Prognostic markers in breast cancer: the reliability of HER2/neu status in core needle biopsy of 325 patients with primary breast cancer

2004 ◽  
Vol 116 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 26-31 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susanne Taucher ◽  
Margaretha Rudas ◽  
Robert M. Mader ◽  
Michael Gnant ◽  
Peter Dubsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Core Needle Biopsy ◽  
Primary Breast Cancer ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Prognostic Markers ◽  
Core Needle

Potential of a novel technique for constructing tissue microarrays from core needle biopsy as seen in older women with primary breast cancer.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e23283-e23283
Author(s):  
Mohammad A Albanghali ◽  
Emad Rakha ◽  
Andrew R. Green ◽  
Binafsha Manzoor Syed ◽  
Christopher Nolan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Older Women ◽  
Core Needle Biopsy ◽  
Primary Breast Cancer ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Tissue Microarrays ◽  
Core Needle ◽  
Novel Technique

Assessment of her2-neu status in core needle biopsy of 215 patients with primary breast cancer

The Breast ◽  
2003 ◽  
Vol 12 ◽  
pp. S28
Author(s):  
S. Taucher ◽  
M. Rudas ◽  
M. Gnant ◽  
D. Kandioler ◽  
P. Dubsky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Core Needle Biopsy ◽  
Primary Breast Cancer ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Core Needle

Upgrade rates and outcomes of screen-detected atypical intraductal epithelial proliferation (AIDEP) diagnosed on core needle biopsy

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-6
Author(s):  
Emma C. Dunne ◽  
Edel M. Quinn ◽  
Maurice Stokes ◽  
John M. Barry ◽  
Malcolm Kell ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Core Needle Biopsy ◽  
Needle Biopsy ◽  
Demographic Data ◽  
Screening Mammography ◽  
Published Data ◽  
Epithelial Proliferation ◽  
Core Needle ◽  
In Situ Carcinoma ◽  
Increased Risk

INTRODUCTION: Atypical intraductal epithelial proliferation (AIDEP) is a breast lesion categorised as “indeterminate” if identified on core needle biopsy (CNB). The rate at which these lesions are upgraded following diagnostic excision varies in the literature. Women diagnosed with AIDEP are thought to be at increased risk of breast cancer. Our aim was to identify the rate of upgrade to invasive or in situ carcinoma in a group of patients diagnosed with AIDEP on screening mammography and to quantify their risk of subsequent breast cancer. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of a prospectively maintained database containing all patients diagnosed with AIDEP on CNB between 2005 and 2012 in an Irish breast screening centre. Basic demographic data was collected along with details of the original CNB result, rate of upgrade to carcinoma and details of any subsequent cancer diagnoses. RESULTS: In total 113 patients were diagnosed with AIDEP on CNB during the study period. The upgrade rate on diagnostic excision was 28.3% (n = 32). 6.2% (n = 7) were upgraded to invasive cancer and 22.1% (n = 25) to DCIS. 81 patients were not upgraded on diagnostic excision and were offered 5 years of annual mammographic surveillance. 9.88% (8/81) of these patients went on to receive a subsequent diagnosis of malignancy. The mean time to diagnosis of these subsequent cancers was 65.41 months (range 20.18–145.21). CONCLUSION: Our data showing an upgrade rate of 28% to carcinoma reflects recently published data and we believe it supports the continued practice of excising AIDEP to exclude co-existing carcinoma.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document