The pathology of familial breast cancer: Morphological aspects

A small proportion of breast cancers are due to a heritable predisposition. Recently, two predisposition genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, have been identified and cloned. The morphological features of tumours from patients harbouring mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes differ from each other and from sporadic breast cancers. Both are of higher grade than are sporadic cases. An excess of medullary/atypical medullary carcinoma has been reported in patients with BRCA1 mutations. Multifactorial analysis, however, shows that the only features independently associated with BRCA1 mutations are a high mitotic count, pushing tumour margins and a lymphocytic infiltrate. For BRCA2 mutation, an association with tubular/lobular carcinoma has been suggested, but not substantiated in a larger Breast Cancer Linkage Consortium study. In multifactorial analysis, the independent features were a lack of tubule formation and pushing tumour margins only. The morphological analysis has implications for clinical management of patients

Sensitivity of imaging for multifocal-multicentric breast carcinoma

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>This retrospective study aims to determine: 1) the sensitivity of preoperative mammography (Mx) and ultrasound (US), and re-reviewed Mx to detect multifocal multicentric breast carcinoma (MMBC), defined by pathology on surgical specimens, and 2) to analyze the characteristics of both detected and undetected foci on Mx and US.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Three experienced breast radiologists re-reviewed, independently, digital mammography of 97 women with MMBC pathologically diagnosed on surgical specimens. The radiologists were informed of all neoplastic foci, and blinded to the original mammograms and US reports. With regards to Mx, they considered the breast density, number of foci, the Mx characteristics of the lesions and their BI-RADS classification. For US, they considered size of the lesions, BI-RADS classification and US pattern and lesion characteristics. According to the histological size, the lesions were classified as: index cancer, 2nd lesion, 3rd lesion, and 4th lesion. Any pathologically identified malignant foci not previously described in the original imaging reports, were defined as undetected or missed lesions. Sensitivity was calculated for Mx, US and re-reviewed Mx for detecting the presence of the index cancer as well as additional satellite lesions.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Pathological examination revealed 13 multifocal and 84 multicentric cancers with a total of 303 malignant foci (282 invasive and 21 non invasive). Original Mx and US reports had an overall sensitivity of 45.5% and 52.9%, respectively. Mx detected 83/97 index cancers with a sensitivity of 85.6%. The number of lesions <it>un</it>detected by original Mx was 165/303. The Mx pattern of breasts with undetected lesions were: fatty in 3 (1.8%); scattered fibroglandular density in 40 (24.3%), heterogeneously dense in 91 (55.1%) and dense in 31 (18.8%) cases. In breasts with an almost entirely fatty pattern, Mx sensitivity was 100%, while in fibroglandular or dense pattern it was reduced to 45.5%. Re-reviewed Mx detected only 3 additional lesions. The sensitivity of Mx was affected by the presence of dense breast tissue which obscured lesions or by an incorrect interpretation of suspicious findings.</p> <p>US detected 73/80 index cancers (sensitivity of 91.2%), US missed 117 malignant foci with a mean tumor diameter of 6.5 mm; the sensitivity was 52.9%</p> <p>Undetected lesions by US were those smallest in size and present in fatty breast or in the presence of microcalcifications without a visible mass.</p> <p>US sensitivity was affected by the presence of fatty tissue or by the extent of calcification.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Mx missed MMBC malignant foci more often in dense or fibroglandular breasts. US missed small lesions in mainly fatty breasts or when there were only microcalcifications. The combined sensitivity of both techniques to assess MMBC was 58%. We suggest larger studies on multimodality imaging.</p

Successful medical management of emphysematous gastritis with concomitant portal venous air: a case report

