The distribution of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) grade in 4232 women and its impact on overdiagnosis in breast cancer screening

Breast Cancer Research

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  van Luijt, P A ^a   Heijnsdijk, E A M ^a   Fracheboud, J ^a   Overbeek, L I H ^c   Broeders, M J M ^a,b,d   Wesseling, J ^f   den Heeten, G J ^a,b,d,e   de Koning, H J ^a  

^a ERASMUS MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^b RADBOUD UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^c the nationwide network and registry of histopathology and cytopathology in the Netherlands   (Netherlands)

^d National Expert and Training Centre for Breast Cancer Screening   (Netherlands)

^e ACADEMIC MEDICAL CENTER   (Netherlands)

^f NETHERLANDS CANCER INSTITUTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

Breast cancer; Ductal carcinoma in situ; MISCAN; Overdiagnosis; Screening

Indexed keywords

AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CANCER GRADING; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; EARLY CANCER DIAGNOSIS; FEMALE; HEALTH SERVICE; HEALTH SURVEY; HUMAN; MASS SCREENING; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PATHOLOGY; REGISTER;

AGED; BREAST NEOPLASMS; CARCINOMA, INTRADUCTAL, NONINFILTRATING; EARLY DETECTION OF CANCER; FEMALE; HUMANS; MASS SCREENING; MEDICAL OVERUSE; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM GRADING; NETHERLANDS; POPULATION SURVEILLANCE; REGISTRIES;

