Quantitative nuclear morphometry by image analysis for prediction of recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Clinical management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains a challenge because significant proportions of patients experience recurrence after conservative surgical treatment. Unfortunately, it is difficult to prospectively identify, using objective criteria, patients who are at high risk of recurrence and might benefit from additional treatment. We conducted a multi-institutional, collaborative case-control study to identify nuclear morphometric features that would be useful for identifying women with DCIS at the highest risk of recurrence. Tissue sections of archival breast tissue of 29 women with recurrent and 73 matched women with nonrecurrent DCIS were stained for DNA, and nuclei in the DCIS lesions were evaluated by image analysis. A clear correlation between mean fractal2_area (FA2) and nuclear grade was observed (P < 0.001), allowing an objective determination of nuclear grade. Several nuclear morphometric features, including mean and variance of variation of radius, mean area, mean and variance of frequency of high boundary harmonics (FQH), and variance in sphericity, were found to be useful in discriminating recurrent from nonrecurrent DCIS subjects. However, the nuclear features associated with recurrence differed between high- and low-grade lesions. For lesions with high FA2 (nuclear grade 3), mean variation of radius, mean FQH, and mean area alone yielded recurrence odds ratios of 4.55 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45-45.96], 3.86 (95% CI, 0.88-16.98), 2.90 (95% CI, 0.31-27.2), respectively. Using a summed feature model, high-FA2 lesions showing three poor prognostic features had an odds ratio of 15.63 (95% CI, 1.22-200), compared with those with zero or one poor prognostic feature. Lesions with low mean FA2 (nuclear grade 1 or 2) showing high variances in sphericity and FQH had an odds ratio of 7.71 (95% CI, 1.77-33.60). Addition of other features did not enhance the odds ratio or its significance. These results suggest that nuclear image analysis of DCIS lesions may provide an adjunctive tool to conventional pathological analysis, both for the objective assessment of nuclear grade and for the identification of features that predict patient outcome.

[1]  F. B. Sørensen,et al.  Reproducibility of mean nuclear volume and correlation with mean nuclear area in breast cancer: an investigation of various sampling schemes. , 1994, Human pathology.

[2]  G. Serio,et al.  Nuclear shape and axillary metastases in breast cancer. Analytic morphometry of aspiration smears. , 1994, Acta cytologica.

[3]  L. Liberman,et al.  Long term follow‐up of women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast‐conserving surgery , 1999, Cancer.

[4]  R. Mansel,et al.  A critical appraisal of six modern classifications of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS): correlation with grade of associated invasive carcinoma , 1996, Histopathology.

[5]  A W Partin,et al.  A comparison of nuclear morphometry and Gleason grade as a predictor of prognosis in stage A2 prostate cancer: a critical analysis. , 1989, The Journal of urology.

[6]  B Fisher,et al.  Lumpectomy compared with lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer. , 1993, The New England journal of medicine.

[7]  Geoff Delaney M.B.B.S.,et al.  Predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ - A meta-analysis , 1999 .

[8]  J. Torhorst,et al.  Prognostic significance (relapse, non-relapse) of nuclear shape parameters in lymph node negative breast cancer. , 1989, Analytical cellular pathology : the journal of the European Society for Analytical Cellular Pathology.

[9]  G. Hortobagyi,et al.  Ductal Carcinoma-In-Situ: Long-Term Results of Breast-Conserving Therapy , 2000, Annals of Surgical Oncology.

[10]  N. Sneige,et al.  Ductal carcinoma in situ treated with lumpectomy and irradiation: histopathological analysis of 49 specimens with emphasis on risk factors and long term results. , 1995, Human pathology.

[11]  G. Schwartz,et al.  Consensus Conference on the Treatment of In Situ Ductal Carcinoma of the Breast, April 22-25, 1999. , 2000, Cancer.

[12]  P. O’Connell,et al.  Analysis of loss of heterozygosity in 399 premalignant breast lesions at 15 genetic loci. , 1998, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[13]  J. Costantino,et al.  Lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-17. , 1998, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[14]  J. Stanford,et al.  Risk of recurrence after ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. , 1998, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[15]  J. Boyages,et al.  Predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis. , 1999, Cancer.

[16]  Z. Werb,et al.  Matrix Metalloproteinase Stromelysin-1 Triggers a Cascade of Molecular Alterations That Leads to Stable Epithelial-to-Mesenchymal Conversion and a Premalignant Phenotype in Mammary Epithelial Cells , 1997, The Journal of cell biology.

[17]  David A. Belsley,et al.  Conditioning Diagnostics: Collinearity and Weak Data in Regression , 1991 .

[18]  M. Lagios Duct carcinoma in situ. Pathology and treatment. , 1990, The Surgical clinics of North America.

[19]  Joseph Costantino,et al.  Pathologic findings from the national surgical adjuvant breast project (NSABP) protocol B‐17. Intraductal carcinoma (ductal carcinoma in situ) , 1995, Cancer.

[20]  S. Martino,et al.  The influence of margin width on local control of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. , 1999, The New England journal of medicine.

[21]  J. Hendriks,et al.  Extent, distribution, and mammographic/ histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ , 1990, The Lancet.

[22]  S. Paik,et al.  Pathologic findings from the national surgical adjuvant breast project (protocol 6) I. Intraductal carcinoma (DCIS) , 1986, Cancer.

