Current trials to reduce surgical intervention in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: Critical review

Countercurrents: DCIS or Cancer? Why All the Confusion?

At present, women with ductal carcinoma in situ are counseled that they have a pre-malignant condition which carries the possibility of progression to a fully malignant breast cancer. However, in most cases, the treatment of DCIS resembles that of a small invasive breast cancer and this is a source of confusion to many. In order to properly evaluate the benefit of radiotherapy, mastectomy and contralateral mastectomy, it is necessary to consider the risks of ipsilateral invasive cancer and of contralateral breast cancer in women with DCIS and with small invasive breast cancer. Several registry-based studies indicate that the risks of ipsilateral and contralateral cancer are similar in the two conditions and therefore a similar approach to treatment is rational.

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Progression to Invasive Cancer: A Review of the Evidence

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), breast cancer confined to the milk ducts, is a heterogeneous entity. The question of how and when a case of DCIS will extend beyond the ducts to become invasive breast cancer has implications for both patient prognosis and optimal treatment approaches. The natural history of DCIS has been explored through a variety of methods, from mouse models to biopsy specimen reviews to population-based screening data to modeling studies. This article will review the available evidence regarding progression pathways and will also summarize current trials designed to assess DCIS progression.

Morphological intratumor heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a heterogeneous disease in terms of morphological characteristics, protein expression profiles, genetic abnormalities, and potential for progression. Molecular heterogeneity has been extensively studied in DCIS. Yet morphological heterogeneity remains relatively undefined. This study investigated morphological intratumor heterogeneity in a series of 51 large DCIS. Nuclear atypia, DCIS architecture, necrosis, calcifications, stromal architecture, and stromal inflammation were assessed in one biopsy slide and three representative slides from each corresponding resection. For each histopathological feature, a histo-score was determined per slide and compared between the biopsy and the resection, as well as within a single resection. Statistical analysis comprised of Friedman tests, post hoc Wilcoxon tests with Bonferroni corrections, Mann-Whitney U tests, and chi-square tests. Despite substantial morphological heterogeneity in around 50% of DCIS, the histopathological assessment of the biopsy did not statistically significantly differ from the resection. Morphological heterogeneity was not significantly associated with patient age, DCIS size, or type of surgery, except for a weak association between heterogeneous stromal inflammation and smaller DCIS size. At the group level, the degree of heterogeneity did not significantly affect the representativity of a biopsy. At the individual patient level, however, the presence of necrosis, intraductal calcifications, myxoid stromal changes, and high-grade nuclear atypia was underestimated in a minority of DCIS patients. This study confirms the presence of morphological heterogeneity in DCIS for all six evaluated histopathological features. This should be kept in mind when taking biopsy-based treatment decisions for DCIS patients.

Association between radiologists' and facilities' characteristics and mammography screening detection of ductal carcinoma in situ

PURPOSE

The aim of our study was, first, to measure association between radiologists and facilities characteristics and DCIS detection. Second, to assess whether those characteristics affect differently the likelihood of detection of DCIS versus invasive breast cancer. When applicable, we examined whether the identified characteristics were similarly associated with low-grade and high-grade DCIS detection.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 1,750,002 digital screening mammograms (2145 screen-detected DCIS) performed in the Quebec breast cancer screening program between 2007 and 2015 inclusively. The associations between radiologists' and facilities' characteristics and (1) the DCIS detection rate, (2) the invasive detection rate, and (3) the odds of DCIS on invasive detection were assess. For statistically significant associations in the latter analysis, analyses stratified by DCIS grade were performed. Multivariable logistic regression with generalized estimating equations estimates to account for correlation among mammograms was used.

RESULTS

Compared to radiologists with recall rate between 5.0 and 9.9%, radiologists with recall rate between 15.0-19.9% and ≥ 20% reached a higher DCIS detection rate, with adjusted detection ratios of, respectively, 1.33 (95% confidence interval = 1.15-1.53) and 1.43 (95% confidence interval = 1.13-1.81). Increase in radiologist' recall rate was statistically significantly associated with an increase in detection of low/intermediate-grade DCIS (P < 0.001), while not in high-grade DCIS (P = 0.15).

