Radiologic and Pathologic Features Associated With Upgrade of Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia at Surgical Excision

Atypical ductal hyperplasia on vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a scoring system to predict the risk of upgrade to malignancy

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

Our multicentric study analysed clinical, radiologic and pathologic features in patients with atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) diagnosed with vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB), to identify factors associated with the risk of upgrade, to develop a scoring system to support decision making.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with ADH on VAB under stereotactic/tomosynthesis guidance (2012-2022) were eligible. Inclusion criteria were availability of surgical histopathological examination of the entire lesion or radiologic follow-up (FUP) ≥ 24 months. VAB results were compared with surgical pathological results or with imaging FUP evolution to assess upgrade. A backward stepwise linear regression was used to identify predictors of upgrade. The discriminatory power of the model was calculated through the area under the receiver operating curve (ROC-AUC); the Hosmer-Lemeshow test was used to assess model calibration. The points system was developed based on the selected risk factors, and the probability of upgrade associated with each point total was determined.

RESULTS

112 ADH lesions were included: 91 (91/112, 81.3%) underwent surgical excision with 20 diagnosis of malignancy, while 21 (21/112, 18.7%) underwent imaging FUP with one interval change (mean FUP time 48 months). Overall upgrade rate was 18.7% (21/112). Age, menopausal status, concurrent breast cancer, BIRADS classification and number of foci of ADH were identified as risk factors for upgrade. Our model showed an AUC = 0.85 (95% CI 0.76-0.94). The points system showed that the risk of upgrade is < 2% when the total score is ≤ 1.

CONCLUSION

Our scoring system seemed a promising easy-to-use decision support tool for management of ADH, decreasing unnecessary surgeries, reducing patients' overtreatment and healthcare costs.

Breast Cancer Screening for Women at Higher-Than-Average Risk: Updated Recommendations From the ACR

Early detection decreases breast cancer death. The ACR recommends annual screening beginning at age 40 for women of average risk and earlier and/or more intensive screening for women at higher-than-average risk. For most women at higher-than-average risk, the supplemental screening method of choice is breast MRI. Women with genetics-based increased risk, those with a calculated lifetime risk of 20% or more, and those exposed to chest radiation at young ages are recommended to undergo MRI surveillance starting at ages 25 to 30 and annual mammography (with a variable starting age between 25 and 40, depending on the type of risk). Mutation carriers can delay mammographic screening until age 40 if annual screening breast MRI is performed as recommended. Women diagnosed with breast cancer before age 50 or with personal histories of breast cancer and dense breasts should undergo annual supplemental breast MRI. Others with personal histories, and those with atypia at biopsy, should strongly consider MRI screening, especially if other risk factors are present. For women with dense breasts who desire supplemental screening, breast MRI is recommended. For those who qualify for but cannot undergo breast MRI, contrast-enhanced mammography or ultrasound could be considered. All women should undergo risk assessment by age 25, especially Black women and women of Ashkenazi Jewish heritage, so that those at higher-than-average risk can be identified and appropriate screening initiated.

Is Surgical Excision of Focal Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia Warranted? Experience at a Tertiary Care Center

BACKGROUND

The core-needle biopsy (CNB) diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) generally mandates follow-up excision, but controversy exists on whether small foci of ADH require surgical management. This study evaluated the upgrade rate at excision of focal ADH (fADH), defined as 1 focus spanning ≤ 2 mm.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified in-house CNBs with ADH as the highest-risk lesion obtained between January 2013 and December 2017. A radiologist assessed radiologic-pathologic concordance. All CNB slides were reviewed by two breast pathologists, and ADH was classified as fADH and nonfocal ADH based on extent. Only cases with follow-up excision were included. The slides of excision specimens with upgrade were reviewed.

RESULTS

The final study cohort consisted of 208 radiologic-pathologic concordant CNBs, including 98 fADH and 110 nonfocal ADH. The imaging targets were calcifications (n = 157), a mass (n = 15), nonmass enhancement (n = 27), and mass enhancement (n = 9). Excision of fADH yielded seven (7%) upgrades (5 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 2 invasive carcinoma) versus 24 (22%) upgrades (16 DCIS, 8 invasive carcinoma) at excision of nonfocal ADH (p = 0.01). Both invasive carcinomas found at excision of fADH were subcentimeter tubular carcinomas away from the biopsy site and deemed incidental.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show a significantly lower upgrade rate at excision of focal ADH than nonfocal ADH. This information can be valuable if nonsurgical management of patients with radiologic-pathologic concordant CNB diagnosis of focal ADH is being considered.

