Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Archives of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

Volumn 133, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 15-25

  Lester, Susan C ^a   Bose, Shikha ^e   Chen, Yunn Yi ^h   Connolly, James L ^b   De Baca, Monica E ^f   Fitzgibbons, Patrick L ^g   Hayes, Daniel F ⁱ   Kleer, Celina ⁱ   O'Malley, Frances P ^j   Page, David L ^k   Smith, Barbara L ^c   Weaver, Donald L ^l   Winer, Eric ^d  

^a BRIGHAM AND WOMEN S HOSPITAL   (United States)

^b BETH ISRAEL DEACONESS MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c MASSACHUSETTS GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United States)

^d DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE   (United States)

^e Cedars Sinai Medical Center

^f UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

^g Physicians Laboratory Ltd   (United States)

^h ST JUDE MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

ⁱ UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN   (United States)

^j MOUNT SINAI HOSPITAL   (Canada)

^k VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^l UNIVERSITY OF VERMONT   (United States)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR;

ARTICLE; CANCER GRADING; CANCER STAGING; CHECKLIST; CLINICAL EXAMINATION; CLINICAL PROTOCOL; DISTANT METASTASIS; HUMAN; IMMUNOHISTOCHEMISTRY; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; LYMPH NODE; MEDICAL DOCUMENTATION; PATIENT INFORMATION;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; CLINICAL PROTOCOLS; FEMALE; HUMANS; PATHOLOGY, SURGICAL; SOCIETIES, MEDICAL; SPECIMEN HANDLING; UNITED STATES;

