Phyllodes tumour evidence gaps mapped from the 5th edition of the WHO classification of tumours of the breast

Mapping the cited evidence of ductal carcinoma in situ from the 5th edition of the World Health Organisation classification of tumours of the breast

AIMS

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is recognised by the World Health Organisation (WHO) Classification of Tumours (WCT) as a non-invasive neoplastic epithelial proliferation confined to the mammary ducts and lobules. This report categorises the references cited in the DCIS chapter of the 5th edition of the WCT (Breast Tumours) according to prevailing evidence levels for evidence-based medicine and the Hierarchy of Evidence for Tumour Pathology (HETP), identifying potential gaps that can inform subsequent editions of the WCT for this tumour.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We included all citations from the DCIS chapter of the WCT (Breast Tumours, 5th edition). Each citation was appraised according to its study design and evidence level. We developed our map of cited evidence, which is a graphical matrix of tumour type (column) and tumour descriptors (rows). Spheres were used to represent the evidence, with size and colour corresponding to their number and evidence level respectively. Thirty-six publications were retrieved. The cited literature in the DCIS chapter comprised mainly case series and were regarded as low-level. We found an unequal distribution of citations among tumour descriptors. 'Pathogenesis' and 'prognosis and prediction' contained the most references, while 'clinical features', 'aetiology' and 'diagnostic molecular pathology' had only a single citation each. 'Prognosis and prediction' had the greatest proportion of moderate- and high-levels of evidence.

CONCLUSION

Our findings align with the disposition for observational studies inherent in the field of pathology. Our map is a springboard for future efforts in mapping all available evidence on DCIS, potentially augmenting the editorial process and future editions of WCTs.

Moving Forward on Tumor Pathology Research Reporting: A Guide for Pathologists From the World Health Organization Classification of Tumors Living Evidence Gap Map by Tumour Type Group

Evidence-based medicine (EBM) can be an unfamiliar territory for those working in tumor pathology research, and there is a great deal of uncertainty about how to undertake an EBM approach to planning and reporting histopathology-based studies. In this article, reviewed and endorsed by the Word Health Organization International Agency for Research on Cancer's International Collaboration for Cancer Classification and Research, we aim to help pathologists and researchers understand the basics of planning an evidence-based tumor pathology research study, as well as our recommendations on how to report the findings from these. We introduce some basic EBM concepts, a framework for research questions, and thoughts on study design and emphasize the concept of reporting standards. There are many study-specific reporting guidelines available, and we provide an overview of these. However, existing reporting guidelines perhaps do not always fit tumor pathology research papers, and hence, here, we collate the key reporting data set together into one generic checklist that we think will simplify the task for pathologists. The article aims to complement our recent hierarchy of evidence for tumor pathology and glossary of evidence (study) types in tumor pathology. Together, these articles should help any researcher get to grips with the basics of EBM for planning and publishing research in tumor pathology, as well as encourage an improved standard of the reports available to us all in the literature.

Effect of adjuvant radiotherapy on overall survival and breast cancer-specific survival of patients with malignant phyllodes tumor of the breast in different age groups: a retrospective observational study based on SEER

PURPOSE

Malignant phyllodes tumor of the breast (MPTB) is a rare type of breast cancer, with an incidence of less than 1%. The value of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT) for MPTB has been controversial. The aim of the study was to explore the effect of radiotherapy on the long-term survival of female patients with MPTB at different ages.

METHODS

Female MPTB patients were selected from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database between 2000 and 2020. A Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was conducted to investigate the value of RT for the long-term survival of MPTB patients in different age groups. Additionally, univariate and multivariate Cox regression analyses were performed for overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) of MPTB patients. Furthermore, propensity score matching (PSM) was also performed to balance the differences in baseline characteristics.

RESULTS

2261 MPTB patients were included in this study, including 455 patients (20.12%) with RT and 1806 patients (79.88%) without RT. These patients were divided into four cohorts based on their ages: 18-45, 46-55, 56-65, and 65-80. Before adjustment, there was a statistically significant difference in long-term survival between RT-treated and non-RT-treated patients in the younger age groups (age group of 18-45 years: OS P = 0.019, BCSS P = 0.016; age group of 46-55 years: OS P < 0.001, BCSS P < 0.001). After PSM, no difference was found in long-term survival of patients in both younger and older groups regardless of whether they received RT (age group of 18-45 years: OS P = 0.473, BCSS P = 0.750; age group of 46-55 years: OS P = 0.380, BCSS P = 0.816, age group of 56-65 years: OS P = 0.484, BCSS P = 0.290; age group of 66-80 years: OS P = 0.997, BCSS P = 0.763). In multivariate COX regression analysis, RT did not affect long-term survival in patients with MPTB.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence that long-term survival of MPTB patients in specific age groups can benefit from RT.

Malignant phyllodes tumor of the breast with predominant osteosarcoma and chondrosarcomatous differentiation: a rare case report and review of literature

Background

Phyllodes tumors (PTs), which account for less than 1% of mammary gland tumors, composed of both epithelial and stromal components. If a malignant heterologous component is encountered, PT is considered malignant. Malignant phyllodes tumors (MPTs) only account for 8% to 20% of PTs. We report a case of MPT with osteosarcoma and chondrosarcoma differentiation and review the literature to discuss the differential diagnosis and therapy.

