The Breast
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 50-55 , February 2011

Factors associated with upgrading to malignancy at surgery of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed on core biopsy

  • Isabelle Deshaies

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de chirurgie, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • ,
  • Louise Provencher

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Santé des populations: URESP, Centre de recherche FRSQ du Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québeca, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de chirurgie, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • ,
  • Simon Jacob

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Santé des populations: URESP, Centre de recherche FRSQ du Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québeca, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de biologie moléculaire, biochimie médical et pathologie, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • ,
  • Gary Côté

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de radiologie, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • ,
  • Jean Robert

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Santé des populations: URESP, Centre de recherche FRSQ du Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québeca, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de chirurgie, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • ,
  • Christine Desbiens

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Santé des populations: URESP, Centre de recherche FRSQ du Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québeca, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de chirurgie, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • ,
  • Brigitte Poirier

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Santé des populations: URESP, Centre de recherche FRSQ du Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québeca, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de chirurgie, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • ,
  • Jean-Charles Hogue

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • ,
  • Éric Vachon

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • ,
  • Caroline Diorio

      Affiliations

    • Centre des Maladies du Sein Deschênes–Fabia, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Santé des populations: URESP, Centre de recherche FRSQ du Centre hospitalier affilié universitaire de Québeca, Hôpital du Saint-Sacrement, 1050 chemin Ste-Foy, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1S 4L8
    • Département de médecine sociale et préventive, Université Laval, Pavillon Ferdinand-Vandry, 1050 ave de la Médecine, Quebec City, QC, Canada G1V 0A6
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author. Tel.: +418 682 7390; fax: +418 682 7949.

Received 19 April 2010 ,Revised 14 June 2010 ,Accepted 15 June 2010.

