Pathologic Review of Atypical Hyperplasia Identified by Image-Guided Breast Needle Core Biopsy

2003 ◽  
Vol 127 (1) ◽  
pp. 49-54 ◽  
Author(s):  
I-Tien Yeh ◽  
Diana Dimitrov ◽  
Pamela Otto ◽  
Alexander R. Miller ◽  
Morton S. Kahlenberg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Core Biopsy ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Carcinoma ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia ◽  
Needle Core Biopsy ◽  
Atypical Lobular Hyperplasia ◽  
Ductal Hyperplasia

Abstract Context.—Management of breast needle core biopsies diagnosed as atypical ductal hyperplasia, atypical lobular hyperplasia, and lobular carcinoma in situ is controversial. Current recommendations involve excisional biopsy to rule out ductal carcinoma in situ and/or invasive carcinoma, which have been reported in more than 50% of cases in some series. Objective.—To determine how frequently these diagnoses made on needle core biopsy are ultimately found to represent in situ or invasive carcinoma based on excisional biopsy specimens, in order to identify predictive factors. Design.—One thousand eight hundred thirty-six image-guided needle core biopsies were performed between January 1, 1995 and May 1, 2001. Fifty-four (2.9%) patients diagnosed with atypical ductal hyperplasia (n = 36), atypical lobular hyperplasia (n = 12), atypical ductal hyperplasia + atypical lobular hyperplasia (n = 3), or lobular carcinoma in situ (n = 3) subsequently underwent breast excisions. Pathologic features were reviewed in each of the needle core biopsies using Page's criteria and were then correlated with excision specimens. Setting.—University medical center. Results.—Review of the needle core biopsy cases with either ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive carcinoma + ductal carcinoma in situ on final excision showed that nucleoli were evident in most of the needle core cases, with foci of nuclear pleomorphism and individual cell necrosis or apoptosis. Conclusion.—A more precise diagnosis can be made by using strict criteria for atypical ductal hyperplasia versus ductal carcinoma in situ on needle core biopsy. Cytologic atypia, even if in a small area, particularly when there is apoptosis/individual cell necrosis, correlates with the finding of a more serious lesion on excision.

Advocating Nonsurgical Management of Patients With Small, Incidental Radial Scars at the Time of Needle Core Biopsy: A Study of 77 Cases

2015 ◽  
Vol 139 (9) ◽  
pp. 1137-1142 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cathleen Matrai ◽  
Timothy M. D'Alfonso ◽  
Lindsay Pharmer ◽  
Michele B. Drotman ◽  
Rache M. Simmons ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Core Biopsy ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Carcinoma ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
Radial Scar ◽  
Needle Core Biopsy ◽  
Ductal Hyperplasia

Context Radial scars are benign sclerosing lesions that are routinely excised when diagnosed in a needle core biopsy. Optimal management for patients with incidental and small (≤5 mm) radial scars is uncertain. Objective To assess pathologic upgrade of radial scars diagnosed in needle core biopsy samples and identify a subset of patients who could benefit from conservative management. Design Patients with a diagnosis of radial scar in a needle core biopsy who underwent excision of the biopsied area were identified. Radial scars greater than 5 mm in size and those with coexisting atypia, carcinoma, and papillary lesions were excluded. After histologic-radiographic correlation, rates of pathologic upgrade were assessed. Results Seventy-seven radial scars diagnosed in 66 patients were included. Overall, 9 of 77 (12%) showed upgrade to a high-risk lesion (6 lobular carcinoma in situ, 2 atypical ductal hyperplasia, 1 atypical lobular hyperplasia), while none (0%) showed upgrade to invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ. One of 22 incidental radial scars (4.5%) showed upgrade on excision versus 6 of 36 (16.7%) for radial scars considered to be the radiographic target (P = .23). Older age was associated with upgrade (P < .001). Conclusions No incidental or small (≤5 mm) radial scars excised revealed invasive carcinoma or ductal carcinoma in situ on excision. Provided there is good pathologic-radiologic concordance, it appears reasonable for these patients to be managed conservatively.

scholarly journals Mucocele-like Lesion of the Breast Diagnosed on Core Biopsy: Histologic and Clinical Analysis of 78 Cases With Focus on Features Associated With Upgrade

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
William S. Towne ◽  
Aya Y. Michaels ◽  
Paula S. Ginter
Keyword(s):  
Core Biopsy ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Carcinoma ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia ◽  
Clinical Analysis ◽  
Atypical Lobular Hyperplasia ◽  
Ductal Hyperplasia

