Ductal carcinoma in situ - update on risk assessment and management

Histopathology

Volumn 68, Issue 1, 2016, Pages 96-109

  Pang, Jia Min B ^a,b   Gorringe, Kylie L ^a,b   Fox, Stephen B ^a,b  

^a PETER MACCALLUM CANCER CENTRE   (Australia)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MELBOURNE   (Australia)

Author keywords

Breast neoplasms; Clinical markers; Clinical pathology; Patient care management

Indexed keywords

ANASTROZOLE; CALPONIN; CYCLOOXYGENASE 2; CYTOKERATIN 5; EPIDERMAL GROWTH FACTOR RECEPTOR 2; ESTROGEN RECEPTOR; PROGESTERONE RECEPTOR; PROTEIN P16; PROTEIN P21; PROTEIN P53; PROTEIN P63; TAMOXIFEN; TRASTUZUMAB; TUMOR MARKER;

ARTICLE; CANCER CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER PROGNOSIS; CANCER RADIOTHERAPY; CANCER SURGERY; CHROMATIN; DNA METHYLATION; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; INTRADUCTAL CARCINOMA; MAMMOGRAPHY; PARTIAL MASTECTOMY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RISK ASSESSMENT; BREAST TUMOR; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; FEMALE; PATHOLOGY;

BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; DISEASE MANAGEMENT; DISEASE PROGRESSION; FEMALE; HUMANS; RISK ASSESSMENT;

EID: 84954466120     PISSN: 03090167     EISSN: 13652559     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/his.12796     Document Type: Article

References (147)

