Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): USC/Van Nuys Prognostic Index (VNPI) and the impact of micropapillary histotype

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 662-662
Author(s):  
S. Fracchioli ◽  
R. Bellino ◽  
R. Arisio ◽  
K. Mingrone ◽  
A. Durando ◽  
...  
2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14_suppl) ◽  
pp. 662-662
Author(s):  
S. Fracchioli ◽  
R. Bellino ◽  
R. Arisio ◽  
K. Mingrone ◽  
A. Durando ◽  
...  

2011 ◽  
Vol 17 (4) ◽  
pp. 343-351 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sevilay Altintas ◽  
Jerome Toussaint ◽  
Virginie Durbecq ◽  
Kathleen Lambein ◽  
Manon T. Huizing ◽  
...  

Cancer ◽  
2007 ◽  
Vol 110 (12) ◽  
pp. 2648-2653 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie G. MacAusland ◽  
Jaroslaw T. Hepel ◽  
Frank K. Chong ◽  
Shira L. Galper ◽  
Jennifer S. Gass ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 56-56 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kinzie Matlock ◽  
Jillian M. Lloyd ◽  
W. Bradford Carter ◽  
Edina Grujic ◽  
Thomas G. Frazier

56 Background: Ductal Carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has a wide spectrum of bioagressiveness. Three models used to assess recurrence risk (RR) of DCIS include: the Van-Nuys Prognostic Index (VN), Memorial Sloan Kettering Breast Cancer Nomogram (MN) and Oncotype Dx DCIS Score (OD; Genomic Health, Redwood City, CA). The aim of our study was to evaluate the concordance between these RR models. Methods: An IRB-approved retrospective chart review was performed on 37 consecutive patients at our institution with DCIS from 12/2011-4/2015 who underwent breast conservation surgery and in whom an OD was obtained. The OD and ‘any recurrent event at 10-years’ scores were used to stratify patients into low risk (LR; OD DCIS score <39/<17%), intermediate risk (IR; 39-54/17-24%) and high risk (HR; >54/>24%), as outlined in the original OD study. The ‘10-year RR’ scores from MN were stratified using the same percentile breakdown as OD. The VN were stratified into LR (4-6), IR (7-9) and HR (>9) groups based on the updated VN study’s guideline. Pathologic slides were re-reviewed by one pathologist blinded to OD score to determine size and margin width based on the protocol outlined in the original VN paper. The three scores for each patient were compared. Results: Eleven patients (29.7%) had concordance between all three scores and all were LR. In 10.8% of patients, there was no concordance between the three scores. The concordance between the OD and VN, OD and MN, and VN and MN was 64.9%, 48.6% and 35.1%, respectively. Conclusions: In evaluating RR, determining LR may have the greatest implication since this group may be the least likely to benefit from adjuvant radiotherapy. Concordance between all three models was seen only in LR patients. All patients who were LR by VN were also LR by OD and MN. Determining a VN initially may help guide additional testing. The added value of OD may be primarily in patients who are not LR by VN. The MN seems to be of limited value in this study. Larger studies assessing these relationships and their outcomes in predicting potential RR in DCIS are warranted.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document