Breast MRI assists in decision-making for surgical excision of atypical ductal hyperplasia

BACKGROUND

Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed on percutaneous breast biopsy typically undergoes surgical excision, upgrading to invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ in 10% to 53%. In efforts to limit excision to those with highest upgrade risk, we sought to determine if breast magnetic resonance imaging has value in predicting upgrade. In this study, we will describe magnetic resonance imaging presentation of atypical ductal hyperplasia and assess magnetic resonance imaging accuracy in predicting upgrade.

METHODS

All female patients ≥18 years with atypical ductal hyperplasia on percutaneous breast biopsy undergoing magnetic resonance imaging from 2008 to 2020 were included. Patient demographics, imaging presentation, magnetic resonance imaging enhancement kinetic curves, and pathology features were captured. Categorical variables were analyzed using Fisher exact to test for association between variables and upgrade. Continuous variables were analyzed using t tests.

RESULTS

Magnetic resonance imaging was performed for 125 percutaneous breast biopsy with atypical ductal hyperplasia: 67 after and 58 before atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis. On magnetic resonance imaging, atypical ductal hyperplasia site had no enhancement in 45 (36%), nonmass enhancement in 50 (40%), and mass enhancement in 30 (24%). In total, 28% had atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by magnetic resonance imaging-guided percutaneous breast biopsy. Surgical excision was performed for 96 (76.8%) and 15 (15.6%) upgraded (11 ductal carcinoma in situ, 4 invasive breast cancer). All 15 upgrades had enhancement. Any kinetic pattern enhancement was significantly associated with upgrade (P = .009) with upgrade most strongly associated with type III washout. The lowest risk for upgrade was pure atypical ductal hyperplasia and no magnetic resonance imaging enhancement (0%, n = 25).

CONCLUSIONS

Active monitoring may be safely offered to women with pure atypical ductal hyperplasia on percutaneous breast biopsy when magnetic resonance imaging shows no enhancement. Any enhancement at atypical ductal hyperplasia site, particularly type III washout kinetics, should continue to undergo excision.

Safety of de-escalation of surgical intervention for atypical ductal hyperplasia on percutaneous biopsy: One size does not fit all

BACKGROUND

Oncologic safety of active monitoring (AM) for atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) on core-needle biopsy (CNB) is not well defined. We sought to define oncologic outcomes for AM to manage ADH meeting institutional predefined low-risk criteria (LOW).

METHODS

ADH was diagnosed on CNB from 10/2015-03/2020. LOW (pure ADH, size <1 cm, >50% removed by CNB, <3 foci, and no necrosis) patients were offered AM; all others were recommended for surgical excision. Oncologic outcomes were compared for AM and surgery.

RESULTS

111 were included, 21 (19%) meeting LOW. AM occurred in 18 (86%) while 3 elected for excision (with 0% upgrade). Of the 18 LOW in AM, 2 required additional CNB (none at ADH site): 0% were diagnosed with cancer over median 23 month follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no missed cancers at ADH site during AM for LOW, confirming the oncologic safety of AM in this select group.

Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia-Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Spectrum: Diagnostic Considerations and Treatment Impact in the Era of Deescalation

As the first node in treatment algorithms for breast disease, pathologists have the potential to play a critical role in refining appropriate therapy for lesions in the atypical ducal hyperplasia-ductal carcinoma in situ (ADH-DCIS) spectrum by conservatively approaching diagnosis of lesions limited in size on core needle biopsy. Appropriate efforts to downgrade the diagnosis of lesions at the borderline of ADH and DCIS will certainly lead to more breast conservation and avoid the common morbidities of mastectomy, sentinel node biopsy, and radiation therapy. Whether results of clinical trials of active surveillance will successfully identify a subset of women who may successfully forgo even limited breast-conserving surgery is eagerly anticipated. Given the increasing concern that a significant number of women with DCIS are overtreated, identification of patients at very low risk for progression who may forgo surgery and radiation therapy safely is of significant interest.