References 

  1. Adepoju LJ, Symmans WF, Babiera GV, Singletary SE, Arun B, Sneige N, et al. Impact of concurrent proliferative high-risk lesions on the risk of ipsilateral breast carcinoma recurrence and contralateral breast carcinoma development in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer. 2006;106:42–50
  2. Collins LC, Baer HJ, Tamimi RM, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Schnitt SJ. Magnitude and laterality of breast cancer risk according to histologic type of atypical hyperplasia: results from the Nurses’ Health Study. Cancer. 2007;109:180–187
  3. Degnim AC, Visscher DW, Berman HK, Frost MH, Sellers TA, Vierkant RA, et al. Stratification of breast cancer risk in women with atypia: a Mayo cohort study. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2671–2677
  4. Worsham MJ, Abrams J, Raju U, Kapke A, Lu M, Cheng J, et al. Breast cancer incidence in a cohort of women with benign breast disease from a multiethnic, primary health care population. Breast J. 2007;13:115–121
  5. Dupont WD, Page DL. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast disease. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:146–151
  6. Tavassoli FA, Norris HJ. A comparison of the results of long-term follow-up for atypical intraductal hyperplasia and intraductal hyperplasia of the breast. Cancer. 1990;65:518–529
  7. Sloane JP, Amendoeira I, Apostolikas N, Bellocq JP, Bianchi S, Boecker W, et al. Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists from 12 countries in diagnosing breast disease and reporting prognostic features of carcinomas. European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology. Virchows Arch. 1999;434:3–10
  8. Ghofrani M, Tapia B, Tavassoli FA. Discrepancies in the diagnosis of intraductal proliferative lesions of the breast and its management implications: results of a multinational survey. Virchows Arch. 2006;449:609–616
  9. Liberman L, Dershaw DD, Glassman JR, Abramson AF, Morris EA, LaTrenta LR, et al. Analysis of cancers not diagnosed at stereotactic core breast biopsy. Radiology. 1997;203:151–157
  10. Chae BJ, Lee A, Song BJ, Jung SS. Predictive factors for breast cancer in patients diagnosed atypical ductal hyperplasia at core needle biopsy. World J Surg Oncol. 2009;7:77
  11. Wagoner MJ, Laronga C, Acs G. Extent and histologic pattern of atypical ductal hyperplasia present on core needle biopsy specimens of the breast can predict ductal carcinoma in situ in subsequent excision. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;131:112–121
  12. Forgeard C, Benchaib M, Guerin N, Thiesse P, Mignotte , Faure C, et al. Is surgical biopsy mandatory in case of atypical ductal hyperplasia on 11-gauge core needle biopsy? A retrospective study of 300 patients. Am J Surg. 2008;196:339–345
  13. Ko E, Han W, Lee JW, Cho J, Kim EK, Jung SY, et al. Scoring system for predicting malignancy in patients diagnosed with atypical ductal hyperplasia at ultrasound-guided core needle biopsy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;112:189–195
  14. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Rados MS. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast. A long-term follow-up study. Cancer. 1985;55:2698–2708
  15. Page DL, Rogers LW. Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia. Hum Pathol. 1992;23:1095–1097
  16. Schnitt SJ, Collins LC. Biopsy interpretation of the breast. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009;
  17. Sohn V, Arthurs Z, Herbert G, Keylock J, Perry J, Eckert M, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: improved accuracy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted versus the 14-gauge core biopsy needle. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2497–2501
  18. Jang M, Cho N, Moon WK, Park JS, Seong MH, Park IA. Underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia at sonographically guided core biopsy of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:1347–1351
  19. Adrales G, Turk P, Wallace T, Bird R, Norton HJ, Greene F. Is surgical excision necessary for atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast diagnosed by mammotome?. Am J Surg. 2000;180:313–315
  20. Jackman RJ, Birdwell RL, Ikeda DM. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: can some lesions be defined as probably benign after stereotactic 11-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy, eliminating the recommendation for surgical excision?. Radiology. 2002;224:548–554
  21. Liberman L, Holland AE, Marjan D, Murray MP, Bartella L, Morris EA, et al. Underestimation of atypical ductal hyperplasia at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;188:684–690
  22. Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, Evans WP, Lechner MC, Richardson TR, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology. 1997;204:485–488
  23. Eby PR, Ochsner JE, DeMartini WB, Allison KH, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Frequency and upgrade rates of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: 9-versus 11-gauge. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:229–234
  24. Eby PR, Ochsner JE, DeMartini WB, Allison KH, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Is surgical excision necessary for focal atypical ductal hyperplasia found at stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy?. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:3232–3238
  25. Graesslin O, Antoine M, Chopier J, Seror JY, Flahault A, Callard P, et al. Histology after lumpectomy in women with epithelial atypia on stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36:170–175
  26. Philpotts LE, Lee CH, Horvath LJ, Lange RC, Carter D, Tocino I. Underestimation of breast cancer with II-gauge vacuum suction biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:1047–1050
  27. Dupont WD, Parl FF, Hartmann WH, Brinton LA, Winfield AC, Worrell JA, et al. Breast cancer risk associated with proliferative breast disease and atypical hyperplasia. Cancer. 1993;71:1258–1265
  28. Agoff SN, Lawton TJ. Papillary lesions of the breast with and without atypical ductal hyperplasia: can we accurately predict benign behavior from core needle biopsy?. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;122:440–443