EID: 84971261491     PISSN: 14655411     EISSN: 1465542X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/s13058-016-0705-5     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Jones JL. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: progression of ductal carcinoma in situ: the pathological perspective. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8(2):204. doi: 10.1186/bcr1397.
2. Registry TNC. Cijfersoverkanker. 2013. http://www.cijfersoverkanker.nl. Accessed 17 Sept 2013.
3. Hofvind S, Lee CI, Elmore JG. Stage-specific breast cancer incidence rates among participants and non-participants of a population-based mammographic screening program. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;135(1):291-9. doi: 10.1007/s10549-012-2162-x.
4. de Gelder R, Heijnsdijk EA, van Ravesteyn NT, Fracheboud J, Draisma G, de Koning HJ. Interpreting overdiagnosis estimates in population-based mammography screening. Epidemiol Rev. 2011;33(1):111-21. doi: 10.1093/epirev/mxr009.
5. Yen MF, Tabar L, Vitak B, Smith RA, Chen HH, Duffy SW. Quantifying the potential problem of overdiagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast cancer screening. Eur J Cancer. 2003;39(12):1746-54.
6. Evans AJ, Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Wilson AR. Screen detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): overdiagnosis or an obligate precursor of invasive disease? J Med Screen. 2001;8(3):149-51.
7. Douglas-Jones AG, Gupta SK, Attanoos RL, Morgan JM, Mansel RE. A critical appraisal of six modern classifications of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS): correlation with grade of associated invasive carcinoma. Histopathology. 1996;29(5):397-409.
8. Moulis S, Sgroi DC. Re-evaluating early breast neoplasia. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10(1):302. doi: 10.1186/bcr1853.
9. Vos CB, ter Haar NT, Rosenberg C, Peterse JL, Cleton-Jansen AM, Cornelisse CJ, 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(8):1410-8. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6693372.
10. Ellis IO. Intraductal proliferative lesions of the breast: morphology, associated risk and molecular biology. Mod Pathol. 2010;23 Suppl 2:S1-7. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.56.
11. Gupta SK, Douglas-Jones AG, Fenn N, Morgan JM, Mansel RE. The clinical behavior of breast carcinoma is probably determined at the preinvasive stage (ductal carcinoma in situ). Cancer. 1997;80(9):1740-5. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19971101)80:9<1740::AID-CNCR7>3.0.CO;2-I.
12. Tsikitis VL, Chung MA. Biology of ductal carcinoma in situ classification based on biologic potential. Am J Clin Oncol. 2006;29(3):305-10. doi: 10.1097/01.coc.0000198740.33617.2f.
13. Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group, Correa C, McGale P, Taylor C, Wang Y, Clarke M, et al. Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010(41):162-77. doi: 10.1093/jncimonographs/lgq039.
14. de Roos MA, van der Vegt B, de Vries J, Wesseling J, de Bock GH. Pathological and biological differences between screen-detected and interval ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(7):2097-104. doi: 10.1245/s10434-007-9395-7.
15. Kessar P, Perry N, Vinnicombe SJ, Hussain HK, Carpenter R, Wells CA. How significant is detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in a breast screening programme? Clin Radiol. 2002;57(9):807-14.
16. Meijnen P, Peterse JL, Oldenburg HS, Woerdeman LA, Rutgers EJ. Changing patterns in diagnosis and treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31(8):833-9. doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2005.03.016.
17. Kerlikowske K, Molinaro AM, Gauthier ML, Berman HK, Waldman F, Bennington J, et al. Biomarker expression and risk of subsequent tumors after initial ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(9):627-37. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djq101.
18. 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(6):499-505. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2010.05.014.
19. Bluekens AM, Holland R, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ. Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicenter study. Radiology. 2012;265(3):707-14. doi: 10.1148/radiol.12111461.
20. Casparie M, Tiebosch AT, Burger G, Blauwgeers H, van de Pol A, van Krieken JH, et al. Pathology databanking and biobanking in The Netherlands, a central role for PALGA, the nationwide histopathology and cytopathology data network and archive. Cell Oncol. 2007;29(1):19-24.
21. Holland R, Peterse JL, Millis RR, Eusebi V, Faverly D, van de Vijver MJ, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: a proposal for a new classification. Semin Diagn Pathol. 1994;11(3):167-80.
22. Habbema JD, van Oortmarssen GJ, Lubbe JT, van der Maas PJ. The MISCAN simulation program for the evaluation of screening for disease. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 1985;20(1):79-93.
23. Jemal A, Center MM, DeSantis C, Ward EM. Global patterns of cancer incidence and mortality rates and trends. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2010;19(8):1893-907. doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-10-0437.
24. Burnside ES, Trentham-Dietz A, Kelcz F, Collins J. An example of breast cancer regression on imaging. Radiology Case Reports. 2006;1(2):27-37.
25. Dehen R. Regression of ductal carcinoma in situ after treatment with acupuncture. J Altern Complement Med. 2013;19(11):911-5. doi: 10.1089/acm.2012.0696.
26. NETB. Interim report 2011. Main results 2008-2009 breast cancer screening programme in the Netherlands. Report. Rotterdam/Nijmegen: ErasmusMC/UMC St Radboud: Department of Public Health/Department of Epidemiology BaH; 2011.
27. Marmot MG, Altman DG, Cameron DA, Dewar JA, Thompson SG, Wilcox M. The benefits and harms of breast cancer screening: an independent review. Br J Cancer. 2013;108(11):2205-40. doi: 10.1038/bjc.2013.177.
28. de Gelder R, Fracheboud J, Heijnsdijk EA, den Heeten G, Verbeek AL, Broeders MJ, et al. Digital mammography screening: weighing reduced mortality against increased overdiagnosis. Prev Med. 2011;53(3):134-40. doi: 10.1016/j.ypmed.2011.06.009.
29. 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(9):1778-84. doi: 10.1002/cncr.20979.
30. Sanders ME, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD, Page DL. The natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women treated by biopsy only revealed over 30 years of long-term follow-up. Cancer. 2005;103(12):2481-4. doi: 10.1002/cncr.21069.
31. Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V, Sopik V, Sun P. Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(7):888-96. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.2510.
32. Shin HJ, Kim HH, Kim SM, Kwon GY, Gong G, Cho OK. Screening-detected and symptomatic ductal carcinoma in situ: differences in the sonographic and pathologic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;190(2):516-25. doi: 10.2214/AJR.07.2206.
33. Weigel S, Hense HW, Heidrich J, Berkemeyer S, Heindel W, Heidinger O. Digital mammography screening: does age influence the detection rates of low-, intermediate-, and high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ? Radiol. 2015:150322. doi: 10.1148/radiol.2015150322.
34. Millis RR, Ryder K, Fentiman IS. Ductal in situ component and prognosis in invasive mammary carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2004;84(2):197-8. doi: 10.1023/B:BREA.0000018434.04960.02.
35. Omer ZB, Hwang ES, Esserman LJ, Howe R, Ozanne EM. Impact of ductal carcinoma in situ terminology on patient treatment preferences. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173(19):1830-1. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.8405.
36. Peres J. DCIS test helps filter at-risk patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2012;104(24):1853-5. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djs515.
37. Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L, van Leeuwen-Stok AE, Skinner VP, Dif N, 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(12):1497-510. doi: 10.1016/j.ejca.2015.05.008.