CONCLUSIONS

A major determinant of DCIS detection is the radiologists' recall rate. Abnormalities referred by radiologists with higher recall rates should be identified in order to understand how to decrease recall rate while keeping an optimal DCIS and invasive detection rate.

Pathological features of 11,337 patients with primary ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and subsequent events: results from the UK Sloane Project

Background

The Sloane audit compares screen-detected ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) pathology with subsequent management and outcomes.

Methods

This was a national, prospective cohort study of DCIS diagnosed during 2003–2012.

Results

Among 11,337 patients, 7204 (64%) had high-grade DCIS. Over time, the proportion of high-grade disease increased (from 60 to 65%), low-grade DCIS decreased (from 10 to 6%) and mean size increased (from 21.4 to 24.1 mm). Mastectomy was more common for high-grade (36%) than for low-grade DCIS (15%). Few (6%) patients treated with breast-conserving surgery (BCS) had a surgical margin <1 mm. Of the 9191 women diagnosed in England (median follow-up 9.4 years), 7% developed DCIS or invasive malignancy in the ipsilateral and 5% in the contralateral breast. The commonest ipsilateral event was invasive carcinoma (n = 413), median time 62 months, followed by DCIS (n = 225), at median 37 months. Radiotherapy (RT) was most protective against recurrence for high-grade DCIS (3.2% for high-grade DCIS with RT compared to 6.9% without, compared with 2.3 and 3.0%, respectively, for low/intermediate-grade DCIS). Ipsilateral DCIS events lessened after 5 years, while the risk of ipsilateral invasive cancer remained consistent to beyond 10 years.

Conclusion

DCIS pathology informs patient management and highlights the need for prolonged follow-up of screen-detected DCIS.

Breast cancer, screening and diagnostic tools: All you need to know

Breast cancer is one of the most frequent malignancies among women worldwide. Methods for screening and diagnosis allow health care professionals to provide personalized treatments that improve the outcome and survival. Scientists and physicians are working side-by-side to develop evidence-based guidelines and equipment to detect cancer earlier. However, the lack of comprehensive interdisciplinary information and understanding between biomedical, medical, and technology professionals makes innovation of new screening and diagnosis tools difficult. This critical review gathers, for the first time, information concerning normal breast and cancer biology, established and emerging methods for screening and diagnosis, staging and grading, molecular and genetic biomarkers. Our purpose is to address key interdisciplinary information about these methods for physicians and scientists. Only the multidisciplinary interaction and communication between scientists, health care professionals, technical experts and patients will lead to the development of better detection tools and methods for an improved screening and early diagnosis.

Interobserver Variability in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast

OBJECTIVES

Since most patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast are treated upon diagnosis, evidence on its natural progression to invasive carcinoma is limited. It is estimated that around half of the screen-detected DCIS lesions would have remained indolent if they had never been detected. Many patients with DCIS are therefore probably overtreated. Four ongoing randomized noninferiority trials explore active surveillance as a treatment option. Eligibility for these trials is mainly based on histopathologic features. Hence, the call for reproducible histopathologic assessment has never sounded louder.

METHODS

Here, the available classification systems for DCIS are discussed in depth.

RESULTS

This comprehensive review illustrates that histopathologic evaluation of DCIS is characterized by significant interobserver variability. Future digitalization of pathology, combined with development of deep learning algorithms or so-called artificial intelligence, may be an innovative solution to tackle this problem. However, implementation of digital pathology is not within reach for each laboratory worldwide. An alternative classification system could reduce the disagreement among histopathologists who use "conventional" light microscopy: the introduction of dichotomous histopathologic assessment is likely to increase interobserver concordance.

CONCLUSIONS

Reproducible histopathologic assessment is a prerequisite for robust risk stratification and adequate clinical decision-making. Two-tier histopathologic assessment might enhance the quality of care.

