Tubular carcinoma of the breast: further evidence to support its excellent prognosis.

PURPOSE Although tubular carcinoma (TC) is known to have a favorable prognosis, it is still unknown whether this subtype represents a distinct type of breast carcinoma or whether it behaves like other low-grade luminal A-type breast carcinomas. METHODS In this study, we performed a retrospective analysis of a large well-characterized series of breast cancers (2,608 carcinomas) to assess the clinicopathologic and molecular features and prognostic value of TC compared with grade 1 ductal carcinomas of the breast. Results When compared with grade 1 ductal carcinoma (n = 212), TC (n = 102) was more likely to be detected on mammographic screening, had smaller median size, and less frequently showed lymphovascular invasion. Compared with grade 1 ductal carcinoma, TC was associated with longer disease-free survival (chi(2) = 13.25, P < .001) and breast cancer-specific survival (chi(2) = 8.8, P = .003). In this study, none of the patients with TC developed distant metastasis or died from the disease without an intervening recurrence as invasive carcinoma of different histologic type. CONCLUSION We conclude that the biologic behavior of TC is excellent and is more favorable than that of grade 1 ductal carcinoma. Patients with TC may be at risk of developing second primary carcinomas in the contralateral breast, which may be of higher grade and poorer potential prognostic outcome. In addition, patients with TC seem to have a close to normal life expectancy, and as a consequence, adjuvant systemic therapy may not be justified in their routine management.

[1]  Barbara L. Smith,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast: results of a large contemporary series. , 2009, American journal of surgery.

[2]  J. Peterse,et al.  Refinement of breast cancer classification by molecular characterization of histological special types , 2008, The Journal of pathology.

[3]  Ian O Ellis,et al.  Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. , 2008, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[4]  G. Turashvili,et al.  Are columnar cell lesions the earliest histologically detectable non-obligate precursor of breast cancer? , 2008, Virchows Archiv.

[5]  I. Ellis,et al.  Morphologic and Molecular Evolutionary Pathways of Low Nuclear Grade Invasive Breast Cancers and Their Putative Precursor Lesions: Further Evidence to Support the Concept of Low Nuclear Grade Breast Neoplasia Family , 2008, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[6]  J. Noël,et al.  Expression of cathepsin D and galectin 3 in tubular carcinomas of the breast , 2008, APMIS : acta pathologica, microbiologica, et immunologica Scandinavica.

[7]  R W Blamey,et al.  Survival of invasive breast cancer according to the Nottingham Prognostic Index in cases diagnosed in 1990-1999. , 2007, European journal of cancer.

[8]  G. Gong,et al.  Pure and Mixed Tubular Carcinoma of the Breast: Mammographic and Sonographic Differential Features , 2007, Korean journal of radiology.

[9]  A. Oktay,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast: Mammographic, sonographic, clinical and pathologic findings , 2007 .

[10]  T. Simonart,et al.  Microvessel and lymphatic density in tubular carcinoma of the breast: comparative study with invasive low-grade ductal carcinoma. , 2006, Breast.

[11]  J. Robertson,et al.  Morphological and immunophenotypic analysis of breast carcinomas with basal and myoepithelial differentiation , 2006, The Journal of pathology.

[12]  J. Daling,et al.  Clinical characteristics of different histologic types of breast cancer , 2005, British Journal of Cancer.

[13]  G. Ball,et al.  High‐throughput protein expression analysis using tissue microarray technology of a large well‐characterised series identifies biologically distinct classes of breast cancer confirming recent cDNA expression analyses , 2005, International journal of cancer.

[14]  M. Sherman,et al.  Comparison of age-specific incidence rate patterns for different histopathologic types of breast carcinoma. , 2004, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[15]  C. Axelsson,et al.  The Nottingham Prognostic Index applied to 9,149 patients from the studies of the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG) , 2004, Breast Cancer Research and Treatment.

