Nodal-Stage Classification in Invasive Lobular Breast Carcinoma: Influence of Different Interpretations of the pTNM Classification

Purpose Application of current nodal status classification is complicated in lobular breast carcinoma metastases. The aim of this study was to define the optimal interpretation of the pTNM classification in sentinel node (SN) -positive patients to select patients with limited or with a high risk of non-SN involvement. Patients and Methods SN metastases of 392 patients with lobular breast carcinoma were reclassified according to interpretations of the European Working Group for Breast Screening Pathology (EWGBSP) and guidelines by Turner et al, and the predictive power for non-SN involvement was assessed. Results Reclassification according to definitions of EWGBSP and Turner et al resulted in different pN classification in 73 patients (19%). The rate of non-SN involvement in the 40 patients with isolated tumor cells according to Turner et al and with micrometastases according to EWGBSP was 20%, which is comparable to the established rate for micrometastases. The rate of non-SN involvement in the 29 patients with micrometastases according to Turner et al and with macrometastases according to EWGBSP was 48%, which is comparable to the established rate for macrometastases. Therefore, the EWGBSP method to classify SN tumor load better reflected the risk of non-SN involvement than the Turner et al system. Conclusion Compared with the guidelines by Turner et al, the EWGBSP definitions better reflect SN metastatic tumor load and allow better differentiation between patients with lobular breast carcinoma who have a limited or a high risk of non-SN metastases. Therefore, we suggest using the EWGBSP definitions in these patients to select high-risk patients who may benefit from additional local and/or systemic therapy

Obtaining Adequate Surgical Margins in Breast-Conserving Therapy for Patients with Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Current Modalities and Future Directions

Inadequate surgical margins represent a high risk for adverse clinical outcome in breast-conserving therapy (BCT) for early-stage breast cancer. The majority of studies report positive resection margins in 20% to 40% of the patients who underwent BCT. This may result in an increased local recurrence (LR) rate or additional surgery and, consequently, adverse affects on cosmesis, psychological distress, and health costs. In the literature, various risk factors are reported to be associated with positive margin status after lumpectomy, which may allow the surgeon to distinguish those patients with a higher a priori risk for re-excision. However, most risk factors are related to tumor biology and patient characteristics, which cannot be modified as such. Therefore, efforts to reduce the number of positive margins should focus on optimizing the surgical procedure itself, because the surgeon lacks real-time intraoperative information on the presence of positive resection margins during breast-conserving surgery. This review presents the status of pre- and intraoperative modalities currently used in BCT. Furthermore, innovative intraoperative approaches, such as positron emission tomography, radioguided occult lesion localization, and near-infrared fluorescence optical imaging, are addressed, which have to prove their potential value in improving surgical outcome and reducing the need for re-excision in BCT

Breast carcinomas of limited extent: frequency, radiologic-pathologic characteristics, and surgical margin requirements.

Item does not contain fulltextBACKGROUND: Clinical trials established the value of breast-conserving treatment (BCT) including the macroscopic removal of the tumor followed by local radiation therapy (RT) for Stage I and II invasive carcinomas. The occurrence of local tumor recurrence is related to the extent and multifocality of the tumor. Various studies aim to identify those tumors that could be proper candidates for conventional BCT. Furthermore, recent studies have focused on the identification of tumors that may be treated by breast-conserving surgery alone without RT. Small, localized tumors theoretically should be the potential candidates for this type of treatment. The mammographic and pathologic criteria for the identification of tumors with limited extent are not yet established; furthermore, the optimal extent of the surgical excision and the method for margin examination are controversial. METHODS: Surgical breast-conserving procedures were simulated in a review of 135 mastectomy specimens of patients treated for an invasive carcinoma (> or = 4 cm in size, all pathologic types except invasive lobular carcinoma) who were theoretically eligible for conservative treatment. Tumor spread including possible multifocality and multicentricity was studied by the technique of correlated specimen radiography and pathology. Breast carcinoma of limited extent (BCLE), the proper tumor profile for BCT, was defined as having no invasive carcinoma, ductal carcinoma in situ, and lymphatic emboli foci beyond 1 cm from the edge of the dominant mass. RESULTS: Fifty-three percent of the patients in this series had a BCLE. No statistically significant relation was found between BCLE and patient age, pathologic size, type and grade of the tumor, lymph node status, mode of detection, and mammographic aspect of the index tumor. Based on mammography, the absence of calcification or tumor density beyond the edge of index tumor appears to be the best predictor for BCLE (P < 0.0001). A 1-cm microscopically tumor free margin as the outer rim of a macroscopic surgical margin of 2 cm gives the best positive predictive value based on pathology (P < 0.0001). By applying the above conditions, 72 of the 135 cancers were identified as being potential BCLE cases in this series. However, whereas 64 of these 72 tumors (89%) were correctly identified as being true BCLE, 8 (11%) were erroneously identified as such (non-BCLE cases), having "residual" tumor foci beyond 2 cm from the edge of the dominant tumor. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude, that approximately 50% of invasive ductal carcinomas may have limited extent. The accuracy of identifying this group of cancers, the proper candidates for BCT, by applying state-of-the-art mammography and pathology may be as high as 90%. A subset of these tumors might represent the potential candidates for treatment with surgery alone without RT. As a result, the routine application of BCT complemented by RT would have led to the overtreatment of 89% of the patients with a BCLE in this series; conversely, 11% of the tumors may have recurred without the use of RT. Considering that these conclusions are based on a theoretic morphologic model, further clinical studies with facilities for high quality team approach in diagnosis and therapy are needed to evaluate the impact of BCLE on BCT strategies. The results of this study should not justify the withholding of RT outside the context of clinical trials