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Introduction</p> <p>The causes of diffuse abdominal pain following pelvic surgery are numerous. We present a rare case of acute abdominal pain in a woman in the post-partum period.</p> <p>Case presentation</p> <p>A 25-year-old Caucasian woman with neurofibromatosis type 1 presented to our hospital with diffuse abdominal pain immediately after a cesarean section. The patient was acutely ill and toxic with a fever of 38.8°C, a pulse of 120 beats per minute and a distended abdomen with absent bowel sounds. A computed tomography scan showed air in the wall of the stomach and portal venous system. The patient was successfully treated with intravenous antibiotics, bowel rest and total parenteral nutrition.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>It is rare for a case of emphysematous gastritis associated with portal venous air to be treated successfully without surgery. To the best of our knowledge, to date there has been no reported association of emphysematous gastritis with neurofibromatosis.</p

Declining recurrence among ductal carcinoma in situ patients treated with breast-conserving surgery in the community setting

Introduction: Randomized trials indicate that adjuvant radiotherapy plus tamoxifen decrease the five-year risk of recurrence among ductal carcinoma in situ patients treated with breast-conserving surgery from about 20% to 8%. The aims of this study were to examine the use and impact of these therapies on risk of recurrence among ductal carcinoma in situ patients diagnosed and treated in the community setting. Methods: We identified 2,995 patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ between 1990 and 2001 and treated with breast-conserving surgery at three large health plans. Medical charts were reviewed to confirm diagnosis and treatment and to obtain information on subsequent breast cancers. On a subset of patients, slides from the index ductal carcinoma in situ were reviewed for histopathologic features. Cumulative incidence curves were generated and Cox regression was used to examine changes in five-year risk of recurrence across diagnosis years, with and without adjusting for trends in use of adjuvant therapies. Results: Use of radiotherapy increased from 25.8% in 1990-1991 to 61.3% in 2000-2001; tamoxifen increased from 2.3% to 34.4%. A total of 245 patients had a local recurrence within five years of their index ductal carcinoma in situ. The five-year risk of any local recurrence decreased from 14.3% (95% confidence interval 9.8 to 18.7) for patients diagnosed in 1990-1991 to 7.7% (95% confidence interval 5.5 to 9.9) for patients diagnosed in 1998-1999; invasive recurrence decreased from 7.0% (95% confidence interval 3.8 to 10.3) to 3.1% (95% confidence interval 1.7 to 4.6). In Cox models, the association between diagnosis year and risk of recurrence was modestly attenuated after accounting for use of adjuvant therapy. Between 1990-1991 and 2000-2001, the proportion of patients with tumors with high nuclear grade decreased from 46% to 32% (P = 0.03) and those with involved surgical margins dropped from 15% to 0% (P = 0.03). Conclusions: The marked increase in the 1990s in the use of adjuvant therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ patients treated with breast-conserving surgery in the community setting only partially explains the 50% decline in risk of recurrence. Changes in pathology factors have likely also contributed to this decline

Effects of patient selection on the applicability of results from a randomised clinical trial (EORTC 10853) investigating breast-conserving therapy for DCIS

Selection of patients for randomised clinical trials may have a large impact on the applicability of the study results to the general population presenting the same disorder. However, clinical characteristics and outcome data on non-entered patients are usually not available. The effects of patient selection for the EORTC 10853 trial investigating the role of radiotherapy in breast conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ have been studied, in an analysis of all patients treated for ductal carcinoma in situ in five participating institutes. The reasons for not entering patients were evaluated and treatment results of the randomised patients were compared to those not entered. A total of 910 patients were treated for ductal carcinoma in situ. Of these, 477 (52%) were ineligible, with the size of the lesion being the main reason for ineligibility (30% of all ductal carcinoma in situ). Of the 433 eligible patients, 278 (64%) were randomised into the trial. The main reasons for non-entry of eligible patients were either physicians' preference for one of the treatment arms (26%) or patients' refusal (9%). These percentages showed significant variation among the institutes. At 4 years follow-up, those patients not entered in the trial and treated with local excision and radiotherapy, had higher local recurrence rates than the patients randomised in the trial and treated with the same approach, (17 vs 2%, P=0.03). The patients treated with local excision alone had equal local recurrence rates (11% in both groups). Selection of patients may explain the differences in outcome of the randomised patients, and those not-entered. Thus, the results of this trial may not be applicable to all patients with ductal carcinoma in situ