Context.— Mucocele-like lesion of the breast (MLL) is an uncommon entity, and recent studies show low rates of upgrade from core needle biopsy (CNB) to excision. Objective.— To evaluate features associated with upgrade of MLLs diagnosed on CNB. Design.— Seventy-eight MLLs diagnosed on CNB from 1998–2019 and subsequent excisions were reviewed. Histologic parameters evaluated included the presence of atypia, presence and morphology of calcifications, and morphologic variant (classic [C-MLL], duct ectasia–like [DEL-MLL], or cystic mastopathy–like [CML-MLL]). Results.— Overall, 45 MLLs lacked atypia and 33 were associated with atypia (atypical ductal hyperplasia, 32; atypical lobular hyperplasia, 1). Most were C-MLLs (61) with fewer DEL-MLLs (14) and CML-MLLs (3). Half showed both coarse and fine calcifications, with fewer showing only coarse or fine calcifications, and some showing none. Subsequent excision or clinical follow-up was available for 25 MLLs without atypia—of which 2 (8.0%) were upgraded to ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)—and 23 with atypia, of which 4 (17.4%) were upgraded to DCIS. No cases were upgraded to invasive carcinoma. All upgraded cases showed coarse calcifications on CNB, and all upgraded cases were associated with residual calcifications on post-CNB imaging. Conclusions.— Most MLLs present as calcifications and nearly half are associated with atypia. Upgrade to DCIS is twice as frequent in MLLs with atypia versus those without. A predominance of coarse calcifications and the presence of residual targeted calcifications following core biopsy may be associated with higher upgrade rates.

Excisional Biopsy Should Be Performed if Lobular Carcinoma In Situ Is Seen on Needle Core Biopsy

2002 ◽  
Vol 126 (6) ◽  
pp. 697-701 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sandra J. Shin ◽  
Paul Peter Rosen
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Core Biopsy ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Carcinoma ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
Excisional Biopsy ◽  
Primary Diagnosis ◽  
Needle Core Biopsy

Abstract Context.—Percutaneous image-guided core biopsy is increasingly becoming the method of choice to evaluate impalpable breast lesions presenting with mammographically detected calcifications or as a mammographically detected mass. Infrequently, a diagnosis of a primary lobular lesion is rendered by needle core biopsy. Although lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) and atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) are not themselves detectable by mammography, they can be associated with calcifications. The management of patients with a primary diagnosis of LCIS or ALH on needle core biopsy is uncertain. Recommendations include excisional biopsy, tamoxifen citrate therapy, mammographic surveillance, or a combination of these approaches. Objective.—The purpose of this study was to report the histologic findings of excisional biopsies performed after ALH or LCIS was found in a needle core biopsy. Design.—Hematoxylin-eosin–stained slides of 20 needle core biopsy specimens from patients with a primary diagnosis of LCIS or ALH were retrieved from the consultation and surgical pathology files of New York Presbyterian Hospital–Weill Medical College of Cornell University. Histologic diagnoses were confirmed in all cases. Results.—Fourteen cases of primary LCIS and 6 cases of ALH found on needle core biopsy were identified. Subsequent excisional biopsy of the 14 LCIS cases revealed the following: LCIS, ductal carcinoma in situ, invasive carcinoma (1 patient; 7%); LCIS, infiltrating lobular carcinoma (1 patient; 7%); LCIS, ductal carcinoma in situ (1 patient; 7%); LCIS (8 patients; 57%); and ALH with or without atypical ductal hyperplasia (3 patients; 21%). Among the 6 patients with ALH on needle core biopsy, 1 had infiltrating lobular carcinoma and LCIS and 2 had LCIS in subsequent excision; other excisions for ALH were benign. Overall, 3 (21%) of 14 patients with a primary diagnosis of LCIS on needle core biopsy had a more significant lesion (ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive carcinoma) in a subsequent excisional biopsy. Conclusions.—Data obtained in this study and in previously published reports lead us to conclude that excisional biopsy may be indicated and should be considered when LCIS is found on needle core biopsy in order to more fully examine the biopsy site for coexistent, clinically inapparent intraductal or invasive carcinoma that may be present in about 25% of these patients. The small number of ALH cases studied produced inconclusive results. We recommend that excisional biopsy be considered if atypical ductal hyperplasia is present with ALH in a needle core biopsy or if the diagnosis of the biopsy specimen is discordant with the mammographic findings.