1. Kerlikowske K. Epidemiology of ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2010; 2010; 139-141.
2. Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. Breast Screen Australia monitoring report 2011-2012. Canberra, Australia: Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2014.
3. Lopez-Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Lacroix-Triki M, Marchio C, Reis-Filho JS. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathways. Histopathology 2010; 57; 171-192.
4. Vos CB, ter Haar NT, Rosenberg C et al. Genetic alterations on chromosome 16 and 17 are important features of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast and are associated with histologic type. Br. J. Cancer 1999; 81; 1410-1418.
5. Buerger H, Otterbach F, Simon R et al. Comparative genomic hybridization of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast - evidence of multiple genetic pathways. J. Pathol. 1999; 187; 396-402.
6. 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; 415-421.
7. Hwang ES, DeVries S, Chew KL et al. Patterns of chromosomal alterations in breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin. Cancer Res. 2004; 10; 5160-5167.
8. Gao Y, Niu Y, Wang X, Wei L, Lu S. Genetic changes at specific stages of breast cancer progression detected by comparative genomic hybridization. J. Mol. Med. 2009; 87; 145-152.
9. Reis-Filho JS, Lakhani SR. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: genetic alterations in pre-invasive lesions. Breast Cancer Res. 2003; 5; 313-319.
10. Liao S, Desouki MM, Gaile DP et al. Differential copy number aberrations in novel candidate genes associated with progression from in situ to invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Genes Chromosom. Cancer 2012; 51; 1067-1078.
11. Reis-Filho JS, Simpson PT, Gale T, Lakhani SR. The molecular genetics of breast cancer: the contribution of comparative genomic hybridization. Pathol. Res. Pract. 2005; 201; 713-725.
12. James LA, Mitchell EL, Menasce L, Varley JM. Comparative genomic hybridisation of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: identification of regions of DNA amplification and deletion in common with invasive breast carcinoma. Oncogene 1997; 14; 1059-1065.
13. Moore E, Magee H, Coyne J, Gorey T, Dervan PA. Widespread chromosomal abnormalities in high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Comparative genomic hybridization study of pure high-grade DCIS. J. Pathol. 1999; 187; 403-409.
14. Ellsworth RE, Ellsworth DL, Love B et al. Correlation of levels and patterns of genomic instability with histological grading of DCIS. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2007; 14; 3070-3077.
15. Tot T. DCIS, cytokeratins, and the theory of the sick lobe. Virchows Arch. 2005; 447; 1-8.
16. Erbas B, Provenzano E, Armes J, Gertig D. The natural history of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a review. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2006; 97; 135-144.
17. Collins LC, Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Schnitt SJ. Outcome of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ untreated after diagnostic biopsy: results from the nurses' health study. Cancer 2005; 103; 1778-1784.
18. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Landenberger M. Intraductal carcinoma of the breast: follow-up after biopsy only. Cancer 1982; 49; 751-758.
19. Walker RA, Dearing SJ, Brown LA. Comparison of pathological and biological features of symptomatic and mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Hum. Pathol. 1999; 30; 943-948.
20. Koh VC, Lim JC, Thike AA et al. Characteristics and behaviour of screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: comparison with symptomatic patients. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2015; 152; 293-304.
21. Barnes NL, Dimopoulos N, Williams KE, Howe M, Bundred NJ. The frequency of presentation and clinico-pathological characteristics of symptomatic versus screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2014; 40; 249-254.
22. Cowell CF, Weigelt B, Sakr RA et al. Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: revisited. Mol. Oncol. 2013; 7; 859-869.
23. Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia. Invasive breast cancer structured reporting protocol. Surry Hills, NSW, Australia: Royal College of Pathologists of Australasia, 2012.
24. Lester SC, Bose S, Chen YY et al. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2009; 133; 15-25.
25. Ellis IO, Coleman D, Wells C et al. Impact of a national external quality assessment scheme for breast pathology in the UK. J. Clin. Pathol. 2006; 59; 138-145.
26. Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Loi S et al. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2006; 98; 262-272.
27. Balleine RL, Webster LR, Davis S et al. Molecular grading of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008; 14; 8244-8252.