Management of Architectural Distortion on Digital Breast Tomosynthesis With Nonmalignant Pathology at Biopsy

Background: Digital breast tomosynthesis (DBT) has led to increased detection and biopsy of architectural distortion, which may yield malignancy, radial scar, or other benign pathologies. Management of nonmalignant architectural distortion on DBT remains controversial. Objective: To determine upgrade rates of architectural distortion on DBT from nonmalignant pathology at biopsy to malignancy at surgery. Methods: This retrospective study included cases of mammographically detected architectural distortion from July 1, 2016, to June 30, 2019, that were nonmalignant at image-guided needle biopsy and underwent surgical excision. Mammographic examinations included digital 2D mammography and DBT. Imaging data were extracted from radiology reports. Upgrade rates were summarized using descriptive statistics. Features of upgraded and non-upgraded cases were compared using Pearson's chi-squared test and Wilcoxon signed-rank test. Results: The study included 129 cases of architectural distortion with nonmalignant pathology at biopsy that underwent excision in 125 women (mean age, 54 years; range, 23-90 years). At biopsy, 92 (71.3%) were radial scars and 37 (28.7%) were other nonmalignant pathologies. Of 66 radial scars without atypia at biopsy, one (1.5%) was upgraded to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) at surgery and none to invasive cancer. Of 24 benign pathologies without atypia at biopsy, one was considered discordant. Of the 23 remaining concordant cases, one (4.3%) was upgraded to DCIS at surgery and none to invasive cancer. The overall upgrade rate to cancer of architectural distortion with concordant nonmalignant pathology at biopsy was 10.2% (13/128). The upgrade rate to cancer of architectural distortion without atypia was 2.2% (2/89) and with atypia was 28.2% (11/39). Explored features (age, personal or family breast cancer history, presentation by screening vs diagnostic mammography, breast density, associated mammographic findings, presence and size of ultrasound correlate, biopsy modality) showed no significant associations with upgrade risk (p>.05). Conclusion: Architectural distortion on DBT with concordant nonmalignant pathology at biopsy has an overall upgrade rate to malignancy at surgery of 10.2%. Architectural distortion without atypia has a low upgrade rate of 2.2%. Clinical Impact: Imaging surveillance can be considered for architectural distortion on DBT yielding radial scar without atypia or other concordant benign pathologies without atypia at biopsy.

Performance of a clinical and imaging-based multivariate model as decision support tool to help save unnecessary surgeries for high-risk breast lesions

PURPOSE

To investigate the performance of an imaging and biopsy parameters-based multivariate model in decreasing unnecessary surgeries for high-risk breast lesions.

METHODS

In an IRB-approved study, we retrospectively reviewed all high-risk lesions (HRL) identified at imaging-guided biopsy in our institution between July 1, 2014-July 1, 2017. Lesions were categorized high-risk-I (HR-I = atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical papillary lesion) and II (HR-II = Flat epithelial atypia, radial scar, benign papilloma). Patient risk factors, lesion features, detection and biopsy modality, excision and cancer upgrade rates were collected. Reference standard for upgrade was either excision or at least 2-year imaging follow-up. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to develop a multivariate model using HRL type, lesion and biopsy needle size for surgical cancer upgrade with performance assessed using ROC analysis.

RESULTS

Of 699 HRL in 652 patients, 525(75%) had reference standard available, and 48/525(9.1%) showed cancer at surgical excision. Excision (84.5% vs 51.1%) and upgrade (17.6%vs1.8%) rates were higher in HR-I compared to HR-II (p < 0.01). In HR-I, small needle size < 12G vs ≥ 12G [32.1% vs 13.2%, p < 0.01] and less cores [< 6 vs ≥ 6, 28.6%vs13.7%, p = 0.01] were significantly associated with higher cancer upgrades. Our multivariate model had an AUC = 0.87, saving 28.1% of benign surgeries with 100% sensitivity, based on HRL subtype, lesion size(mm, continuous), needle size (< 12G vs ≥ 12G) and biopsy modality (US vs MRI vs stereotactic) CONCLUSION: Our multivariate model using lesion size, needle size and patient age had a high diagnostic performance in decreasing unnecessary surgeries and shows promise as a decision support tool.

Lesions of uncertain malignant potential of the breast (B3) on vacuum-assisted biopsy for microcalcifications: Predictors of malignancy

PURPOSE

To investigate clinical, radiologic and pathologic features of B3 lesions diagnosed on VABB targeting microcalcifications, for identifying predictors of malignancy.

METHOD

This retrospective multi-centre study included consecutive VABBs performed over a 10-year period on suspicious microcalcifications not associated with other radiological signs diagnosed as B3 on histology from VABB, with outcomes ascertained by surgical excision. Clinical, demographic, radiological and histological (B3 subcategory) data were collected. For statistical analysis (univariate and binary logistic regression), the primary outcome variable was the upgrade rate to malignancy after surgery. Predictors of upgrade to malignancy were identified from clinical, demographic, radiological and pathological variables (including B3 subcategory).