EID: 58349088766     PISSN: 00039985     EISSN: 15432165     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. Fitzgibbons PL, Connolly JL, Page DL, for the Members of the Cancer Committee, College of American Pathologists. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with carcinomas of the breast. In: Reporting on Cancer Specimens: Case Summaries and Background Documentation. Northfield, Ill: College of American Pathologists; 2005. Available at: http://www.cap.org/ apps/cap. portal?nfpb=true&cntvwrPtltactionOverride = %2Fportlets%2FcontentViewer% 2Fshow&windowLabel = cntvwrPtlt& cntvwrPtlt%7BactionForm.contentReference %7D = committees%2Fcancer%2Fcancerprotocols%2Fprotocolsindex. html&state= maximized&pageLabel = cntvwr. Accessed June 18, 2008.
2. Owings DV, Hann L, Schnitt SJ. How thoroughly should needle localization breast biopsies be sampled for microscopic examination?: a prospective mam- mographic/pathologic correlative study. Am J Surg Pathol. 1990;14:578-583.
3. Association of Directors of Anatomic and Surgical Pathology. Recommendations for the Reporting of Breast Carcinoma. Updated September 2004, Version 1.1. Avalable at: http://www.adasp.org/Checklists/Checklists.htm. AccessedJune 18, 2008.
4. Schwartz GF, Lagios MD, Carter D, et al. Consensus conference on the classification of ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer. 1997;80:1798-1802.
5. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Recht A, et al. Image-detected breast cancer: state of the art diagnosis and treatment. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201:586-597.
6. Lester SC. Manual of Surgical Pathology. 2nd ed. New York, NY: Elsevier; 2006.
7. Silverstein MJ, Poller D, Craig P, et al. A prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer. 1996;77:2267-2274.
8. Grin A, Horne G, Ennis M, O'Malley FP. Measuring extent of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast excision specimens: a comparison of 4 methods. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:31-37.
9. Dadmanesh F, Fan X, Dastane A, Amin MB, Bose S. Comparative analysis of size estimation by mapping and counting number of blocks with ductal carcinoma in situ in breast excision specimens. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133:26-30.
10. Carlson JW, Birdwell RL, Gombos EC, Golshan M, Smith DN, Lester SC. MRI-directed, wire-localized breast excisions: incidence of malignancy and recommendations for pathologic evaluation. Hum Pathol. 2007;38:1754-1759.
11. Vicini FA, Kestin LL, Goldstein NS, Baglan KL, Pettinga JE, Martinez AA. Relationship between excision volume, margin status, and tumor size with the development of local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ treated with breast-conserving therapy. J Surg Oncol. 2001;76:245-254.
12. Lagios MD, Westdahl PR, Margolin FR, et al. Duct carcinoma in situ: relationship of extent of noninvasive disease to the frequency of occult invasion, multicentricity, lymph node metastasis, and short-term treatment failures. Cancer. 1982;50:1309-1314.
13. Maffuz A, Barroso-Bravo S, Najera I, Zarco G, Alvarado-Cabrero I, Rogriguez-Cuevas SI. Tumor size as predictor of microinvasion, invasion, and axillary metastasis in ductal carcinoma in situ. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2006;25:223-227.
14. Moore KH, Sweeney KJ, Wilson ME, et al. Outcomes for women with ductal carcinoma-in-situ and a positive sentinel lymph node: a multi-institutional audit. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2911-2917.
15. Broekhuizen LN, Wijsman JH, Peterse JL, Rutgers EJT. The incidence and significance of micrometastases in lymph nodes of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ and T1a carcinoma of the breast. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:502-506.
16. Lara JF, Young SM, Velilla RE, Santoro EJ, Templeton SF. The relevance of occult axillary micrometastasis in DCIS: a clinicopathologic study with long-term follow-up. Cancer. 2003;98:2105-2113.
17. O'Sullivan MJ, Morrow M. Ductal carcinoma in situ: current management. Surg Clin North Am. 2007;87:333-351, viii.
18. Dillon MF, McDermott EW, O'Doherty A, Quinn CM, Hill AD, O'Higgins N. Factors affecting successful breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:1618-1628.
19. Sigal-Zafrani B, Lewis JS, Clough KB, et al, for the Institut Curie Breast Study Group. Histologic margin assessment for breast ductal carcinoma in situ: precision and implications. Mod Pathol. 2004;17:81-88.
20. Neuschatz AC, DiPetrillo T, Steinhoff M, et al. The value of breast lumpectomy margin assessment as a predictor of residual tumor burden in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer. 2002;94:1917-1924.
21. Cheng L, Al-Kaisi NK, Gordon NH, Liu AY, Gebrail F, Shenk RR. Relationship between the size and margin status of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast and residual disease. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1997;89:1356-1360.
22. Di Saverio S, Catena F, Santini D, et al. 259 patients with DCIS of the breast applying USC/Van Nuys prognostic index: a retrospective review with long term follow up. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;109:405-416.
23. MacDonald HR, Silverstein MJ, Mabry H, et al. Local control in ductal carcinoma in situ treated by excision alone: incremental benefit of larger margins.Am J Surg. 2005;190:521-525.
24. Asjoe FT, Altintas S, Huizing MT, et al. The value of the Van Nuys Prognostic Index in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a retrospective analysis. Breast J. 2007;13:359-367.
25. MacDonald HR, Silverstein MJ, Lee LA, et al. Margin width as the sole determinant of local recurrence after breast conservation in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg. 2006;192:420-422.
26. Saqi A, Osborne MP, Rosenblatt R, Shin SJ, Hoda SA. Quantifying mammary duct carcinoma in situ: a wild-goose chase? Am J Clin Pathol. 2000; 113(suppl 1):S30-S37.
27. Clingan R, Griffen M, Phillips J, et al. Potential margin distortion in breast tissue by specimen mammography. Arch Surg. 2003;138:1371-1374.
28. Graham RA, Homer MJ, Katz J, et al. The pancake phenomenon contributes to the inaccuracy of margin assessment in patients with breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2002;184:89-93.
29. Werling RW, Hwang H, Yaziji H, Gown AM. Immunohistochemical distinction of invasive from noninvasive breast lesions: a comparative study of p63 verus calponin and smooth muscle myosin heavy chain. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003; 27:82-90.
30. Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG). Evaluation of breast specimens removed by needle localization technique. Available at: http://www.rtog.org/qa/ 98-04/9804images/9804path1.html. Accessed June 18, 2008.
31. Torresan RZ, dos Santos CC, Okamura H, Alvarenga M. Evaluation ofglandular tissue after skin-sparing mastectomies. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:1037-1044.
32. Gralow JR, Burstein HJ, Wood W, et al. Preoperative therapy in invasive breast cancer: pathologic assessment and systemic therapy issues in operable disease. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:814-819.
33. Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al, eds. Breast. In: AJCC CancerStaging Manual. 6th ed. New York, NY: Springer; 2002:223-240.
34. Connolly JL. Changes and problematic areas in interpretation of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 6th edition, for breast cancer. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2006;130:287-291.
35. Singletary SE, Connolly JL. Breast cancer staging: working with the sixth edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2006;56:37-47.
36. Singletary SE, Greene FL, Sobin LH. Classification of isolated tumor cells: clarification of the 6th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual. Cancer. 2003;98:2740-2741.
37. Sobin LH, Wittekind C, eds. Breast cancer. In: UICC TNM Classification of Malignant Tumours. 6th ed. New York, NY: Wiley-Liss; 2002:131-141.
38. Houghton J, George WD, Cuzick J, et al. Radiotherapy and tamoxifen in women with completely excised ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand: randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2003;362:95-103.
39. Fisher B, Land S, Mamounas E, et al. Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Experience. Semin Oncol. 2001;28:400-418.
40. Allred D, Bryant J, Land S, et al. Estrogen receptor expression as a predictive marker of the effectiveness of tamoxifen in the treatment of DCIS: findings from NSABP Protocol B-24. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2002;81(suppl 1):abstract 30.
41. Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5287-5312.
42. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer-V.2.2008. Fort Washington, Pa: National Comprehensive Cancer Network Inc. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physiciangls/PDF/breast. pdf. Accessed June 18, 2008.
43. Bradley GG, Schnitt SJ, Collins LC. Ductal carcinoma in situ with basal-like phenotype: a possible precursor to invasive basal-like breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2006;19:617-621.
44. Steinman S, Wang J, Bourne P, et al. Expression of cytokeratin markers, ER-alpha, PR, HER-2/neu, and EGFR in pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and DCIS with co-existing invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the breast. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2007;37:127-134.
45. Idval I, Ringberg A, Anderson H, et al. Histopathological and cell biological characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: a comparison between the primary DCIS and subsequent ipsilateral and contralateral tumors. Breast. 2005;14:290-297.
46. Bijker N, Pearse JL, Duchateau L, et al. Histological type and marker expression of the primary tumour compared with its local recurrence after breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Cancer. 2001;84: 539-544.
47. Sahoo S, Recant WM, Jaskowiak N, et al. Defining negative margins in DCIS patients treated with breast conservation therapy: the University ofChicago experience. Breast J. 2005;11:242-247.
48. Commission on Laboratory Accreditation. Laboratory Accreditation Program. Anatomic Pathology Checklist. Northfield, Ill: College of American Pathologists; Sept 2007. Questions related to reporting of results only. ANP.22988. Available at: http://www.cap.org/apps/cap.portal?nfpb= true&pageLabel=eLABLAPpage. Accessed June 18, 2008.