Why the term 'low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ ' should be changed to 'borderline breast disease': Diagnostic and clinical implications

Women's Health

Volumn 8, Issue 1, 2012, Pages 57-62

  Masood, Shahla ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA COLLEGE OF MEDICINE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA HEALTH JACKSONVILLE   (United States)

Author keywords

atypical ductal hyperplasia; borderline breast disease; borderline breast lesion; breast cancer; breast cancer precursor; breast cancer risk factor; low grade ductal carcinoma in situ; molecular imaging; proliferative breast disease; screening mammography

Indexed keywords

TAMOXIFEN;

ATYPICAL DUCTAL HYPERPLASIA; BORDERLINE BREAST DISEASE; BREAST DISEASE; BREAST HYPERPLASIA; CANCER PATIENT; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER RISK; CANCER SCREENING; DISEASE ASSOCIATION; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MASTECTOMY; MOLECULAR GENETICS; MORPHOLOGY; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; REVIEW; RISK REDUCTION; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; TUMOR BIOPSY;

BIOPSY; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, DUCTAL, BREAST; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; DIAGNOSIS, DIFFERENTIAL; FEMALE; FIBROCYSTIC BREAST DISEASE; HUMANS; HYPERPLASIA; PRECANCEROUS CONDITIONS; TERMINOLOGY AS TOPIC; WOMEN'S HEALTH;

EID: 83755170436     PISSN: 17455057     EISSN: 17455065     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2217/whe.11.88     Document Type: Review

References (40)