RESULTS

Amongst 447 VABBs, there were 57(12.7 %) upgrades to malignancy at surgical histology (36 DCIS and 21 invasive cancer). At univariate analysis, variables significantly associated with increased risk of upgrade to malignancy were age>55 years (p = 0.01), lesion size>10 mm (p < 0.0001), BI-RADS 4b-c and 5 (p = 0.0001), and fine pleomorphic morphology (p = 0.002) of microcalcifications. Binary logistic regression confirmed as significant independent risk factors age, lesion size and BI-RADS category (p = 0.02, 0.02 and 0.0006 respectively). Amongst subcategories of B3 lesions, lobular neoplasia was significantly(p = 0.04) associated with upgrade, confirmed as an independent risk factor [p = 0.03, OR = 2.3(1.1-4.7)]. Flat epithelial atypia was significantly(p = 0.004) associated with reduced odds of upgrade, but binary logistic regression showed only borderline association [p = 0.052, OR = 0.4(0.2-1.01)].

CONCLUSIONS

Across B3 lesions diagnosed on histology from VABB of suspicious microcalcifications, older age, size>10 mm, BI-RADS category≥ 4b on imaging, and lobular neoplasia were risk factors for upgrade to malignancy. This information can be used to discuss patients' tailored management options.

Ipsilateral and Concurrent Breast Cancer and Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia: Does Atypia Also Need Surgical Excision?

BACKGROUND

Standard-of-care management of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) is surgical excision. Multiple studies have identified features of ADH in patients at low risk for upgrade who may benefit from omission of surgical excision. Patients with an ipsilateral breast cancer have been excluded from studies investigating observation for the management of ADH.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of women with both a breast cancer and an ipsilateral separate site of ADH diagnosed on percutaneous biopsy, who underwent excision of both sites from 2008 to 2018. Radiographic and pathologic features of ADH and cancer were analyzed, including imaging size, biopsy modality, distance between sites, cancer subtype, grade, prognostic markers, ADH foci, and presence of necrosis or micropapillary features. Final pathology at the ADH site was used to determine upgrade. Multivariable logistic regression was performed to identify variables significantly associated with ADH upgrade to malignancy.

RESULTS

Among 62 women meeting the inclusion criteria, 11 (17.7%) upgraded to malignancy [9 ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), 2 invasive cancer] at the site of ADH. Upgrade was significantly higher with ipsilateral DCIS (p = 0.03), ultrasound biopsy at the ADH site (p = 0.01), and ADH with necrosis (p = 0.04). The group at lowest risk for upgrade had stereotactic biopsy and ADH without necrosis (0% upgrade).

CONCLUSION

The presence of breast cancer does not significantly increase the likelihood for upgrade at a separate site of ipsilateral concurrent ADH above contemporary reported upgrade rates of ADH alone (10-30%). When considering breast conservation for breast cancer, omitting excision of the site of ADH can be considered when low-risk features are present.

Pitfalls and controversies in pathology impacting breast cancer management

Introduction: Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, at morphological, molecular, and clinical levels and this has significant implications for the diagnosis and management of the disease. The introduction of breast screening, and the use of small tissue sampling for diagnosis, the recognition of new morphological and molecular subtypes, and the increasing use of neoadjuvant therapies have created challenges in pathological diagnosis and classification.Areas covered: Areas of potential difficulty include columnar cell lesions, particularly flat epithelial atypia, atypical ductal hyperplasia, lobular neoplasia and its variants, and a range of papillary lesions. Fibroepithelial, sclerosing, mucinous, and apocrine lesions are also considered. Established and newer prognostic and predictive markers, such as immune infiltrates, PD-1 and PD-L1 and gene expression assays are evaluated. The unique challenges of pathology assessment post-neoadjuvant systemic therapy are also explored.Expert opinion: Controversies in clinical management arise due to incomplete and sometimes conflicting data on clinicopathological associations, prognosis, and outcome. The review will address some of these challenges.

Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia and Lobular Neoplasia: Update and Easing of Guidelines

OBJECTIVE. Atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH), and lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) are among high-risk lesions that have been previously recommended for surgical excision when diagnosed on core needle biopsy. Recent studies have examined whether imaging surveillance is a reasonable alternative to surgical management for these lesions. This article synthesizes the evidence regarding management of atypical hyperplasia and LCIS diagnosed on core needle biopsy and clinical implications of these diagnoses on future breast cancer risk as well as highlights areas of further research needed to improve practice guidelines for these high-risk lesions. CONCLUSION. Although surgical excision is still recommended after diagnosis of ADH on core needle biopsy, in specific circumstances ALH and LCIS can safely be managed by imaging surveillance.