CDH2/N-cadherin and early diagnosis of invasion in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ

PURPOSE

This proof-of-concept study investigates gene expression in core needle biopsies (CNB) to predict whether individuals diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on CNB were affected by invasion at the time of diagnosis.

METHODS

Using a QuantiGene Plex 2.0 assay, 14 gene expression profiling was performed in 303 breast tissue samples. Preoperative diagnostic performance of a gene was measured by area under receiver-operating characteristic curve (AUC) with 95% confidence interval (CI). The gene mRNA positivity cutoff was computed using Gaussian mixture model (GMM); protein expression was measured by immunohistochemistry; DNA methylation was evaluated by targeted bisulfite sequencing.

RESULTS

mRNA from 69% (34/49) mammoplasties, 72% (75/104) CNB DCIS, and 89% (133/150) invasive breast cancers (IBC) were analyzed. Based on pre-and post-surgery DCIS chart reviews, 21 cases were categorized as DCIS synchronous with invasion and 54 DCIS were pure DCIS without pathologic evidence of invasive disease. The ectopic expression of neuronal cadherin CDH2 was probable in 0% mammoplasties, 6% pure DCIS, 29% synchronous DCIS, and 26% IBC. The CDH2 mRNA positivity in preoperative biopsies showing pure DCIS was predictive of a final diagnosis of invasion (AUC = 0.67; 95% CI 0.53-0.80; P = 0.029). Site-specific methylation of the CDH2 promoter (AUC = 0.76; 95% CI 0.54-0.97; P = 0.04) and measurements of N-cadherin, a pro-invasive cell-cell adhesion receptor encoded by CDH2 (AUC = 0.8; 95% CI 0.66-0.99; P < 0.005) had a discriminating power allowing for discernment of CDH2-positive biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Evidence of CDH2/N-cadherin expression, predictive of invasion synchronous with DCIS, may help to clarify a diagnosis and direct the course of therapy earlier in a patient's care.

Intraductal fulvestrant for therapy of ERα-positive ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a preclinical study

Mammographic screening for breast cancer has led to increased detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and a reappraisal of the necessity of aggressive treatment with their attendant toxicities for a preneoplastic lesion. Fulvestrant, a selective estrogen receptor degrader, is very effective in the treatment of estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast cancer, but delivery by the painful intramuscular (i.m) route is limiting. We hypothesized that intraductal (i.duc) administration of fulvestrant will provide a direct, safe and effective treatment for DCIS. Mice bearing mammary ductal xenografts of ER+, luciferase-tagged MCF-7 breast cancer cells were administered vehicle or fulvestrant i.m or i.duc. I.duc MCF-7-luc tumors in mice treated with fulvestrant i.duc or i.m grew significantly slower than vehicle control. Whole mount analysis and histopathology showed that i.duc fulvestrant achieved significantly larger cancer-free areas. Western blot analysis showed reduced levels of estrogen receptor alpha (ERα) and its downstream targets, c-Myc and Cyclin D1, and increased levels of ERβ, which is known to inhibit ERα function. Immunohistochemical analysis of tumor sections showed that Ki67 and ERα protein levels decreased by 3-fold, and neoangiogenesis was inhibited by i.duc fulvestrant treatment. I.duc fulvestrant also reduced outgrowth of ERα+, autochthonous N-methyl-N-nitrosourea-induced mammary tumors in rats. Overall, we have shown that i.duc fulvestrant was significantly more effective than, or equivalent in action to i.m fulvestrant in two preclinical models of breast cancer. These studies provide evidence for a novel and safe route for fulvestrant therapy of DCIS and prevention of breast cancer. This preclinical study provides a strong basis for conducting clinical trials for DCIS and early breast cancer.

Grading variation in 2,934 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the effect of laboratory- and pathologist-specific feedback reports

BACKGROUND

Histologic grade of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS) may become the single biomarker that decides whether patients will be treated. Yet, evidence shows that grading variation in daily practice is substantial. To facilitate quality improvement, feedback reports, in which laboratory-specific case-mix adjusted proportions per grade were benchmarked against other laboratories, were sent to the individual laboratories by March 1, 2018. One year later, the effect of these feedback reports on inter-laboratory variation was studied.