28. World Health Organization (WHO). WHO classification of tumours of the breast. Lyon: International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), 2012.
29. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. National Comprehensive Cancer Network clinical practice guidelines in oncology, breast cancer, version 2.2015. Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Fort Washington, PA: National Comprehensive Cancer Network, 2015.
30. Thomas J, Hanby A, Pinder S et al. Implications of inconsistent measurement of er status in non-invasive breast cancer: a study of 1, 684 cases from the Sloane Project. Breast J. 2008; 14; 33-38.
31. Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Hicks DG et al. Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J. Clin. Oncol. 2013; 31; 3997-4013.
32. Siziopikou KP, Anderson SJ, Cobleigh MA et al. Preliminary results of centralized HER2 testing in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): NSABP B-43. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2013; 142; 415-421.
33. Bijker N, Rutgers EJ, Peterse JL et al. Variations in diagnostic and therapeutic procedures in a multicentre, randomized clinical trial (EORTC 10853) investigating breast-conserving treatment for DCIS. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2001; 27; 135-140.
34. Bleyer A, Welch HG. Effect of three decades of screening mammography on breast-cancer incidence. N. Engl. J. Med. 2012; 367; 1998-2005.
35. Sorum R, Hofvind S, Skaane P, Haldorsen T. Trends in incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ: the effect of a population-based screening programme. Breast 2010; 19; 499-505.
36. van Steenbergen LN, Voogd AC, Roukema JA et al. Screening caused rising incidence rates of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2009; 115; 181-183.
37. Virnig BA, Wang SY, Shamilyan T, Kane RL, Tuttle TM. Ductal carcinoma in situ: risk factors and impact of screening. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2010; 2010; 113-116.
38. Greenwood HI, Heller SL, Kim S, Sigmund EE, Shaylor SD, Moy L. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breasts: review of MR imaging features. Radiographics 2013; 33; 1569-1588.
39. Barreau B, de Mascarel I, Feuga C et al. Mammography of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: review of 909 cases with radiographic-pathologic correlations. Eur. J. Radiol. 2005; 54; 55-61.
40. Bijker N, Donker M, Wesseling J, den Heeten GJ, Rutgers EJ. Is DCIS breast cancer, and how do I treat it? Curr. Treat. Options Oncol. 2013; 14; 75-87.
41. Holland R, Hendriks JH, Vebeek AL, Mravunac M, Schuurmans Stekhoven JH. Extent, distribution, and mammographic/histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 1990; 335; 519-522.
42. Ponti A, Lynge E, James T et al. International variation in management of screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur. J. Cancer 2014; 50; 2695-2704.
43. Nicholson S, Hanby A, Clements K et al. Variations in the management of the axilla in screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ: evidence from the UK NHS breast screening programme audit of screen detected DCIS. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol. 2015; 41; 86-93.
44. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Pinder SE et al. Effect of tamoxifen and radiotherapy in women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ: long-term results from the UK/ANZ DCIS trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011; 12; 21-29.
45. Fisher B, Costantino J, Redmond C et al. Lumpectomy compared with lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1993; 328; 1581-1586.
46. Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N et al. Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17. J. Clin. Oncol. 1998; 16; 441-452.
47. Julien JP, Bijker N, Fentiman IS et al. Radiotherapy in breast-conserving treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: first results of the EORTC randomised Phase III trial 10853. EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. Lancet 2000; 355; 528-533.
48. Bijker N, Meijnen P, Peterse JL et al. Breast-conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma-in-situ: ten-year results of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized Phase III trial 10853 - a study by the EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. J. Clin. Oncol. 2006; 24; 3381-3387.
49. Emdin SO, Granstrand B, Ringberg A et al. SWEDCIS: radiotherapy after sector resection for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Results of a randomised trial in a population offered mammography screening. Acta Oncol. 2006; 45; 536-543.
50. Holmberg L, Garmo H, Granstrand B et al. Absolute risk reductions for local recurrence after postoperative radiotherapy after sector resection for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Clin. Oncol. 2008; 26; 1247-1252.
