele D, et al. Metaplastic breast carcinomas are basal-like tumours. Histopathology 2006; 49: 10-21.
80. Lee AH. The histological diagnosis of metastases to the breast from extramammary malignancies. J Clin Pathol 2007; 60: 1333-41.
81. Tot T. Cytokeratins 20 and 7 as biomarkers: usefulness in discriminating primary from metastatic adenocarcinoma. Eur J Cancer 2002; 38: 758-63.
82. Chu PG, Weiss LM. Keratin expression in human tissues and neoplasms. Histopathology 2002; 40: 403-39.
83. Harvey JM, Clark GM, Osborne CK, Allred DC. Estrogen receptor status by immunohistochemistry is superior to the ligand-binding assay for predicting response to adjuvant endocrine therapy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1474-81.