1. Ernster VL, Barclay J. Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 22, 151-156 (1997).
2. Ashikari R, Huvos AG, Snyder RE et al. Proceedings: a clinicopathologic study of atypical lesions of the breast. Cancer 33, 310-317 (1974).
3. Ashikari R, Huvos AG, Snyder RE et al. A clinicopathologic study of atypical lesions of the breast with further follow-up. Pathol. Res. Pract. 166, 481-490 (1980). (Pubitemid 10064976)
4. Goldenberg VE, Goldenberg NS, Sommers SC. Comparative ultrastructure of atypical ductal hyperplasia, intraductal carcinoma, and infiltrating ductal carcinoma of the breast. Cancer 24, 1152-1169 (1963).
5. Wellings SR, Jensen HM, Marcum RG. An atlas of subgross pathology of the human breast with special reference to possible precancerous lesions. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 55, 231-273 (1975).
6. Masood S. Cytopathology of the Breast. American Society of Clinical Pathology Press, Chicago, IL, USA (1996).
7. Liberman L. Clinical management issues in percutaneous core breast biopsy. Radiol. Clin. North Am. 38(4), 791-810 (2000).
8. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 347(6), 1270-1271 (2002).
9. Gulliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Am. Surg. 220, 391-401 (1994). (Pubitemid 24313232)
10. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Effects of adjuvant tamoxifen and of cytotoxic therapy on mortality in early breast cancer: an overview of 61 randomized trials among 28,896 women. N. Engl. J. Med. 319, 1681-1692 (1988).
11. NIH Consensus Conference: treatment of early stage breast cancer. JAMA 265, 391-395 (1991).
12. Winchester DP, Kaufman C, Anderson B et al. The National Accreditation Program for Breast Centers: quality improvement through interdisciplinary evaluation and management. Bull. Am. Coll. Surg. 93(10), 13-17 (2008).
13. Beck JS. Observer variability in reporting of breast lesions. J. Clin. Pathol. 38, 1358-1365 (1985).
14. Palli D, Galli M, Bianchi S et al. Reproducibility of histological diagnosis of breast lesions: results of a panel in Italy. Eur. J. Cancer 32A, 603-607 (1996).
15. Rosai J. Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 15, 209-221 (1991).
16. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavassoli FA et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardized criteria. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 16, 1133-1143 (1992). (Pubitemid 23004420)
17. Wells WA, Carney PA, Elizssen MS et al. Statewide study of diagnostic agreement in breast pathology. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 90, 142-145 (1998). (Pubitemid 28114415)
18. Jain RK, Mehta R, Dimitrov R et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: interobserver and intraobserver variability. Mod. Pathol. 24, 917-923 (2011).
19. Masood S. Core needle biopsy versus fine needle aspiration biopsy: are there similar sampling and diagnostic issues? Clin. Lab. Med. 25, 679-688 (2005). (Pubitemid 41674476)
20. Youngson BJ, Liberman L, Rosen PP. Displacement of carcinomatos epithelium in surgical breast specimens following stereotaxic core biopsy. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 103, 598-602 (1995).
21. Diaz LK, Wiley EL, Venta LA. Are malignant cells displaced by large-gauge needle core biopsy of the breast? Am. J Radiol. 173, 1303-1313 (1999). (Pubitemid 29494013)
22. Dupont WD, Page DL. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast disease. N. Engl. J. Med. 312, 146-151 (1985). (Pubitemid 15192861)
23. Page DL, Dupont WD. Anatomic indicators (histologic and cytologic) of increased breast cancer risk. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 28, 157-166 (1993). (Pubitemid 24056087)
24. Fisher B, Constantine JP, Wickerham DL et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P I Study. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 90, 1371-1388 (1998). (Pubitemid 28439961)
25. Simpson PT, Reis-F-Filho JS, Gale T et al. Molecular evolution of breast cancer. J. Pathol. 205, 248-254 (2005).
26. 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. 29, 734-746 (2005). (Pubitemid 40734423)
27. Sanders ME, Schyler PA, Dupont WD, Page DL. The natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated by biopsy only revealed over 30 years of long term follow-up. Cancer 103(12), 2481-2494 (2005).
28. Betsill WL Jr, Rose PP, Lieberman PH, Robbins GF. Intraductal carcinoma. Long-term follow-up after treatment by biopsy alone. JAMA 239(18), 1863-1867 (1978). (Pubitemid 8322874)
29. Solin L, Kurtz J, ForguetA, Amalric R et al. Fifteen-year results of breast-conserving surgery and definitive breast irradiation for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Clin. Oncol. 14(3), 754-763 (1996). (Pubitemid 26085518)
30. Allred C. Ductal carcinoma in situ: terminology, classification, and natural history. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 41, 134-138 (2010).
31. Masood S. Raising the bar: a plea for standardization and quality improvement in the practice of breast pathology. Breast J. 12(5), 409-412 (2006). (Pubitemid 44337430)
32. Saul S. Earliest steps to find breast cancer area prone to error. New York Times, 20 July (2010).
33. Masood S. Is it time to retire the term of 'in situ carcinoma' and use the term of 'borderline breast disease?' Breast J. 6(16), 571-572 (2010).
34. Perkins C, Balma D, Garcia R; Members of the Consensus Group; Susan G. Komen for the Cure. Why current breast pathology practices must be evaluated. A Susan G. Komen for the Cure white paper: June 2006. Breast J. 13(5), 443-447 (2007). (Pubitemid 47329330)
35. Rosen PP. Breast Pathology (3rd Edition). Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, Philadelphia, PA, USA, 250 (2009).
36. Tarek M, Abdel-Fatah A, Powe DG et al. Morphologic and molecular evolutionary pathways of low nuclear grade invasive breast cancers and their putative precursor lesions: further evidence to support the concept of low nuclear grade breast neoplasia family. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 32, 513-523 (2008). (Pubitemid 351458293)
37. Masood S, Rosa M. Borderline breast lesions: diagnostic challenges and clinical implications. Adv. Anat. Pathol. 18, 190-198 (2011).
38. Richart RM, Barron BA. A follow-up study of patients with cervical dysplasia. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol. 105, 386-393 (1969).
39. Melnikow J, Nuovo J, Willan AR et al. Natural history of cervical squamous intrepithelial lesions: a meta-analysis. Obstet. Gynecol. 92(4 Pt 2), 727-735 (1998). (Pubitemid 28440819)
40. The 1988 Bethesda System for reporting cervical/vaginal cytologic diagnoses. National Cancer Institute Workshop. JAMA 262, 931-934 (1989).