Comparison of Ductal Lavage and Random Periareolar Fine Needle Aspiration as Tissue Acquisition Methods in Early Breast Cancer Prevention Trials

Purpose: Short-term phase I and phase II breast cancer prevention trials require tissue acquisition at baseline and after intervention to evaluate modulation of potential biomarkers. Currently used tissue acquisition methods include ductal lavage (DL), random periareolar fine needle aspiration (RPFNA), and core needle biopsy. The optimum method to retrieve adequate samples and the most accepted method by study participants is not known. Experimental Design: We compared RPFNA and DL as breast tissue acquisition methods for short-term breast cancer prevention trials by evaluating sample adequacy and tolerability in subjects who participated in two prospective phase II breast cancer prevention trials. Eighty-six women at increased risk for breast cancer were included in this study and underwent baseline DL and RPFNA. High risk was defined as having a 5-year Gail score of >1.67% or a history of atypical hyperplasia (AH), lobular carcinoma, or breast cancer. Results: Median age was 54.5 years (range, 39-75 years); 75% of the women were postmenopausal. About 51% of the women yielded nipple aspiration fluid, and breast fluid samples via DL were retrieved in 73% of these subjects. Of these samples, 71% were adequate samples (greater than 10 epithelial cells). However, when the entire cohort was considered, only 31% of the subjects had adequate samples. RPFNA was also attempted in all subjects, and sample retrieval rate was 100%. Out of these, 96% of the subjects had adequate samples. In DL samples, AH rate was 3.7% was and hyperplasia (H) rate was 11.1%. In RPFNA samples, AH rate was 12.9%, and H rate was 24.7%. Cytology findings in RPFNA samples correlated with age, menopausal status, and breast cancer risk category (previous history of lobular carcinoma in situ). Both procedures were well tolerated, and no complications occurred among participants. Conclusions: Considering that the main end point for short-term prevention trials is the modulation of biomarkers, it is important to optimize adequate sample acquisition; therefore, RPFNA is a more practical option for future phase I and II breast cancer prevention trials compared with DL.

[1]  R. Brown,et al.  Frequency of benign and malignant breast lesions in 207 consecutive autopsies in Australian women. , 1985, British Journal of Cancer.

[2]  J. A. Andersen,et al.  Breast cancer and atypia among young and middle-aged women: a study of 110 medicolegal autopsies. , 1987, British Journal of Cancer.

[3]  C. Zalles,et al.  Comparison of cytomorphology in specimens obtained by random periareolar fine needle aspiration and ductal lavage from women at high risk for development of breast cancer , 2006, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[4]  M. Dowsett,et al.  Effects of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole on normal breast epithelial cell proliferation and metabolic indices in postmenopausal women: a pilot study for breast cancer prevention. , 2002, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[5]  P. Goss,et al.  The role of COX-2 inhibition in breast cancer treatment and prevention. , 2004, Seminars in oncology.

[6]  M. Morrow,et al.  Ductal lavage and ductoscopy: the opportunities and the limitations. , 2002, Clinical breast cancer.

[7]  M. Mayo,et al.  Breast-tissue sampling for risk assessment and prevention. , 2005, Endocrine-related cancer.

[8]  B. Arun.  Ductal lavage and risk assessment of breast cancer. , 2004, The oncologist.

[9]  B. Trock,et al.  A Pilot Study to Establish a Clinical Model to Perform Phase II Studies of Breast Cancer Chemopreventive Agents in Women at High Risk with Biomarkers as Surrogate Endpoints for Activity , 2004, Clinical Cancer Research.

[10]  J. Kirk,et al.  Nipple aspiration and ductal lavage in women with a germline BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation , 2005, Breast Cancer Research.

[11]  M. Cazzaniga,et al.  Atypia and Ki-67 Expression from Ductal Lavage in Women at Different Risk for Breast Cancer , 2006, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[12]  D. Rimm,et al.  Patterns of reduced nipple aspirate fluid production and ductal lavage cellularity in women at high risk for breast cancer , 2005, Breast Cancer Research.

[13]  K. Siziopikou,et al.  Correlation of nipple aspiration and ductal lavage cytology with histopathologic findings for patients before scheduled breast biopsy examination. , 2006, American journal of surgery.

[14]  M. Skolnick,et al.  Inheritance of proliferative breast disease in breast cancer kindreds. , 1990, Science.

[15]  C. Osborne,et al.  Morphologic and Immunophenotypic Markers as Surrogate Endpoints of Tamoxifen Effect for Prevention of Breast Cancer , 2005, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[16]  L. Kiemeney,et al.  High prevalence of premalignant lesions in prophylactically removed breasts from women at hereditary risk for breast cancer. , 2003, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[17]  William E Grizzle,et al.  A phase II breast cancer chemoprevention trial of oral alpha-difluoromethylornithine: breast tissue, imaging, and serum and urine biomarkers. , 2002, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[18]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Progress in breast cancer chemoprevention. , 2002, Endocrine-related cancer.

[19]  C. Zalles,et al.  Failure of High Risk Women to Produce Nipple Aspirate Fluid Does Not Exclude Detection of Cytologic Atypia in Random Periareolar Fine Needle Aspiration Specimens , 2004, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[20]  C K Redmond,et al.  Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. , 1999, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[21]  R. Champlin,et al.  Nonmyeloablative stem cell transplantation for lymphoma. , 2004, Seminars in oncology.

[22]  D. Francescatti,et al.  Ductal lavage using medically aseptic technique in women at high risk for breast cancer. , 2004, Clinical breast cancer.

[23]  N. Sneige,et al.  Correlation of cytologic findings and chromosomal instability detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization in breast fine-needle aspiration specimens from women at high risk for breast cancer , 2006, Modern Pathology.

[24]  Victoria L. Seewaldt,et al.  Retinoic Acid Receptor-β2 Promoter Methylation in Random Periareolar Fine Needle Aspiration , 2005, Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[25]  B. Ljung,et al.  Ductal lavage for detection of cellular atypia in women at high risk for breast cancer. , 2001, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[26]  S. Khan.  The role of ductal lavage in the management of women at high risk for breast carcinoma , 2004, Current treatment options in oncology.

[27]  M. Mayo,et al.  Short-term breast cancer prediction by random periareolar fine-needle aspiration cytology and the Gail risk model. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[28]  G. Mills,et al.  Progress in Chemoprevention Drug Development: The Promise of Molecular Biomarkers for Prevention of Intraepithelial Neoplasia and Cancer—A Plan to Move Forward , 2006, Clinical Cancer Research.