Pathological and Biological Differences Between Screen-Detected and Interval Ductal Carcinoma in situ of the Breast

Background: The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has risen dramatically with the introduction of screening mammography. The aim was to evaluate differences in pathological and biological characteristics between patients with screen-detected and interval DCIS. Methods: From January 1992 to December 2001, 128 consecutive patients had been treated for pure DCIS at our institute. From these, 102 had been attending the Dutch breast cancer screening program. Sufficient paraffin-embedded tissue was available in 74 out of the 102 cases to evaluate biological marker expression (Her2/neu, ER, PR, p53 and cyclin D1) on tissue microarrays (TMA group). Differences in clinicopathological characteristics and marker expression between screen-detected and interval patients were evaluated. Screen-detected DCIS was classified as DCIS detected by screening mammography, when the two-year earlier examination failed to reveal an abnormality. Interval patients were classified as patients with DCIS detected within the two-year interval between two subsequent screening rounds. Results: Screen-detected DCIS was related with linear branching and coarse granular microcalcifications on mammography (p < .001) and with high-grade DCIS according to the Van Nuys classification (p = .025). In univariate analysis, screen-detected DCIS was related with Her2/neu overexpression (odds ratio [OR] = 6.5; 95%CI 1.3-31.0; p = .020), and interval DCIS was associated with low-grade (Van Nuys, OR = 7.3; 95% CI 1.6-33.3; p = .010) and PR positivity (OR = 0.3; 95%CI 0.1-1.0; p = .042). The multivariate analysis displayed an independent relation of Her2/neu overexpression with screen-detected DCIS (OR = 12.8; 95%CI 1.6-104.0; p = .018). Conclusions: These findings suggest that screen-detected DCIS is biologically more aggressive than interval DCIS and should not be regarded as overdiagnosis

Grade of recurrent in situ and invasive carcinoma following treatment of pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Grade of recurrent in situ and invasive carcinoma following treatment of pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast The grade of recurrent in situ and invasive carcinoma occurring after treatment of pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has been compared with the grade of the original DCIS in 122 patients from four different centres (The Royal Marsden Hospitals, London and Sutton, 57 patients; Guy's Hospital, London, 19 patients; Nottingham City Hospital, 31 patients and The Royal Liverpool Hospital, 15 patients). The recurrent carcinoma was pure DCIS in 70 women (57%) and in 52 women (43%) invasive carcinoma was present, which was associated with an in situ element in 43. In all, 19 patients developed a second recurrence (pure DCIS in 11 and invasive with or without an in situ element in eight). The majority of invasive carcinomas followed high-grade DCIS. There was strong agreement between the grade of the original DCIS and that of the recurrent DCIS (k = 0.679), which was the same in 95 of 113 patients (84%). The grade of the original DCIS showed only fair agreement with the grade of recurrent invasive carcinoma (k = 0.241), although agreement was stronger with the pleomorphism score of the recurrent carcinoma (k = 0.396). There was moderate agreement, in recurrent invasive lesions, between the grade of the DCIS and that of the associated invasive element (k = 0.515). Other features that showed moderate or strong agreement between the original and recurrent DCIS were necrosis and periductal inflammation. The similarity between the histological findings of the original and subsequent DCIS is consistent with the concept that recurrent lesions represent regrowth of residual carcinoma. In addition, although agreement between the grade of the original DCIS and that of any subsequent invasive carcinoma was only fair, there is no suggestion that low-grade DCIS lesions progress to higher grade lesions or to the development of higher grade invasive carcinoma. This is in agreement with immunohistochemical and molecular data indicating that low- grade and high-grade mammary carcinomas are quite different lesions