  29. Lewis JT, Hartmann LC, Vierkant RA, Maloney SD, Shane Pankratz V, Allers TM, et al. An analysis of breast cancer risk in women with single, multiple, and atypical papilloma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:665–672
  30. Page DL, Kidd TE, Dupont WD, Simpson JF, Rogers LW. Lobular neoplasia of the breast: higher risk for subsequent invasive cancer predicted by more extensive disease. Hum Pathol. 1991;22:1232–1239
  31. Chuba PJ, Hamre MR, Yap J, Severson RK, Lucas D, Shamsa F, et al. Bilateral risk for subsequent breast cancer after lobular carcinoma-in-situ: analysis of surveillance, epidemiology, and end results data. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:5534–5541
  32. Fajardo LL, Pisano ED, Caudry DJ, Gatsonis CA, Berg WA, Connolly J, et al. Stereotactic and sonographic large-core biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions: results of the Radiologic Diagnostic Oncology Group V study. Acad Radiol. 2004;11:293–308
  33. Darling ML, Smith DN, Lester SC, Kaelin C, Selland DL, Denison CM, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ as revealed by large-core needle breast biopsy: results of surgical excision. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:1341–1346
  34. Willett WC, Rockhill B, Hankinson SE, Hunter D, Colditz GA. Nongenetic factors in the causation of breast cancer. In:  Harris JRL,  Lippman ME,  Morrow M,  Osborne CK editor. Diseases of the breast. 3rd ed.. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2004;p. 223–276
  35. Ely KA, Carter BA, Jensen RA, Simpson JF, Page DL. Core biopsy of the breast with atypical ductal hyperplasia: a probabilistic approach to reporting. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25:1017–1021
  36. Sneige N, Lim SC, Whitman GJ, Krishnamurthy S, Sahin AA, Smith TL, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis by directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy of breast microcalcifications. Considerations for surgical excision. Am J Clin Pathol. 2003;119:248–253
  37. Yeh IT, Dimitrov D, Otto P, Miller AR, Kahlenberg MS, Cruz A. Pathologic review of atypical hyperplasia identified by image-guided breast needle core biopsy. Correlation with excision specimen. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003;127:49–54
  38. Fuhrman GM, Cederbom GJ, Bolton JS, King TA, Duncan JL, Champaign JL, et al. Image-guided core-needle breast biopsy is an accurate technique to evaluate patients with nonpalpable imaging abnormalities. Ann Surg. 1998;227:932–939
  39. Lin PH, Clyde JC, Bates DM, Garcia JM, Matsumoto GH, Girvin GW. Accuracy of stereotactic core-needle breast biopsy in atypical ductal hyperplasia. Am J Surg. 1998;175:380–382
  40. Gadzala DE, Cederbom GJ, Bolton JS, McKinnon WM, Farr GH, Champaign J, et al. Appropriate management of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by stereotactic core needle breast biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 1997;4:283–286
  41. Moore MM, Hargett CW, Hanks JB, Fajardo LL, Harvey JA, Frierson HF, et al. Association of breast cancer with the finding of atypical ductal hyperplasia at core breast biopsy. Ann Surg. 1997;225:726–731discussion 731–723
  42. Meyer JE, Smith DN, Lester SC, Kaelin C, DiPiro PJ, Denison CM, et al. Large-core needle biopsy of nonpalpable breast lesions. JAMA. 1999;281:1638–1641
  43. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Ellis I, Ambrogetti D. Underestimation of malignancy of breast core-needle biopsy: concepts and precise overall and category-specific estimates. Cancer. 2007;109:487–495
  44. Zhao L, Freimanis R, Bergman S, Shen P, Perrier ND, Lesko N, et al. Biopsy needle technique and the accuracy of diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia for mammographic abnormalities. Am Surg. 2003;69:757–762discussion 762
  45. Lourenco AP, Mainiero MB, Lazarus E, Giri D, Schepps B. Stereotactic breast biopsy: comparison of histologic underestimation rates with 11- and 9-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2007;189:W275–W279
  46. Ingegnoli A, d’Aloia C, Frattaruolo A, Pallavera L, Martella E, Crisi G, et al. Flat epithelial atypia and atypical ductal hyperplasia: carcinoma underestimation rate. Breast J. 2010;16:55–59
  47. Teng-Swan Ho J, Tan PH, Hee SW, Su-Lin Wong J. Underestimation of malignancy of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed on 11-gauge stereotactically guided mammotome breast biopsy: an asian breast screen experience. Breast. 2008;17:401–406
  48. Travade A, Isnard A, Bouchet F, Bagard C. Non-palpable breast lesions and core needle biopsy with mammotome 11G: is surgery required in patients with atypical ductal hyperplasia?. J Radiol. 2006;87:307–310
  49. Winchester DJ, Bernstein JR, Jeske JM, Nicholson MH, Hahn EA, Goldschmidt RA, et al. Upstaging of atypical ductal hyperplasia after vacuum-assisted 11-gauge stereotactic core needle biopsy. Arch Surg. 2003;138:619–622discussion 622–613
  50. Gal-Gombos EC, Esserman LE, Recine MA, Poppiti RJ. Large-needle core biopsy in atypical intraductal epithelial hyperplasia including immunohistochemical expression of high molecular weight cytokeratin: analysis of results of a single institution. Breast J. 2002;8:269–274
  51. Burak WE, Owens KE, Tighe MB, Kemp L, Dinges SA, Hitchcock CL, et al. Vacuum-assisted stereotactic breast biopsy: histologic underestimation of malignant lesions. Arch Surg. 2000;135:700–703
  52. Cangiarella J, Waisman J, Symmans WF, Gross J, Cohen JM, Wu H, et al. Mammotome core biopsy for mammary microcalcification: analysis of 160 biopsies from 142 women with surgical and radiologic followup. Cancer. 2001;91:173–177
  53. Brem RF, Behrndt VS, Sanow L, Gatewood OM. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: histologic underestimation of carcinoma in tissue harvested from impalpable breast lesions using 11-gauge stereotactically guided directional vacuum-assisted biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172:1405–1407

PII: S0960-9776(10)00154-2

doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2010.06.004

The Breast
Volume 20, Issue 1 , Pages 50-55 , February 2011

Article Tools