[23]  R. Baker,et al.  Prognostic factors in patients with stage I, estrogen receptor‐negative carcinoma of the breast. A clinicopathologic study , 1983, Cancer.

[24]  G. Schwartz,et al.  [The consensus conference on the treatment of in situ ductal carcinoma of the breast, April 22-25, 1999]. , 2000, Bulletin du cancer.

[25]  G. Noël,et al.  [Radiotherapy in breast-conserving treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: first results of the EORTC randomised phase III trial 10853]. , 2001, Cancer radiotherapie : journal de la Societe francaise de radiotherapie oncologique.

[26]  R W Veltri,et al.  Genetically engineered neural networks for predicting prostate cancer progression after radical prostatectomy. , 1999, Urology.

[27]  James Dignam,et al.  Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-24 randomised controlled trial , 1999, The Lancet.

[28]  G. Garas,et al.  Intralaboratory variations in the grading of breast carcinoma. , 1982, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[29]  P H Bartels,et al.  Data representation and reduction for chromatin texture in nuclei from premalignant prostatic, esophageal, and colonic lesions. , 2000, Cytometry.

[30]  M. Silverstein,et al.  Ductal carcinoma in situ. The success of breast conservation therapy: a shared experience of two single institutional nonrandomized prospective studies. , 1997, Surgical oncology clinics of North America.

[31]  C. MacAulay,et al.  Nuclear morphometry as an intermediate endpoint biomarker in chemoprevention of cervical carcinoma using alpha-difluoromethylornithine. , 1999, Cytometry.

[32]  M. Silverstein,et al.  Duct carcinoma in situ: 227 cases without microinvasion. , 1992, European journal of cancer.

[33]  R E Hermann,et al.  Predicting the likelihood of residual disease in women treated for ductal carcinoma in situ. , 1999, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[34]  M J Gaffey,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. , 1995, American journal of clinical pathology.

[35]  R. Veltri,et al.  The role of biopsy pathology, quantitative nuclear morphometry, and biomarkers in the preoperative prediction of prostate cancer staging and prognosis. , 1998, Seminars in urologic oncology.

[36]  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.

[37]  R W Veltri,et al.  Ability to predict biochemical progression using Gleason score and a computer-generated quantitative nuclear grade derived from cancer cell nuclei. , 1996, Urology.

[38]  D C Young,et al.  An algorithm for predicting nonorgan confined prostate cancer using the results obtained from sextant core biopsies with prostate specific antigen level. , 1996, The Journal of urology.

[39]  A. Patchefsky,et al.  Subclinical ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: Treatment by local excision and surveillance alone , 1992, Cancer.

[40]  B Palcic,et al.  Malignancy-associated changes in the breast. Changes in chromatin distribution in epithelial cells in normal-appearing tissue adjacent to carcinoma. , 1995, Analytical and quantitative cytology and histology.

[41]  A. Sabichi,et al.  Interobserver reproducibility of the Lagios nuclear grading system for ductal carcinoma in situ. , 1999, Human pathology.

[42]  H. Thornton,et al.  Ductal carcinoma-in-situ of the breast , 1992, The Lancet.

[43]  S. Devries,et al.  Chromosomal alterations in ductal carcinomas in situ and their in situ recurrences. , 2000, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[44]  V. Weaver,et al.  Tissue structure, nuclear organization, and gene expression in normal and malignant breast. , 1999, Cancer research.

[45]  O L Mangasarian,et al.  Importance of nuclear morphology in breast cancer prognosis. , 1999, Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research.

[46]  D. Schultz,et al.  Fifteen-year results of breast-conserving surgery and definitive breast irradiation for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. , 1996, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[47]  D. Visscher,et al.  Image cytophotometric DNA analysis of atypical hyperplasias and intraductal carcinomas of the breast. , 1990, Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine.

[48]  R. Montironi,et al.  Computed cell cycle and DNA histogram analyses in image cytometry in breast cancer. , 1993, Journal of clinical pathology.

[49]  D. Pinkel,et al.  The Stromal Proteinase MMP3/Stromelysin-1 Promotes Mammary Carcinogenesis , 1999, Cell.

[50]  F. Vicini,et al.  Factors associated with local recurrence of mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ in patients given breast‐conserving therapy , 2000, Cancer.

[51]  K Rodenacker,et al.  Identification of a low‐risk group of stage I breast cancer patients by cytometrically assessed DNA and nuclear texture parameters , 1995, The Journal of pathology.

[52]  B Palcic,et al.  Nuclear texture measurements in image cytometry. , 1995, Pathologica.

[53]  L. Cheng,et al.  Relationship between the size and margin status of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast and residual disease. , 1997, Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

[54]  W. Dupont,et al.  Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15–25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy , 1995, Cancer.

[55]  J. V. Bacus,et al.  Image morphometric nuclear grading of intraepithelial neoplastic lesions with applications to cancer chemoprevention trials. , 1999, Cancer epidemiology, biomarkers & prevention : a publication of the American Association for Cancer Research, cosponsored by the American Society of Preventive Oncology.

[56]  M. Lagios,et al.  Mammographically detected duct carcinoma in situ. Frequency of local recurrence following tylectomy and prognostic effect of nuclear grade on local recurrence , 1989, Cancer.