51. 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; 95-102.
52. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group. Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2010; 41; 162-177.
53. Goodwin A, Parker S, Ghersi D, Wilcken N. Post-operative radiotherapy for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. The Cochrane database of systematic reviews 2013; 11; CD000563.
54. Hughes LL, Wang M, Page DL et al. Local excision alone without irradiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009; 27; 5319-5324.
55. McCormick B, Winter K, Hudis C et al. RTOG 9804: a prospective randomized trial for good-risk ductal carcinoma in situ comparing radiotherapy with observation. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015; 33; 709-715.
56. Wong JS, Kaelin CM, Troyan SL et al. Prospective study of wide excision alone for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Clin. Oncol. 2006; 24; 1031-1036.
57. Wong JS, Chen YH, Gadd MA et al. Eight-year update of a prospective study of wide excision alone for small low- or intermediate-grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Breast cancer research and treatment 2014; 143; 343-350.
58. Solin LJ, Kurtz J, Fourquet A 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. 1996; 14; 754-763.
59. Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B et al. Long-term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103; 478-488.
60. Staley H, McCallum I, Bruce J. Postoperative tamoxifen for ductal carcinoma in situ: Cochrane Systematic Review and meta-analysis. Breast 2014; 23; 546-551.
61. Margolese RG, Cecchinini RS, Julian TB et al. Primary results, NRG Oncology/NSABP B-35: a clinical trial of anastrozole (A) versus tamoxifen (tam) in postmenopausal patients with DCIS undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy. ASCO Annual Meeting. J. Clin. Oncol. 2015; 33(Suppl); abstract LBA500.
62. Shamliyan T, Wang SY, Virnig BA, Tuttle TM, Kane RL. Association between patient and tumor characteristics with clinical outcomes in women with ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Natl Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2010; 2010; 121-129.
63. Wang SY, Shamliyan T, Virnig BA, Kane R. Tumor characteristics as predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2011; 127; 1-14.
64. Habel LA, Dignam JJ, Land SR, Salane M, Capra AM, Julian TB. Mammographic density and breast cancer after ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2004; 96; 1467-1472.
65. Dunne C, Burke JP, Morrow M, Kell MR. Effect of margin status on local recurrence after breast conservation and radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Clin. Oncol. 2009; 27; 1615-1620.
66. Wang SY, Chu H, Shamliyan T et al. Network meta-analysis of margin threshold for women with ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2012; 104; 507-516.
67. Silverstein MJ, Poller DN, Waisman JR et al. Prognostic classification of breast ductal carcinoma-in-situ. Lancet 1995; 345; 1154-1157.
68. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD, Craig PH et al. A prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer 1996; 77; 2267-2274.
69. Silverstein MJ. The University of Southern California/Van Nuys Prognostic Index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am. J. Surg. 2003; 186; 337-343.
70. Silverstein MJ, Lagios MD. Treatment selection for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast using the University of Southern California/Van Nuys (USC/VNPI) Prognostic Index. Breast J. 2015; 21; 127-132.
71. Altintas S, Lambein K, Huizing MT et al. Prognostic significance of oncogenic markers in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a clinicopathologic study. Breast J. 2009; 15; 120-132.
72. Gilleard O, Goodman A, Cooper M, Davies M, Dunn J. The significance of the Van Nuys Prognostic Index in the management of ductal carcinoma in situ. World J. Surg. Oncol. 2008; 6; 61.
73. MacAusland SG, Hepel JT, Chong FK et al. An attempt to independently verify the utility of the Van Nuys Prognostic Index for ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer 2007; 110; 2648-2653.
74. 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.
75. Dodwell D, Clements K, Lawrence G et al. Radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery for screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ: indications and utilisation in the UK. Interim findings from the Sloane Project. Br. J. Cancer 2007; 97; 725-729.
76. Whitfield R, Kollias J, de Silva P, Turner J, Maddern G. Management of ductal carcinoma in situ according to Van Nuys Prognostic Index in Australia and New Zealand. Aust. NZ J. Surg. 2012; 82; 518-523.