METHODS

Synoptic pathology reports of all pure DCIS resection specimens between March 1, 2017 and March 1, 2019 were retrieved from PALGA (the nationwide Dutch pathology registry). Laboratory-specific proportions per grade were compared to the overall proportion in the year before and after feedback. The absolute deviation for all three grades at once, represented by the overall deviation score (ODS), was calculated as the sum of deviations from the grade-specific overall proportions. Case-mix adjusted, laboratory-specific odds ratios (ORs) for high- (grade III) versus low-grade (grade I-II) DCIS were obtained by multivariable logistic regression.

RESULTS

Overall, 2954 DCIS reports from 31 laboratories were included. After feedback, the range between laboratories decreased by 22 and 6.5% for grades II and III, while an increase of 6.2% was observed for grade I. Both the mean ODS (27.2 to 24.1%) and maximum ODS (87.7 to 59.6%) decreased considerably. However, the range of case-mix adjusted ORs remained fairly stable and substantial (0.39 (95% CI: 0.18-0.86) to 3.69 (95% CI: 1.30-10.51)).

CONCLUSION

A promising decrease in grading variation was observed after laboratory-specific feedback for DCIS grades II-III, while this was not observed for DCIS grade I. Overall, grading variation remained substantial which needs to be addressed considering its clinical implications. Nationwide consensus on a classification, and training of (expert breast) pathologists, for example by e-learning, may help to further improve grading standardization.

The challenge of avoiding over- and under-treatment in older women with ductal cancer in situ: A scoping review of existing knowledge gaps and a meta-analysis of real-world practice patterns

Ductal cancer in situ (DCIS) is mainly a screen-detected disease and although the risk for breast cancer is age-dependent, most screening programs do not include women over the age of 75 years. Older women are usually excluded from clinical trials and treatment practices are largely based on observational studies or extrapolation of trial results from younger patients, leading to either over- or under-treatment of this population. We systematically reviewed available electronic databases for DCIS treatment patterns and outcomes in older patients 15 years. Inclusion criteria allowed for randomised controlled trials, cohort studies, case-control and cross-sectional studies, as well as meta-analyses, systematic reviews and position papers. Results showed that, although elderly are not necessarily frail, they are generally treated as such by physicians, aiming to de-escalate therapeutic interventions. After adjusting for frailty, age seems to be a significant factor for less surgery; however, older women with DCIS are more probable to receive surgery than their counterparts with early invasive cancer. DCIS biology and subtypes are independent risk factors for local recurrence or progression to invasive carcinoma, if DCIS is under-treated. The end-benefit of surgery, radio- and endocrine-therapy depend on additional parameters, such as life expectancy, co-morbidities and competing risks of death. Screen-detected DCIS in older women is a challenging clinical problem, mainly due to the lack of high-level data. Therapeutic strategies should be tailored to life expectancy and performance status, DCIS features and patient preference, aiming at combining optimal oncological outcomes with maintenance of quality of life.

Interobserver variability in upfront dichotomous histopathological assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the DCISion study

