1
|
Farante G, Toesca A, Magnoni F, Lissidini G, Vila J, Mastropasqua M, Viale G, Penco S, Cassano E, Lazzeroni M, Bonanni B, Leonardi MC, Ripoll-Orts F, Curigliano G, Orecchia R, Galimberti V, Veronesi P. Advances and controversies in management of breast ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Eur J Surg Oncol 2021; 48:736-741. [PMID: 34772587 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2021.10.030] [Citation(s) in RCA: 11] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/18/2021] [Revised: 10/25/2021] [Accepted: 10/29/2021] [Indexed: 01/03/2023] Open
Abstract
Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor of invasive breast cancer. It accounts for 25% of all breast cancers diagnosed, as a result of the expansion of breast cancer screening and is associated with a high survival rate. DCIS is particularly clinically challenging, due to its heterogeneous pathological and biological traits and its management is continually evolving towards more personalized and less aggressive therapies. This article suggests evidence-based guidelines for proper DCIS clinical management, which should be discussed within a multidisciplinary team in order to propose the most suitable approach in clinical practice, taking into account recent scientific studies. Here we include updated multidisciplinary treatment protocols and techniques in accordance with the most recent contributions published on this topic in the peer-reviewed medical literature, and we outline future perspectives.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Gabriel Farante
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
| | - Antonio Toesca
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Francesca Magnoni
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Germana Lissidini
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - José Vila
- Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain
| | | | - Giuseppe Viale
- Division of Anatomo-Pathology, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), Milan, Italy; School of Medicine, University of Milan, Italy
| | - Silvia Penco
- Division of Breast Radiology, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Division of Breast Radiology, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Matteo Lazzeroni
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Bernardo Bonanni
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | | | | | - Giuseppe Curigliano
- School of Medicine, University of Milan, Italy; Division of Breast Radiology, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Division of Radiotherapy, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Division of Early Drug Development for Innovative Therapy, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Roberto Orecchia
- School of Medicine, University of Milan, Italy; Division of Breast Radiology, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Division of Radiotherapy, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Viviana Galimberti
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy
| | - Paolo Veronesi
- Division of Breast Surgery, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), IRCCS, Milan, Italy; Hospital Universitario y Politécnico La Fe, Valencia, Spain; School of Medicine University of Bari "Aldo Moro", Italy; Division of Anatomo-Pathology, European Institute of Oncology (EIO), Milan, Italy; School of Medicine, University of Milan, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Nicosia L, Latronico A, Addante F, De Santis R, Bozzini AC, Montesano M, Frassoni S, Bagnardi V, Mazzarol G, Pala O, Lazzeroni M, Lissidini G, Mastropasqua MG, Cassano E. Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia after Vacuum-Assisted Breast Biopsy: Can We Reduce the Upgrade to Breast Cancer to an Acceptable Rate? Diagnostics (Basel) 2021; 11:diagnostics11061120. [PMID: 34205428 PMCID: PMC8259513 DOI: 10.3390/diagnostics11061120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/02/2021] [Revised: 06/16/2021] [Accepted: 06/17/2021] [Indexed: 12/02/2022] Open
Abstract
(1) Background: to evaluate which factors can reduce the upgrade rate of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) to in situ or invasive carcinoma in patients who underwent vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) and subsequent surgical excision. (2) Methods: 2955 VABBs were reviewed; 141 patients with a diagnosis of ADH were selected for subsequent surgical excision. The association between patients’ characteristics and the upgrade rate to breast cancer was evaluated in both univariate and multivariate analyses. (3) Results: the upgrade rates to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and invasive carcinoma (IC) were, respectively, 29.1% and 7.8%. The pooled upgrade rate to DCIS or IC was statistically lower at univariate analysis, considering the following parameters: complete removal of the lesion (p-value < 0.001); BIRADS ≤ 4a (p-value < 0.001); size of the lesion ≤15 mm (p-value: 0.002); age of the patients <50 years (p-value: 0.035). (4) Conclusions: the overall upgrade rate of ADH to DCIS or IC is high and, as already known, surgery should be recommended. However, ADH cases should always be discussed in multidisciplinary meetings: some parameters appear to be related to a lower upgrade rate. Patients presenting these parameters could be strictly followed up to avoid overtreatment.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Luca Nicosia
- Department of Breast Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.L.); (A.C.B.); (M.M.); (E.C.)
| | - Antuono Latronico
- Department of Breast Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.L.); (A.C.B.); (M.M.); (E.C.)
| | - Francesca Addante
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Section of Anatomic Pathology, School of Medicine, University “Aldo Moro”, 70124 Bari, Italy;
| | - Rossella De Santis
- Postgraduate School in Radiology, University of Milan, 20122 Milan, Italy;
| | - Anna Carla Bozzini
- Department of Breast Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.L.); (A.C.B.); (M.M.); (E.C.)
| | - Marta Montesano
- Department of Breast Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.L.); (A.C.B.); (M.M.); (E.C.)
| | - Samuele Frassoni
- Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milan-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy; (S.F.); (V.B.)
| | - Vincenzo Bagnardi
- Department of Statistics and Quantitative Methods, University of Milan-Bicocca, 20126 Milan, Italy; (S.F.); (V.B.)
| | - Giovanni Mazzarol
- Division of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (G.M.); (O.P.)
| | - Oriana Pala
- Division of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (G.M.); (O.P.)
| | - Matteo Lazzeroni
- Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, IEO European Institute of Oncology IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy;
| | - Germana Lissidini
- Division of Breast Surgery, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy;
| | - Mauro Giuseppe Mastropasqua
- Department of Emergency and Organ Transplantation, Section of Anatomic Pathology, School of Medicine, University “Aldo Moro”, 70124 Bari, Italy;
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +39-0805594414
| | - Enrico Cassano
- Department of Breast Radiology, IEO European Institute of Oncology, IRCCS, 20141 Milan, Italy; (L.N.); (A.L.); (A.C.B.); (M.M.); (E.C.)