77. Altintas S, Toussaint J, Durbecq V et al. Fine tuning of the Van Nuys Prognostic Index (VNPI) 2003 by integrating the Genomic Grade Index (GGI): new tools for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Breast J. 2011; 17; 343-351.
78. Rudloff U, Jacks LM, Goldberg JI et al. Nomogram for predicting the risk of local recurrence after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Clin. Oncol. 2010; 28; 3762-3769.
79. Sweldens C, Peeters S, van Limbergen E et al. Local relapse after breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: a European single-center experience and external validation of the memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center DCIS nomogram. Cancer J. 2014; 20; 1-7.
80. Wang F, Li H, Tan PH et al. Validation of a nomogram in the prediction of local recurrence risks after conserving surgery for Asian women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin. Oncol. 2014; 26; 684-691.
81. Collins LC, Achacoso N, Haque R et al. Risk prediction for local breast cancer recurrence among women with DCIS treated in a community practice: a nested, case-control study. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2015; doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4641-x [Epub ahead of print].
82. Lari SA, Kuerer HM. Biological markers in DCIS and risk of breast recurrence: a systematic review. J. Cancer 2011; 2; 232-261.
83. Zhou W, Jirstom K, Amini RM et al. Molecular subtypes in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast rand their relation to prognosis: a population-based cohort study. BMC Cancer 2013; 13; 512.
84. Rakovitch E, Nofech-Mozes S, Hanna W et al. HER2/neu and Ki-67 expression predict non-invasive recurrence following breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. Br. J. Cancer 2012; 106; 1160-1165.
85. Kerlikowske K, Molinaro AM, Gauthier ML et al. Biomarker expression and risk of subsequent tumors after initial ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosis. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2010; 102; 627-637.
86. Witkiewicz AK, Cox DW, Rivadeneira D et al. The retinoblastoma tumor suppressor pathway modulates the invasiveness of ERBB2-positive breast cancer. Oncogene 2014; 33; 3980-3991.
87. Williams KE, Barnes NL, Cramer A et al. Molecular phenotypes of DCIS predict overall and invasive recurrence. Ann. Oncol. 2015; 26; 1019-1025.
88. Zhou W, Johansson C, Jirstrom K et al. A comparison of tumor biology in primary ductal carcinoma in situ recurring as invasive carcinoma versus a new in situ. Int. J. Breast Cancer 2013; 2013; 582134.
89. Ringberg A, Anagnostaki L, Anderson H, Idvall I, Ferno M. South Sweden Breast Cancer Group. Cell biological factors in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast - relationship to ipsilateral local recurrence and histopathological characteristics. Eur. J. Cancer 2001; 37; 1514-1522.
90. Gudlaugsson E, Skaland I, Janssen EA et al. Comparison of the effect of different techniques for measurement of Ki67 proliferation on reproducibility and prognosis prediction accuracy in breast cancer. Histopathology 2012; 61; 1134-1144.
91. Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A'Hern R et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the international Ki67 in breast cancer working group. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2011; 103; 1656-1664.
92. Witkiewicz AK, Rivadeneira DB, Ertel A et al. Association of RB/P16-pathway perturbations with DCIS recurrence: dependence on tumor versus tissue microenvironment. Am. J. Pathol. 2011; 179; 1171-1178.
93. Gauthier ML, Berman HK, Miller C et al. Abrogated response to cellular stress identifies DCIS associated with subsequent tumor events and defines basal-like breast tumors. Cancer Cell 2007; 12; 479-491.
94. Perez AA, Balabram D, Rocha RM, da Silva Souza A, Gobbi H. Co-expression of p16, Ki67 and COX-2 is associated with basal phenotype in high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Histochem. Cytochem. 2015; 63; 408-416.
95. Barnes N, Haywood P, Flint P, Knox WF, Bundred NJ. Survivin expression in in situ and invasive breast cancer relates to COX-2 expression and DCIS recurrence. Br. J. Cancer 2006; 94; 253-258.
96. Kulkarni S, Patil DB, Diaz LK, Wiley EL, Morrow M, Khan SA. COX-2 and ppargamma expression are potential markers of recurrence risk in mammary duct carcinoma in-situ. BMC Cancer 2008; 8; 36.
97. Generali D, Buffa FM, Deb S et al. COX-2 expression is predictive for early relapse and aromatase inhibitor resistance in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast, and is a target for treatment. Br. J. Cancer 2014; 111; 46-54.
98. Hieken TJ, Cheregi J, Farolan M, Kim J, Velasco JM. Predicting relapse in ductal carcinoma in situ patients: an analysis of biologic markers with long-term follow-up. Am. J. Surg. 2007; 194; 504-506.