Case presentation

A 59-year-old Chinese woman come to our hospital because of a palpable mass she had had for 1 months in the left breast. Preoperative core needle biopsy (CNB) was performed on the left breast mass on January 11, 2023. Pathological diagnosis was malignant tumor, the specific type was not clear. Mastectomy and sentinel lymph node biopsy of the left breast was performed. No metastasis was found in 3 sentinel lymph nodes identified by carbon nanoparticles and methylene blue double staining. Heterologous osteosarcoma and chondrosarcomatous differentiation of phyllodes tumor were observed. Immunohistochemistry: spindle tumor cells ER(-), PR(-), HER-2(-), CK-pan(-), CK7(-), CK8(-), SOX10(-), S100(-), and MDM2(-), CK5/6(-), P63(-), P40(-) were all negative. CD34:(+), SATB2(+), P53(90% strong), CD68 (+), Ki-67(LI: about 60%). No ductal carcinoma in situ was found in the breast. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) indicated USP6 was negatively expressed on formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue sections.

Conclusion

MPTs are rare, and heterologous differentiation in MPTs is exceedingly rare. It could be diagnosed by pathology when metaplastic carcinoma, primary osteosarcoma, or myositis ossificans were excluded. This case could help clinicians to improve the prognosis and treatment of this disease.

A New Hierarchy of Research Evidence for Tumor Pathology: A Delphi Study to Define Levels of Evidence in Tumor Pathology

The hierarchy of evidence is a fundamental concept in evidence-based medicine, but existing models can be challenging to apply in laboratory-based health care disciplines, such as pathology, where the types of evidence and contexts are significantly different from interventional medicine. This project aimed to define a comprehensive and complementary framework of new levels of evidence for evaluating research in tumor pathology-introducing a novel Hierarchy of Research Evidence for Tumor Pathology collaboratively designed by pathologists with help from epidemiologists, public health professionals, oncologists, and scientists, specifically tailored for use by pathologists-and to aid in the production of the World Health Organization Classification of Tumors (WCT) evidence gap maps. To achieve this, we adopted a modified Delphi approach, encompassing iterative online surveys, expert oversight, and external peer review, to establish the criteria for evidence in tumor pathology, determine the optimal structure for the new hierarchy, and ascertain the levels of confidence for each type of evidence. Over a span of 4 months and 3 survey rounds, we collected 1104 survey responses, culminating in a 3-day hybrid meeting in 2023, where a new hierarchy was unanimously agreed upon. The hierarchy is organized into 5 research theme groupings closely aligned with the subheadings of the WCT, and it consists of 5 levels of evidence-level P1 representing evidence types that merit the greatest level of confidence and level P5 reflecting the greatest risk of bias. For the first time, an international collaboration of pathology experts, supported by the International Agency for Research on Cancer, has successfully united to establish a standardized approach for evaluating evidence in tumor pathology. We intend to implement this novel Hierarchy of Research Evidence for Tumor Pathology to map the available evidence, thereby enriching and informing the WCT effectively.

Breast carcinoma arising in a fibroadenoma: A case series of 16 patients and review of the literature

Breast carcinoma arising from a fibroadenoma is an uncommon entity and is frequently detected incidentally during pathological examination or excisional biopsy of a benign breast tumor. Due to only sporadic cases being reported, evidence-based guidelines are not well-established to date. The present report describes 16 patients diagnosed with breast carcinoma arising within a fibroadenoma in the Third Hospital of Nanchang (Nanchang, China) between January 2019 and December 2021 and discusses the clinicopathological characteristics, imaging findings and treatment. The age of patients at diagnosis ranged between 19 and 58 years and a well-defined asymptomatic mass was the most common clinical presentation. Carcinoma occurring in fibroadenoma generally mimics a benign tumor and potential carcinomatous changes may not be detected. Pathologically, carcinoma in situ was the predominant subtype in the present study. Additionally, ductal carcinoma in situ was more common compared with lobular carcinoma in situ in the present case series. Regarding the molecular phenotypes, the majority of cases were categorized as luminal subtype, although other subtypes such as triple-negative and HER2 positive breast cancer were also identified. In the present study, seven patients were treated with breast-conserving surgery and nine patients were treated with mastectomy. Sentinel lymph node biopsy was performed in all patients and none exhibited axillary node metastasis. Additionally, six patients underwent radiotherapy and two received chemotherapy. During the follow-up, all patients were alive and no evidence of disease relapse was observed. In summary, clinicians should be aware of the possibility of carcinoma within a fibroadenoma, which could alter the therapeutical course. Adequate biopsy or excision should be performed in patients with indicators of malignant transformation in a presumed benign breast tumor.

Refining the classification of breast phyllodes tumours

Phyllodes tumours of the breast are uncommon fibroepithelial neoplasms that pose recurrent classification challenges, in large part due to the multiple histological parameters of stromal hypercellularity and atypia, stromal mitotic count, stromal overgrowth and tumour borders, that are used for grading. While the World Health Organization (WHO) Classification of Breast Tumours provides recommendations on diagnostic features, defining criteria are not always applied in routine practice. Lack of concordance among pathologists in typing and grading further underscores the classification difficulties, especially in the borderline category. Although there has been significant molecular information on phyllodes tumours in recent years which has been diagnostically helpful, it has not been translated into daily clinical practice. In order to refine the classification of phyllodes tumours into one that is simple yet comprehensive, reproducible and prognostically precise, a multipronged approach is needed that leverages on global contributions of the International Fibroepithelial Consortium, support by the International Collaboration on Cancer Classification and Research (IC³ R) in amalgamating evidence translation, and guidance from the International Collaboration on Cancer Reporting (ICCR) for standardised reporting. It is hoped that the evidence generated can be used towards refining the classification of phyllodes tumours for the future.