Histopathological assessment of ductal carcinoma in situ, a nonobligate precursor of invasive breast cancer, is characterized by considerable interobserver variability. Previously, post hoc dichotomization of multicategorical variables was used to determine the "ideal" cutoffs for dichotomous assessment. The present international multicenter study evaluated interobserver variability among 39 pathologists who performed upfront dichotomous evaluation of 149 consecutive ductal carcinomas in situ. All pathologists independently assessed nuclear atypia, necrosis, solid ductal carcinoma in situ architecture, calcifications, stromal architecture, and lobular cancerization in one digital slide per lesion. Stromal inflammation was assessed semiquantitatively. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes were quantified as percentages and dichotomously assessed with a cutoff at 50%. Krippendorff's alpha (KA), Cohen's kappa and intraclass correlation coefficient were calculated for the appropriate variables. Lobular cancerization (KA = 0.396), nuclear atypia (KA = 0.422), and stromal architecture (KA = 0.450) showed the highest interobserver variability. Stromal inflammation (KA = 0.564), dichotomously assessed tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (KA = 0.520), and comedonecrosis (KA = 0.539) showed slightly lower interobserver disagreement. Solid ductal carcinoma in situ architecture (KA = 0.602) and calcifications (KA = 0.676) presented with the lowest interobserver variability. Semiquantitative assessment of stromal inflammation resulted in a slightly higher interobserver concordance than upfront dichotomous tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes assessment (KA = 0.564 versus KA = 0.520). High stromal inflammation corresponded best with dichotomously assessed tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes when the cutoff was set at 10% (kappa = 0.881). Nevertheless, a post hoc tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes cutoff set at 20% resulted in the highest interobserver agreement (KA = 0.669). Despite upfront dichotomous evaluation, the interobserver variability remains considerable and is at most acceptable, although it varies among the different histopathological features. Future studies should investigate its impact on ductal carcinoma in situ prognostication. Forthcoming machine learning algorithms may be useful to tackle this substantial diagnostic challenge.

Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma In Situ

OBJECTIVES

We aimed to determine the interobserver reproducibility in diagnosing low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). We also aimed to compare the interobserver variability using a proposed two-tiered grading system as opposed to the current three-tiered system.

METHODS

Three expert breast pathologists and one junior pathologist identified low-grade DCIS from a set of 300 DCIS slides. Months later, participants were asked to grade the 300 cases using the standard three-tiered system.

RESULTS

Using the two-tiered system, interobserver agreement among breast pathologists was considered moderate (κ = 0.575). The agreement was similar (κ = 0.532) with the junior pathologist included. Using the three-tiered system, pathologists' agreement was poor (κ = 0.235).

CONCLUSIONS

Pathologists' reproducibility on diagnosing low-grade DCIS showed moderate agreement. Experience does not seem to influence reproducibility. Our proposed two-tiered system of low vs nonlow grade, where the intermediate grade is grouped in the nonlow category has shown improved concordance.

Grading Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) of the Breast - What's Wrong with It?

Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast is a non-obligate precursor of invasive breast cancer, and at its lower risk end might not need treatment, a hypothesis tested in several currently running randomized clinical trials. This review describes the heterogeneity of grading ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). First it considers differences between low and high grade DCIS, and then it looks at several grading schemes and highlights how different these are, not only in the features considered for defining a given grade but also in their wording of a given variable seen in the grade in question. Rather than being fully comprehensive, the review aims to illustrate the inconsistencies. Reproducibility studies on grading mostly suggestive of moderate agreement on DCIS differentiation are also illustrated. The need for a well structured, more uniform and widely accepted language for grading DCIS is urged to avoid misunderstanding based misclassifications and improper treatment selection.

Collagen (XI) alpha-1 chain is an independent prognostic factor in breast ductal carcinoma in situ