99. de Roos MA, de Bock GH, de Vries J, van der Vegt B, Wesseling J. P53 overexpression is a predictor of local recurrence after treatment for both in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. J. Surg. Res. 2007; 140; 109-114.
100. Provenzano E, Hopper JL, Giles GG, Marr G, Venter DJ, Armes JE. Biological markers that predict clinical recurrence in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur. J. Cancer 2003; 39; 622-630.
101. Solin LJ, Gray R, Baehner FL et al. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2013; 105; 701-710.
102. Wood WC, Alvarado M, Buchholz DJ et al. The current clinical value of the DCIS score. Oncology (Williston Park) 2014; 28(Suppl 2); C2, 1-8, C3.
103. Hannemann J, Velds A, Halfwerk JB, Kreike B, Peterse JL, van de Vijver MJ. Classification of ductal carcinoma in situ by gene expression profiling. Breast Cancer Res. 2006; 8; R61.
104. Muggerud AA, Hallett M, Johnsen H et al. Molecular diversity in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and early invasive breast cancer. Mol. Oncol. 2010; 4; 357-368.
105. Johnson CE, Gorringe KL, Thompson ER et al. Identification of copy number alterations associated with the progression of DCIS to invasive ductal carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2012; 133; 889-898.
106. Aubele M, Mattis A, Zitzelsberger H et al. Extensive ductal carcinoma in situ with small foci of invasive ductal carcinoma: evidence of genetic resemblance by CGH. J. Int. Cancer 2000; 85; 82-86.
107. Aulmann S, Bentz M, Sinn HP. C-myc oncogene amplification in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2002; 74; 25-31.
108. Jang MH, Kim EJ, Choi Y et al. FGFR1 is amplified during the progression of in situ to invasive breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res. 2012; 14; R115.
109. Werner M, Mattis A, Aubele M et al. 20q13.2 amplification in intraductal hyperplasia adjacent to in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Virchows Arch. 1999; 435; 469-472.
110. Iakovlev VV, Arneson NC, Wong V et al. Genomic differences between pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast and that associated with invasive disease: a calibrated ACGH study. Clinical Cancer Res. 2008; 14; 4446-4454.
111. Burkhardt L, Grob TJ, Hermann I et al. Gene amplification in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2010; 123; 757-765.
112. Moelans CB, de Wegers RA, Monsuurs HN, Maess AH, van Diest PJ. Molecular differences between ductal carcinoma in situ and adjacent invasive breast carcinoma: a multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification study. Cell Oncol. 2011; 34; 475-482.
113. Hernandez L, Wilkerson PM, Lambros MB et al. Genomic and mutational profiling of ductal carcinomas in situ and matched adjacent invasive breast cancers reveals intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity and clonal selection. J. Pathol. 2012; 227; 42-52.
114. Robanus-Maandag EC, Bosch CA, Kristel PM et al. Association of c-myc amplification with progression from the in situ to the invasive stage in c-myc-amplified breast carcinomas. J. Pathol. 2003; 201; 75-82.
115. Heselmeyer-Haddad K, Berroa Garcia LY, Bradley A et al. Single-cell genetic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer reveals enormous tumor heterogeneity yet conserved genomic imbalances and gain of myc during progression. Am. J. Pathol. 2012; 181; 1807-1822.
116. Mu K, Li L, Yang Q et al. Detection of CHK1 and CCND1 gene copy number changes in breast cancer with dual-colour fluorescence in-situ hybridization. Histopathology 2011; 58; 601-607.
117. Sakr RA, Weigelt B, Chandarlapaty S, et al. Pi3k pathway activation in high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ-implications for progression to invasive breast carcinoma. Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research 2014; 20; 2326-2337.
118. Miron A, Varadi M, Carrasco D, et al. Pik3ca mutations in in situ and invasive breast carcinomas. Cancer research 2010; 70; 5674-5678.
119. Ho GH, Calvano JE, Bisogna M et al. In microdissected ductal carcinoma in situ, HER-2/neu amplification, but not p53 mutation, is associated with high nuclear grade and comedo histology. Cancer 2000; 89; 2153-2160.
120. Munn KE, Walker RA, Menasce L, Varley JM. Mutation of the tp53 gene and allelic imbalance at chromosome 17p13 in ductal carcinoma in situ. Br. J. Cancer 1996; 74; 1578-1585.
121. Chitemerere M, Andersen TI, Holm R, Karlsen F, Borresen AL, Nesland JM. Tp53 alterations in atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1996; 41; 103-109.
122. Done SJ, Eskandarian S, Bull S, Redston M, Andrulis IL. P53 missense mutations in microdissected high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Natl Cancer Inst. 2001; 93; 700-704.
123. Vincent-Salomon A, Lucchesi C, Gruel N et al. Integrated genomic and transcriptomic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008; 14; 1956-1965.