[16]  G. Cserni,et al.  Tumour histological grade may progress between primary and recurrent invasive mammary carcinoma. , 2002, Journal of Clinical Pathology.

[17]  E. Berg,et al.  World Health Organization Classification of Tumours , 2002 .

[18]  S. Devries,et al.  Genomic alterations in tubular breast carcinomas. , 2001, Human pathology.

[19]  I. Olivotto,et al.  Tubular Carcinoma of the Breast: A Population‐Based Study of Nodal Metastases at Presentation and of Patterns of Relapse , 2001, The breast journal.

[20]  R. Gelber,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast: Prognosis and response to adjuvant systemic therapy , 2001, ANZ journal of surgery.

[21]  J. Lamb,et al.  Pathology characteristics that optimize outcome prediction of a breast screening trial , 2000, British Journal of Cancer.

[22]  S. Edge,et al.  Prognostic factors in breast cancer , 2005 .

[23]  H. Stalsberg,et al.  The delimitation of tubular carcinomaof the breast , 2000 .

[24]  G. Inghirami,et al.  Tubular Carcinoma of the Breast: Immunohistochemical and DNA Flow Cytometric Profile , 1999, The breast journal.

[25]  I. Ellis,et al.  The prognosis of small primary breast cancers. , 1999, European journal of cancer.

[26]  G M Clark,et al.  Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of tubular and mucinous breast carcinomas. , 1999, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[27]  A. Hanby,et al.  Comparative genomic hybridization of breast tumors stratified by histological grade reveals new insights into the biological progression of breast cancer. , 1999, Cancer research.

[28]  S. Helmer,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast: an institutional review. , 1997, The American surgeon.

[29]  M. Cranor,et al.  A comparative study of pure tubular and tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast. , 1997, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[30]  S. Singletary,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast. Predicting axillary nodal metastases and recurrence. , 1996, Annals of Surgery.

[31]  S. Pinder,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. IV: Should you be a typer or a grader? A comparative study of two histological prognostic features in operable breast carcinoma , 1995, Histopathology.

[32]  R. Walker,et al.  Pathological and biological features of mammographically detected invasive breast carcinomas. , 1995, British Journal of Cancer.

[33]  R. Blamey,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. II. Histological type. Relationship with survival in a large study with long‐term follow‐up , 1992, Histopathology.

[34]  I. Ellis,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. , 2002, Histopathology.

[35]  S Hellman,et al.  Pathological prognostic factors in stage I (T1N0M0) and stage II (T1N1M0) breast carcinoma: a study of 644 patients with median follow-up of 18 years. , 1989, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[36]  P. Carstens,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast. A long term follow‐up , 1985, Histopathology.

[37]  F. Parl,et al.  The histologic and biologic spectrum of tubular carcinoma of the breast. , 1983, Human pathology.

[38]  H. Norris,et al.  Well-differentiated (tubular) carcinoma of the breast. A clinicopathologic study of 145 pure and mixed cases. , 1982, American journal of clinical pathology.

[39]  D. Gersell,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast: Clinical and pathological observations concerning 135 cases , 1982, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[40]  G. Peters,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast. Clinical pathologic correlations based on 100 cases. , 1981, Annals of surgery.

[41]  H. Oberman,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast , 1979, The American journal of surgical pathology.

[42]  P. Carstens Tubular carcinoma of the breast. A study of frequency. , 1978, American journal of clinical pathology.

[43]  S. Feig,et al.  The pathology of breast cancer detected by mass population screening , 1977, Cancer.

[44]  P. Rosen,et al.  Medullary carcinoma of the breast. A clinicopathologic study with 10 year follow‐up , 1977, Cancer.

[45]  H. Salazar,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast. Clinical, histological, and ultrastructural observations. , 1977, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[46]  A. Huvos,et al.  Tubular carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathologic study of 35 cases. , 1972, American Journal of Clinical Pathology.