Comparison of pathological and biological features of symptomatic and mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

To determine whether the ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) detected mammographically or presenting clinically is the same or differs, pathological and biological (c-erbB-2 and p53 detection) features of 79 cases of pure DCIS, 5 cases with microinvasion and 8 cases with 1 to 2 mm of invasion, all detected by mammography, have been compared with 59 cases of pure DCIS, 8 cases with microinvasion and 7 cases with 1 to 2 mm invasion, all of which presented clinically. Half of the mammographically detected group were smaller than 20 mm, and there was a higher incidence of these being low grade, whereas 30% of the symptomatic cases were smaller than 20 mm, and more of this group were larger than 50 mm. For the pure DCIS, there were less high-grade and more intermediate-grade cases in the mammographically detected group, although the incidence of low grade was similar between the two groups. There were more cases with a micropapillary pattern in the symptomatic group. C-erbB-2 protein was detected in 42% of the mammographically detected cases, whereas 59% of the symptomatic cases had c-erbB-2 reactivity. P53 detection was similar for both groups (33.0% and 37.0%). There were more symptomatic cases with invasion, and these were predominantly high grade, whereas the mammographically detected cases were both high and intermediate grade. Twelve of the 15 symptomatic cases with invasion expressed c-erbB-2, in comparison with 4 of the 13 mammographically detected cases, with half of the high-grade lesions in the latter group being negative. This study has shown that although there is overlap of pathological and biological features between DCIS presenting clinically and that detected mammographically, there can be differences in extent, grade, and invasion. The impact of this, however, can be determined only by clinical follow-up.

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

[2]  J. Varley,et al.  Mutation of the TP53 gene and allelic imbalance at chromosome 17p13 in ductal carcinoma in situ. , 1996, British Journal of Cancer.

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

[4]  P. Rosen,et al.  The clinical significance of pre‐invasive breast carcinoma , 1980, Cancer.

[5]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  Neu-protein overexpression in breast cancer. Association with comedo-type ductal carcinoma in situ and limited prognostic value in stage II breast cancer. , 1988, The New England journal of medicine.

[6]  H. Bingham Duct carcinoma in situ–Relationship of extent of non-invasive disease to the frequency of occult invasion, multicentricity, lymph node metastases, and short-term treatment failures , 1983 .

[7]  C. Quinn,et al.  Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the clinical significance of histological classification , 1997, Histopathology.

[8]  M. J. van de Vijver,et al.  Ductal carcinoma in situ: a proposal for a new classification. , 1994, Seminars in diagnostic pathology.

[9]  A. Huggins,et al.  Comparative pathology of breast cancer in a randomised trial of screening. , 1991, British Journal of Cancer.

[10]  M. Stratton,et al.  Loss of heterozygosity in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast , 1995, The Journal of pathology.

[11]  M. Lagios,et al.  Duct carcinoma in situ. Relationship of extent of noninvasive disease to the frequency of occult invasion, multicentricity, lymph node metastases, and short‐term treatment failures , 1982 .

[12]  S. Feig,et al.  Heterogeneity of intraductai carcinoma of the breast , 1989 .

[13]  W. McGuire,et al.  Overexpression of HER-2/neu and its relationship with other prognostic factors change during the progression of in situ to invasive breast cancer. , 1992, Human pathology.

[14]  U. Chetty,et al.  Noninvasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: the relevance of histologic categorization. , 1993, Human pathology.

[15]  J. Davies,et al.  Pathology reporting in breast cancer screening. Royal College of Pathologists Working Group. , 1991, Journal of clinical pathology.

[16]  S. Ashley,et al.  Immunohistochemical distribution of c‐erbB‐2 in in situ breast carcinoma—a detailed morphological analysis , 1990, The Journal of pathology.

[17]  C. Andrews,et al.  Sucrase-isomaltase expression in chronic ulcerative colitis and dysplasia. , 1992, Human pathology.

[18]  D. Lane,et al.  Expression of p53 protein in infiltrating and in‐situ breast carcinomas , 1991, The Journal of pathology.

[19]  M. Gnant,et al.  p53 protein expression, cell proliferation and steroid hormone receptors in ductal and lobular in situ carcinomas of the breast. , 1997, European journal of cancer.

[20]  W. Gregory,et al.  The classification of ductal carcinoma in situ and its association with biological markers. , 1994, Seminars in diagnostic pathology.

[21]  I. Ellis,et al.  p53 protein expression in mammary ductal carcinoma in situ: relationship to immunohistochemical expression of estrogen receptor and c-erbB-2 protein. , 1993, Human pathology.

[22]  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.

[23]  P. Validire,et al.  Mammographically-detected ductal in situ carcinoma of the breast analyzed with a new classification. A study of 127 cases: correlation with estrogen and progesterone receptors, p53 and c-erbB-2 proteins, and proliferative activity. , 1994, Seminars in diagnostic pathology.

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

[25]  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.

[26]  W. Gregory,et al.  Ductal carcinoma in situ: Assessment of necrosis and nuclear morphology and their association with biological markers , 1995, The Journal of pathology.

[27]  J. Bártková,et al.  Immunohistochemical demonstration of c-erbB-2 protein in mammary ductal carcinoma in situ. , 1990, Human pathology.

[28]  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.

[29]  T. Walsh,et al.  Microsatellite instability in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast , 1998, The Journal of pathology.

[30]  P. Rosen The pathological classification of human mammary carcinoma: past, present and future. , 1979, Annals of clinical and laboratory science.