Classification of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in the EORTC 10853 trial: Do subtypes predict risk of recurrence? Results of the central pathology review of the EORTC 10853 DCIS trial

1998 ◽  
Vol 34 ◽  
pp. S8
Author(s):  
N. Bilker ◽  
J.L. Bijker ◽  
N. Peterse ◽  
M. van de Vijver ◽  
J.P. Julien
2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e12035-e12035
Author(s):  
Yuko Date ◽  
Masafumi Takimoto ◽  
Toshio Morohoshi ◽  
Seigo Nakamura

e12035 Background: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a heterogenous group of breast lesion and demands a broad range of surgical management techniques. Previous studies reported the importance of receptor expression and referred to the risk of recurrence.We classified ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) into 4 subtypes using IHC staining (ER, PgR, HER2 and Ki-67) and investigated the frequency and their characteristics. Also we investigated whether this classification is related to the risk of recurrence. Methods: 117 women who underwent operation between 2010 and 2012 were included our study. We defined 4 subtypes as follows; luminal A (LA), ER and/or PgR (HR)(+) HER2(-) Ki-67(low), luminal B (LB), HR(+) HER2(-) Ki-67(high) or HR(+) HER2(+),HER2(H), HR(-) HER2(+), and basal-like(BL), HR(-) HER2(-).We also evaluated the risk of recurrence using Van Nuys Prognostic Index (VNPI), an algorithm based on DCIS size, nuclear grade (NG), necrosis, margin width and patient age. Results: The frequency of subtype was as follows; LA 77 cases (65.8%), LB 18 (15.3%), H 14 (12.0%) and BL 8 (6.8%). LA tended to smaller size (average: 3.2cm, range: 0.2-12), low NG (NG1 was 97.4%). In a contrary, H and BL were larger size (average: 3.7cm (H), 4.5cm (BL)) and high NG (these percentages of NG3 were 64.3% (H) and 50.0% (BL)). All of the BL had necrosis. About half of the LA was VNPI 6 and 7, but many of the other subtypes were more than VNPI 7 (p=0.02). Conclusions: Classification of subtypes using IHC patterns is simple, useful and, moreover, that are related to the risk of recurrence. Though it is important whether the woman is BRCA1/2 mutation carrier, we might be determined a treatment of DCIS by the subtype.


Cancer ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 120 (7) ◽  
pp. 1085-1085 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael D. Lagios ◽  
Melvin J. Silverstein

1993 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jon Parker ◽  
David R. Dance ◽  
David H. Davies ◽  
L. J. Yeoman ◽  
M. J. Michell ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (26_suppl) ◽  
pp. 90-90
Author(s):  
Sarah Patricia Cate ◽  
Alyssa Gillego ◽  
Manjeet Chadha ◽  
John Rescigno ◽  
Paul R. Gliedman ◽  
...  

90 Background: The Oncoype DX DCIS Score was developed to assess the risk of recurrence for ductal carcinoma in situ, as well as an invasive breast cancer. It is a 12 gene assay performed on an individual patient’s tumor and is used to predict the ten year local recurrence risk of an ipsilateral breast event, which can be either an invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ. It is also used to predict the 10 year risk of an invasive cancer. The DCIS Score was clinically validated using patients from ECOG 5194. The purpose of this study was to investigate how often clinicians, (medical oncologists, breast surgical oncologists, and radiation oncologists) can predict the DCIS Score. Methods: In this IRB approved study, we retrospectively reviewed the charts of 27 patients at our institution who underwent unilateral or bilateral partial mastectomy for DCIS from April 2012 to February 2013 and who had their pathology specimens submitted for DCIS Scores. Patient age range was 40-79 years old, with a mean of 56.8. All patients underwent consultation with radiation oncology. A chart was compiled to include the patient’s age and tumor histology. This included grade of DCIS, extent of DCIS, presence of necrosis, margin width, and hormone receptors. We then removed all identifying factors from the patients’ data, and surveyed our radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, and breast surgical oncologists on whether patients had a low, intermediate, or high DCIS Score. Results: Breast surgical oncologists accurately predicted the DCIS score 49% of the time. Medical oncologists predicted the DCIS score 35% of the time, while radiation oncologists were accurate 51% of the time. Conclusions: This study demonstrates the difficulty in predicting the DCIS Score. The information obtained from the DCIS Score is specific to the genetic behavior of each individual tumor, whereas traditional methods of predicting risk of recurrence and benefit of radiation are based on standard pathologic and clinical criteria. Further studies on larger patient populations need to be performed prior to wide scale acceptance of this genomic test. [Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document