Differentiating lymphovascular invasion from retraction artifact on histological specimen of breast carcinoma and their implications on prognosis

Journal of Breast Cancer

Volumn 15, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 478-480

  Zaorsky, Nicholas George ^a   Patil, Ninad ^b   Freedman, Gary Mitchel ^c   Tuluc, Madalina ^a  

^a THOMAS JEFFERSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b FOX CHASE CANCER CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA   (United States)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Diagnosis; Pathology

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; ARTIFACT; BREAST CARCINOMA; CANCER GRADING; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RISK; CELL INTERACTION; DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS; HISTOLOGY; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; LYMPH VESSEL METASTASIS; MEDICAL DECISION MAKING; OBSERVER VARIATION; STROMA CELL; TUMOR VOLUME;

EID: 84872307427     PISSN: 17386756     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2012.15.4.478     Document Type: Article

References (14)

1. Lester SC. The breast. In: Kumar VK, Abbas AK, Fausto N, editors. Robbins and Cotran's Pathological Basis of Disease. 7th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier, Saunders; 2005. p.1148.
2. Rosen PP. Tumor emboli in intramammary lymphatics in breast carcinoma: pathologic criteria for diagnosis and clinical significance. Pathol Annu 1983;18 Pt 2:215-32.
3. Bevilacqua JL, Kattan MW, Fey JV, Cody HS 3rd, Borgen PI, Van Zee KJ. Doctor, what are my chances of having a positive sentinel node? A validated nomogram for risk estimation. J Clin Oncol 2007;25:3670-9.
4. Van Zee KJ, Manasseh DM, Bevilacqua JL, Boolbol SK, Fev JV, Tan LK, et al. A nomogram for predicting the likelihood of additional nodal metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:1140-51.
5. Gilchrist KW, Gould VE, Hirschl S, Imbriqlia JE, Patchefsky AS, Penner DW, et al. Interobserver variation in the identification of breast carcinoma in intramammary lymphatics. Hum Pathol 1982;13:170-2.
6. Yeh I, Brooks JSJ, Pietra GG. Atlas of Microscopic Artifacts and Foreign Materials. 1st ed. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1997. p.144.
7. Acs G, Paragh G, Chuang ST, Laronga C, Zhang PJ. The presence of micropapillary features and retraction artifact in core needle biopsy material predicts lymph node metastasis in breast carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2009;33:202-10.
8. Irie J, Manucha V, Ioffe OB, Silverberg SG. Artefact as the pathologist's friend: peritumoral retraction in in situ and infiltrating duct carcinoma of the breast. Int J Surg Pathol 2007;15:53-9.
9. Lee AK, DeLellis RA, Wolfe HJ. Intramammary lymphatic invasion in breast carcinomas. Evaluation using ABH isoantigens as endothelial markers. Am J Surg Pathol 1986;10:589-94.
10. Saigo PE, Rosen PP. The application of immunohistochemical stains to identify endothelial-lined channels in mammary carcinoma. Cancer 1987;59:51-4.
11. Acs G, Dumoff KL, Solin LJ, Pasha T, Xu X, Zhang PJ. Extensive retraction artifact correlates with lymphatic invasion and nodal metastasis and predicts poor outcome in early stage breast carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2007;31:129-40.
12. Ren S, Abuel-Haija M, Khurana JS, Zhang X. D2-40: an additional marker for myoepithelial cells of breast and the precaution in interpreting tumor lymphovascular invasion. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 2011;4:175-82.
13. Bose S, Derosa CM, Ozzello L. Immunostaining of type IV collagen and smooth muscle actin as an aid in the diagnosis of breast lesions. Breast J 1999;5:194-201.
14. Prasad ML, Hyjek E, Giri DD, Ying L, O'Leary JJ, Hoda SA. Double immunolabeling with cytokeratin and smooth-muscle actin in confirming early invasive carcinoma of breast. Am J Surg Pathol 1999;23:176-81.