Are fine‐needle aspiration biopsy‐derived cell blocks a useful surrogate for tissue samples in breast cancer?

The diagnosis of breast cancer (BC) is based on clinical examination in combination with imaging, and confirmed by pathological assessment of core needle biopsy or fine‐needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB). The biological profile of the lesion is needed to define the prognosis and establish therapy. Given the importance of an early and minimally invasive diagnosis, we aimed to verify whether the biological features detected in FNAB‐derived cytological material reflect the biological characteristics of surgical samples.

[1]  L. Thabane,et al.  A sensitivity and specificity comparison of fine needle aspiration cytology and core needle biopsy in evaluation of suspicious breast lesions: A systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2017, Breast.

[2]  P. Candoli,et al.  Easily detectable cytomorphological features to evaluate during ROSE for rapid lung cancer diagnosis: from cytology to histology , 2016, Oncotarget.

[3]  B. Ljung,et al.  Estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 expression in breast cancer FNA cell blocks and paired histologic specimens: A large retrospective study , 2016, Cancer cytopathology.

[4]  H. Kuerer,et al.  Incremental cancer detection using breast ultrasonography versus breast magnetic resonance imaging in the evaluation of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients. , 2016, The British journal of radiology.

[5]  D. Amadori,et al.  ALK translocation detection in non‐small cell lung cancer cytological samples obtained by TBNA or EBUS‐TBNA , 2016, Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology.

[6]  E. Inwald,et al.  4-IHC classification of breast cancer subtypes in a large cohort of a clinical cancer registry: use in clinical routine for therapeutic decisions and its effect on survival , 2015, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[7]  E. Balslev,et al.  Reliability of histological malignancy grade, ER and HER2 status on core needle biopsy vs surgical specimen in breast cancer , 2014, APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica.

[8]  Gustav Stålhammar,et al.  Low concordance of biomarkers in histopathological and cytological material from breast cancer , 2014, Histopathology.

[9]  D. Amadori,et al.  Molecular determinations of EGFR and EML4-ALK on a single slide of NSCLC tissue , 2013, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[10]  D. Dabbs,et al.  The effect of 96-hour formalin fixation on the immunohistochemical evaluation of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 expression in invasive breast carcinoma. , 2012, American journal of clinical pathology.

[11]  Jianlun Liu,et al.  Diagnostic value of fine-needle aspiration biopsy for breast mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis , 2012, BMC Cancer.

[12]  P. V. van Diest,et al.  Diagnosis of breast lesions: fine-needle aspiration cytology or core needle biopsy? A review , 2011, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[13]  Jorge S Reis-Filho,et al.  Molecular profiling currently offers no more than tumour morphology and basic immunohistochemistry , 2010, Breast Cancer Research.

[14]  Rohit Bhargava,et al.  Histopathologic variables predict Oncotype DX™ Recurrence Score , 2008, Modern Pathology.

[15]  Thomas Rüdiger,et al.  Inter‐laboratory and inter‐observer reproducibility of immunohistochemical assessment of the Ki‐67 labelling index in a large multi‐centre trial , 2002, The Journal of pathology.

[16]  E. Rutgers,et al.  Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. , 2015, Annals of oncology : official journal of the European Society for Medical Oncology.

[17]  H. Iwase,et al.  Comparison of prognostic values between combined immunohistochemical score of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, Ki-67 and the corresponding gene expression score in breast cancer , 2013, Modern Pathology.

[18]  Medical Advisory Secretariat.  Screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years at average risk for breast cancer: an evidence-based analysis. , 2007, Ontario health technology assessment series.