124. Zhou W, Muggerud AA, Vu P et al. Full sequencing of tp53 identifies identical mutations within in situ and invasive components in breast cancer suggesting clonal evolution. Mol. Oncol. 2009; 3; 214-219.
125. Kang JH, Kim SJ, Noh DY, Choe KJ, Lee ES, Kang HS. The timing and characterization of p53 mutations in progression from atypical ductal hyperplasia to invasive lesions in the breast cancer. J. Mol. Med. 2001; 79; 648-655.
126. Dunlap J, Le C, Shukla A et al. Phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase and AKT1 mutations occur early in breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2010; 120; 409-418.
127. Troxell ML, Brunner AL, Neff T et al. Phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase pathway mutations are common in breast columnar cell lesions. Mod. Pathol. 2012; 25; 930-937.
128. Li H, Zhu R, Wang L et al. Pik3ca mutations mostly begin to develop in ductal carcinoma of the breast. Exp. Mol. Pathol. 2010; 88; 150-155.
129. Lee JS. GSTP1 promoter hypermethylation is an early event in breast carcinogenesis. Virchows Arch. 2007; 450; 637-642.
130. Muggerud AA, Ronneberg JA, Warnberg F et al. Frequent aberrant DNA methylation of ABCB1, FOXC1, PPP2R2B and PTEN in ductal carcinoma in situ and early invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2010; 12; R3.
131. Park SY, Kwon HJ, Lee HE et al. Promoter CPG island hypermethylation during breast cancer progression. Virchows Arch. 2011; 458; 73-84.
132. Fleischer T, Frigessi A, Johnson KC et al. Genome-wide DNA methylation profiles in progression to in situ and invasive carcinoma of the breast with impact on gene transcription and prognosis. Genome Biol. 2014; 15; 435.
133. Hoque MO, Prencipe M, Poeta ML et al. Changes in CPG islands promoter methylation patterns during ductal breast carcinoma progression. Cancer Epidemiol. Biomark. Prev. 2009; 18; 2694-2700.
134. Verschuur-Maes AH, de Bruin PC, van Diest PJ. Epigenetic progression of columnar cell lesions of the breast to invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 2012; 136; 705-715.
135. Douglas DB, Akiyama Y, Carraway H et al. Hypermethylation of a small CPGuanine-rich region correlates with loss of activator protein-2alpha expression during progression of breast cancer. Cancer Res. 2004; 64; 1611-1620.
136. Fackler MJ, McVeigh M, Evron E et al. DNA methylation of rassf1a, hin-1, rar-beta, cyclin d2 and twist in in situ and invasive lobular breast carcinoma. Int. J. Cancer 2003; 107; 970-975.
137. Pang JM, Deb S, Takano EA et al. Methylation profiling of ductal carcinoma in situ and its relationship to histopathological features. Breast Cancer Res. 2014; 16; 423.
138. Lehmann U, Langer F, Feist H, Glockner S, Hasemeier B, Kreipe H. Quantitative assessment of promoter hypermethylation during breast cancer development. Am. J. Pathol. 2002; 160; 605-612.
139. Lee JS, Fackler MJ, Teo WW et al. Quantitative promoter hypermethylation profiles of ductal carcinoma in situ in North American and Korean women: potential applications for diagnosis. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2008; 7; 1398-1406.
140. Moelans CB, Verschuur-Maes AH, van Diest PJ. Frequent promoter hypermethylation of BRCA2, CDH13, MSH6, PAX5, PAX6 and WT1 in ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. J. Pathol. 2011; 225; 222-231.
141. Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L et al. Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, Phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ - the Lord Study. Eur. J. Cancer 2015; 51; 1497-1510.
142. Allen MD, Thomas GJ, Clark S et al. Altered microenvironment promotes progression of preinvasive breast cancer: myoepithelial expression of alphavbeta6 integrin in DCIS identifies high-risk patients and predicts recurrence. Clinical Cancer Res. 2014; 20; 344-357.
143. Witkiewicz AK, Dasgupta A, Nguyen KH et al. Stromal caveolin-1 levels predict early DCIS progression to invasive breast cancer. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2009; 8; 1071-1079.
144. Witkiewicz AK, Freydin B, Chervoneva I et al. Stromal CD10 and SPARC expression in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patients predicts disease recurrence. Cancer Biol. Ther. 2010; 10; 391-396.
145. Van Bockstal M, Lambein K, Gevaert O et al. Stromal architecture and periductal decorin are potential prognostic markers for ipsilateral locoregional recurrence in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Histopathology 2013; 63; 520-533.
146. Allred DC, Wu Y, Mao S et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ and the emergence of diversity during breast cancer evolution. Clin. Cancer Res. 2008; 14; 370-378.
147. Maley CC, Galipeau PC, Finley JC et al. Genetic clonal diversity predicts progression to esophageal adenocarcinoma. Nat. Genet. 2006; 38; 468-473.