Collagen11A1 (COL11A1) is a fibrillary type collagen constituting a minor component of the extracellular matrix and plays role in tissue tensile strength. Overexpression of COL11A1 expression is associated with aggressive behavior and poor outcome in several human malignancies. In this study, we evaluated the association between COL11A1 expression and clinicopathological parameters of the breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and its prognostic value. COL11A1 protein expression was assessed immunohistochemically in a large well-characterized cohort of DCIS including pure (n = 776) and DCIS associated with invasive carcinoma (DCIS-mixed, n = 239). COL11A1 expression was assessed in tumor cells and surrounding stromal cells, and correlated with clinicopathological parameters, immunoprofile and disease outcome. In pure DCIS, high COL11A1 expression was observed in tumor cells and surrounding stromal cells in 25 and 13% of cases, respectively. Higher COL11A1 expression within the stromal cells was associated with hormone receptor negative, HER2 enriched and triple negative molecular subtypes and showed a positive linear correlation with proliferation index, dense tumor infiltrating lymphocytes and hypoxia-inducible factor 1 alpha. COL11A1 expression in tumor and stromal cells was significantly higher in DCIS associated with invasive carcinoma than in pure DCIS, and within the DCIS-mixed cohort, the invasive component showed higher COL11A1 expression than the DCIS component (all, p < 0.0001). Overexpression of stromal COL11A1 was an independent predictor of shorter local recurrence-free interval for all recurrences (HR = 13.2, 95% CI = 6.9-25.4, p < 0.0001) and for invasive recurrences (HR = 11.2, 95% CI = 4.9-25.8, p < 0.0001). When incorporated with other risk factors, stromal COL11A1 provided better patient risk stratification. DCIS with higher stromal COL11A1 expression showed poor outcome even with adjuvant radiotherapy management. In conclusion, overexpression of stromal COL11A1 is associated with invasive recurrence in DCIS and is a potential marker to predict the response to radiotherapy.

A retrospective alternative for active surveillance trials for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a nonobligate precursor of invasive breast cancer, accounting for 20 % of screen-detected breast cancers. Little is known about the natural progression of DCIS because most patients undergo surgery upon diagnosis. Many DCIS patients are likely being overtreated, as it is believed that only around 50 % of DCIS will progress to invasive carcinoma. Robust prognostic markers for progression to invasive carcinoma are lacking. In the past, studies have investigated women who developed a recurrence after breast-conserving surgery (BCS) and compared them with those who did not. However, where there is no recurrence, the patient has probably been adequately treated. The present narrative review advocates a new research strategy, wherein only those patients with a recurrence are studied. Approximately half of the recurrences are invasive cancers, and half are DCIS. So-called "recurrences" are probably most often the result of residual disease. The new approach allows us to ask: why did some residual DCIS evolve to invasive cancers and others not? This novel strategy compares the group of patients that developed in situ recurrence with the group of patients that developed invasive recurrence after BCS. The differences between these groups could then be used to develop a robust risk stratification tool. This tool should estimate the risk of synchronous and metachronous invasive carcinoma when DCIS is diagnosed in a biopsy. Identification of DCIS patients at low risk for developing invasive carcinoma will individualize future therapy and prevent overtreatment.

Significant inter- and intra-laboratory variation in grading of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a nationwide study of 4901 patients in the Netherlands

Purpose

A considerable part of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) lesions may never progress into invasive breast cancer. However, standard treatment consists of surgical excision. Trials aim to identify a subgroup of low-risk DCIS patients that can safely forgo surgical treatment based on histologic grade, which highlights the importance of accurate grading. Using real-life nationwide data, we aimed to create insight and awareness in grading variation of DCIS in daily clinical practice.

Methods

All synoptic pathology reports of pure DCIS resection specimens between 2013 and 2016 were retrieved from PALGA, the nationwide Dutch Pathology Registry. Absolute differences in proportions of grade I-III were visualized using funnel plots. Multivariable analysis was performed by logistic regression to correct for case-mix, providing odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals for high-grade (III) versus low-grade (I–II) DCIS.

Results

4952 DCIS reports from 36 laboratories were included, of which 12.5% were reported as grade I (range 6.1–24.4%), 39.5% as grade II (18.2–57.6%), and 48.0% as grade III (30.2–72.7%). After correction for case-mix, 14 laboratories (38.9%) reported a significantly lower (n = 4) or higher (n = 10) proportion of high-grade DCIS than the reference laboratory. Adjusted ORs (95%CI) ranged from 0.52 (0.31–0.87) to 3.83 (1.42–10.39). Significant grading differences were also observed among pathologists within laboratories.

Conclusion

In this cohort of 4901 patients, we observed substantial inter- and intra-laboratory variation in DCIS grading, not explained by differences in case-mix. Therefore, there is an urgent need for nationwide standardization of grading practices, especially since the future management of DCIS may alter significantly depending on histologic grade.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-018-05082-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.