Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ: treatment options for a new pathologic entity.

Introduction Not only is breast carcinoma the second leading cause of cancer mortality, it is also the most common form of cancer in women. Accumulation of genetic alterations within a single clone of cells eventually leads to uncontrolled growth. Models of progression of breast carcinoma suggest that the epithelial cell gives rise to carcinoma in situ after first going through phases of hyperplasia and atypical hyperplasia. In 1941, lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) was first described as a preinvasive lesion with inevitable progression to invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). Total mastectomy was the standard recommendation. Haagensen, while working at Columbia University, was the first to describe LCIS progressing to ILC. In 1978, Rosen stated that total astectomy with low axillary dissection was the most logical operaive procedure for LCIS and that a contralateral biopsy should be erformed to rule out bilaterality. By the 1980s, LCIS was accepted as a marker for increased risk rather than a precancerous lesion, and

[1]  Norman Wolmark,et al.  Effects of tamoxifen vs raloxifene on the risk of developing invasive breast cancer and other disease outcomes: the NSABP Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 trial. , 2006, JAMA.

[2]  Norman Wolmark,et al.  Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project , 2004, Cancer.

[3]  C. Bartoli,et al.  Interpretation of the risk associated with the unexpected finding of lobular carcinoma in situ , 2006, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[4]  S. Devries,et al.  Genetic and Phenotypic Characteristics of Pleomorphic Lobular Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast , 2009, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[5]  Baljit Singh,et al.  Is surgical excision necessary for the management of atypical lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ diagnosed on core needle biopsy?: a report of 38 cases and review of the literature. , 2009, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[6]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  © 1997 Cancer Research Campaign , 2022 .

[7]  Partha S. Ray,et al.  The Florid Subtype of Lobular Carcinoma In Situ: Marker or Precursor for Invasive Lobular Carcinoma? , 2011, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[8]  T. Tot,et al.  Lobular Intraepithelial Neoplasia [Lobular Carcinoma In Situ] With Comedo-type Necrosis: A Clinicopathologic Study of 18 Cases , 2006, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[9]  G. Swanson,et al.  The continuing dilemma of lobular carcinoma in situ. , 1992, Archives of surgery.

[10]  R. Goldschmidt,et al.  Lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. , 1996, Seminars in surgical oncology.

[11]  D. Dabbs,et al.  Lobular Versus Ductal Breast Neoplasms: The Diagnostic Utility of P120 Catenin , 2007, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[12]  S. Barsky,et al.  Should LCIS Be Regarded as a Heterogeneous Disease? , 1999, The breast journal.

[13]  M. Wunderlich,et al.  [Carcinoma in situ of the female breast]. , 1974, Zentralblatt fur Chirurgie.

[14]  C. Bodian,et al.  Lobular neoplasia (so‐called lobular carcinoma in situ) of the breast , 1978, Cancer.

[15]  I. Christensen,et al.  Carcinoma in situ of the female breast. 10 year follow-up results of a prospective nationwide study , 2000, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[16]  Melissa P. Murray,et al.  Lobular Carcinoma, Not Only a Classic , 2010, The breast journal.

[17]  M. Chivukula Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ: A divergent entity with emerging significance. , 2011, Oncology.