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Complete Removal of the Lesion as a Guidance in the Management of Patients with Breast Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13040868. [PMID: 33670739 PMCID: PMC7923077 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13040868] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 2.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/29/2020] [Revised: 01/29/2021] [Accepted: 02/11/2021] [Indexed: 12/27/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary A diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ, made on biopsy, is often followed by surgery or radiotherapy because of the risk of an upgrading disease upon subsequent surgical specimens, finding invasive carcinoma. In order to select which patients can be spared overtreatments and alternatively followed with active surveillance, we retrospectively reviewed 2173 vacuum assisted breast biopsies. Our goal was to demonstrate if complete removal of the lesion by biopsy, documented by mammograms, can be a valid criterion to select the patients that can be spared further treatments. The results of our study demonstrate a significant lower upgrading rate of disease when the lesion is completely removed. Thus, performing a mammogram to document the absence of residual lesion following vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB) allows us to reduce overtreatments and to select which patients can be followed with an active surveillance, sparing unjustified public health costs. Abstract Background: Considering highly selected patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), active surveillance is a valid alternative to surgery. Our study aimed to show the reliability of post-biopsy complete lesion removal, documented by mammogram, as additional criterion to select these patients. Methods: A total of 2173 vacuum-assisted breast biopsies (VABBs) documented as DCIS were reviewed. Surgery was performed in all cases. We retrospectively collected the reports of post-VABB complete lesion removal and the histological results of the biopsy and surgery. We calculated the rate of upgrade of DCIS identified on VABB upon excision for patients with post-biopsy complete lesion removal and for those showing residual lesion. Results: We observed 2173 cases of DCIS: 408 classified as low-grade, 1262 as intermediate-grade, and 503 as high-grade. The overall upgrading rate to invasive carcinoma was 15.2% (330/2173). The upgrade rate was 8.2% in patients showing mammographically documented complete removal of the lesion and 19% in patients without complete removal. Conclusion: The absence of mammographically documented residual lesion following VABB was found to be associated with a lower upgrading rate of DCIS to invasive carcinoma on surgical excision and should be considered when deciding the proper management DCIS diagnosis.
Collapse
|
4
|
Uzan C, Mazouni C, Rossoni C, De Korvin B, de Lara CT, Cohen M, Chabbert N, Zilberman S, Boussion V, Vincent Salomon A, Espie M, Coutant C, Marchal F, Salviat F, Boulanger L, Doutriaux-Dumoulin I, Jouve E, Mathelin C, de Saint Hilaire P, Mollard J, Balleyguier C, Joyon N, Triki ML, Delaloge S, Michiels S. Prospective Multicenter Study Validate a Prediction Model for Surgery Uptake Among Women with Atypical Breast Lesions. Ann Surg Oncol 2020; 28:2138-2145. [PMID: 32920723 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09107-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 4] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/28/2020] [Accepted: 08/18/2020] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Diagnosis of atypical breast lesions (ABLs) leads to unnecessary surgery in 75-90% of women. We have previously developed a model including age, complete radiological target excision after biopsy, and focus size that predicts the probability of cancer at surgery. The present study aimed to validate this model in a prospective multicenter setting. - METHODS Women with a recently diagnosed ABL on image-guided biopsy were recruited in 18 centers, before wire-guided localized excisional lumpectomy. Primary outcome was the negative predictive value (NPV) of the model. RESULTS The NOMAT model could be used in 287 of the 300 patients included (195 with ADH). At surgery, 12 invasive (all grade 1), and 43 in situ carcinomas were identified (all ABL: 55/287, 19%; ADH only: 49/195, 25%). The area under the receiving operating characteristics curve of the model was 0.64 (95% CI 0.58-0.69) for all ABL, and 0.63 for ADH only (95% CI 0.56-0.70). For the pre-specified threshold of 20% predicted probability of cancer, NPV was 82% (77-87%) for all ABL, and 77% (95% CI 71-83%) for patients with ADH. At a 10% threshold, NPV was 89% (84-94%) for all ABL, and 85% (95% CI 78--92%) for the ADH. At this threshold, 58% of the whole ABL population (and 54% of ADH patients) could have avoided surgery with only 2 missed invasive cancers. CONCLUSION The NOMAT model could be useful to avoid unnecessary surgery among women with ABL, including for patients with ADH. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NCT02523612.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Catherine Uzan
- AP-HP (Assistance Publique des Hôpitaux de Paris), Department of Gynecological and Breast Surgery and Oncology, Pitié-Salpêtrière University Hospital, Paris, France. .,Sorbonne University, INSERM UMR_S_938, "Cancer Biology and Therapeutics", Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine (CRSA), Paris, France. .,Institut Universitaire de Cancérologie (IUC), Paris, France.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Anne Vincent Salomon
- Institut Curie, Université Paris-Sciences Lettres, INSERM U934, Département de Médecine Diagnostique et Théranostique, Paris, France
| | - Marc Espie
- University of Paris, Hôpital Saint Louis, APHP, Paris, France
| | | | - Frederic Marchal
- Institut de Cancérologie de Lorraine, Vandœuvre-lès-Nancy, France
| | - Flore Salviat
- Service de Biostatistique et d'Épidémiologie, Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France.,CESP INSERM U1018, Université Paris-Sud, Université Paris-Saclay, Villejuif, France
| | | | | | - Eva Jouve
- Institut Claudius Regaud-Oncopole, Toulouse, France
| | - Carole Mathelin
- Les Hôpitaux universitaires de Strasbourg, Strasbourg, France
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Collapse
|