Reflex Estrogen Receptor (ER) and Progesterone Receptor (PR) Analysis of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) in Breast Needle Core Biopsy Specimens

2016 ◽  
Vol 40 (8) ◽  
pp. 1090-1099 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher J. VandenBussche ◽  
Ashley Cimino-Mathews ◽  
Ben Ho Park ◽  
Leisha A. Emens ◽  
Theodore N. Tsangaris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Progesterone Receptor ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Core Biopsy ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Needle Core Biopsy ◽  
Biopsy Specimens

Minimal (≤0.1 cm) Invasive Carcinoma in Breast Core Needle Biopsies

2004 ◽  
Vol 128 (9) ◽  
pp. 996-999
Author(s):  
Andrew A. Renshaw
Keyword(s):  
Minimally Invasive ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Carcinoma ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia ◽  
Core Needle ◽  
Ductal Hyperplasia ◽  
Ductal Carcinomas ◽  
Invasive Carcinomas

Abstract Context.—Although minimally invasive (microinvasive) carcinoma (≤0.1 cm) of the breast is a well-known and well-characterized entity in excision specimens, the significance of small foci of invasion in breast core needle biopsies has not been well described. Objective.—To define the significance of minimally invasive carcinoma in breast core needle biopsies. Design.—Review of a large series of core needle biopsies for invasive carcinomas measuring 0.1 cm or less and correlation of the results with those of subsequent excision. Setting.—Large community hospital. Results.—From approximately 8500 biopsies, a total of 18 cases of minimally invasive carcinoma from 16 women aged 42 to 80 years were identified. All were present on only 1 of 8 slides made from the block. Overall, the incidence was approximately 0.1% of all biopsies and 1% of all invasive carcinomas. Six cases were invasive lobular carcinomas, 1 was tubulolobular carcinoma, 3 were tubular carcinomas, and the remaining 8 were ductal carcinomas. Eight cases were associated with high-grade comedo ductal carcinomas, 2 with low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ, 3 with atypical ductal hyperplasia, 3 with atypical ductal hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ, and 2 with no other lesion. From a total of 8 sections done entirely through the block, the lesion was present on the first level in 4 cases and the fifth level in 5 cases. No cases were identified in the last 3 levels. Subsequent pathology was available for 16 of the 18 cases. Invasive carcinomas measuring more than 1 cm were present in 9 cases (64%; along with 2 positive lymph nodes), invasive carcinomas less than 1 cm in 2 cases (14%), ductal carcinoma alone in 4 cases (29%), and no carcinoma in 1 case (7%). No pathologic or radiologic features were associated with the finding of invasive carcinoma at excision. Conclusion.—Invasive carcinoma measuring 0.1 cm or less is a rare finding in breast core needle biopsies, is commonly associated with in situ carcinomas and atypical hyperplasias, and is often associated with larger invasive foci at excision. However, invasive carcinomas smaller than 0.1 cm can occur without any other significant findings and may require relatively extensive sampling to identify.

scholarly journals Diagnostic underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ at percutaneous core needle and vacuum-assisted biopsies of the breast in a Brazilian reference institution

2016 ◽  
Vol 49 (1) ◽  
pp. 6-11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gustavo Machado Badan ◽  
Decio Roveda Júnior ◽  
Sebastião Piato ◽  
Eduardo de Faria Castro Fleury ◽  
Mário Sérgio Dantas Campos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia ◽  
Surgical Excision ◽  
Target Lesion ◽  
Core Needle ◽  
Ductal Hyperplasia ◽  
Underestimation Rate

Abstract Objective: To determine the rates of diagnostic underestimation at stereotactic percutaneous core needle biopsies (CNB) and vacuum-assisted biopsies (VABB) of nonpalpable breast lesions, with histopathological results of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) subsequently submitted to surgical excision. As a secondary objective, the frequency of ADH and DCIS was determined for the cases submitted to biopsy. Materials and Methods: Retrospective review of 40 cases with diagnosis of ADH or DCIS on the basis of biopsies performed between February 2011 and July 2013, subsequently submitted to surgery, whose histopathological reports were available in the internal information system. Biopsy results were compared with those observed at surgery and the underestimation rate was calculated by means of specific mathematical equations. Results: The underestimation rate at CNB was 50% for ADH and 28.57% for DCIS, and at VABB it was 25% for ADH and 14.28% for DCIS. ADH represented 10.25% of all cases undergoing biopsy, whereas DCIS accounted for 23.91%. Conclusion: The diagnostic underestimation rate at CNB is two times the rate at VABB. Certainty that the target has been achieved is not the sole determining factor for a reliable diagnosis. Removal of more than 50% of the target lesion should further reduce the risk of underestimation.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document