Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ composed of signet ring cells mimicking cribriform ductal carcinoma in situ

2020 ◽  
Vol 26 (10) ◽  
pp. 2050-2051
Author(s):  
Mark Kavesh ◽  
Melanie Martinez ◽  
Jaya Ruth Asirvatham
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Signet Ring Cells ◽  
Signet Ring ◽  
Pleomorphic Lobular Carcinoma

Lobular Neoplasia of the Breast: An Update

2009 ◽  
Vol 133 (7) ◽  
pp. 1116-1120 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alejandro Contreras ◽  
Husain Sattar
Keyword(s):  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Neoplasia ◽  
Therapeutic Interventions ◽  
High Grade ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Molecular Studies ◽  
Pleomorphic Lobular Carcinoma

Abstract Context.—Lobular neoplasias (LNs) of the breast include atypical lobular neoplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ. Recent evidence suggests that LN is not only a risk factor for invasive lobular carcinoma, but is also a nonobligate precursor. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ (PLCIS) is a subtype of LN that has high-grade nuclei and other features that may mimic high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. The management and follow-up of patients diagnosed with LN on core biopsy is a current issue of debate. However, recent genomic and molecular studies have identified candidate genes that may be important in understanding the pathogenesis of atypical lobular neoplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ, and thus may lead to other therapeutic interventions. Objective.—To review the literature on LN of the breast and discuss current issues in the diagnosis and management of this entity, with particular attention to the relatively newly recognized lesion PLCIS. Because the management of PLCIS varies from the other LN lesions, the recognition of PLCIS by the pathologist is necessary. Current issues in the molecular pathogenesis of LN are also presented. Data Sources.—Extensive review of the literature. Hematoxylin-eosin–stained and immunohistochemical-stained tissue from the author's personal collection. Conclusions.—Although morphology and immunohistochemical stains, such as E-cadherin, are important in the diagnosis and understanding of LN, genomic and molecular studies may guide the way these lesions are handled in the future. Recognizing PLCIS is important both for patient management and for our future understanding of LN pathogenesis.

Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ: A distinct entity of controversial significance.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 177-177
Author(s):  
Marina De Brot ◽  
Shirin Muhsen ◽  
Victor P. Andrade ◽  
Starr Koslow Mautner ◽  
Melissa Murray ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
Previous History ◽  
Prior History ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Pleomorphic Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
History Of

177 Background: Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ (PLCIS) is an increasingly diagnosed variant of lobular carcinoma in situ. Histologically, it resembles ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), leading to controversy over proper management. Yet, the natural history of PLCIS is unknown. Here we describe our experience with PLCIS. Methods: Review of pathology reports (1995–2012) identified 233 cases of LCIS variants. Patients with synchronous ipsilateral DCIS or invasive cancer (IC) were excluded leaving 25 cases for review. Consensus review by 3 pathologists further excluded 7; leaving 18 cases, 12 of which were classified as PLCIS and 6 as LCIS with pleomorphic features (LCIS-PF). (Table) PLCIS was defined by cellular dyshesion, nuclear pleomorphism with a 2-3 fold size variation, conspicuous nucleoli, mitoses and abundant cytoplasm; lesions not meeting all parameters were classified as LCIS-PF. Loss of e-cadherin was confirmed; clinical data were obtained from medical records. Results: Mean patient age at diagnosis of PLCIS/LCIS-PF was 57 yrs (42-67 yrs). All cases presented with imaging abnormalities. A previous history of breast cancer was present in 7/18 (39%) pts (3/7, ipsilateral; 4/7, contralateral). Following PLCIS/LCIS-PF diagnosis, 6/18 (33%) pts underwent mastectomy and 12/18 had excision alone, with (n=3) or without chemoprevention (n=9). Margin status was negative in 4/12 pts; close in 3/12 pts and positive in 5/12 pts undergoing excision. At a median follow-up of 27 mos (2-148 mos), 2/12 pts treated with excision developed ipsilateral breast cancer (1 DCIS; 1 IC). Both had close margins at initial excision; median time to cancer, 54 mos. Conclusions: Pure PLCIS is an uncommon lesion. Synchronous malignancy or prior history of breast cancer are often present in patients with PLCIS, contributing to the difficulty in determining the actual risk conferred by this lesion and appropriate management. Efforts to systematically characterize LCIS variants and prospective documentation of outcomes are needed to clarify the significance of these lesions. [Table: see text]

scholarly journals Ductal Carcinoma in situ and Lobular Carcinoma in situ Arising in a Phyllodes Tumor

2015 ◽  
Vol 76 (4) ◽  
pp. 693-698
Author(s):  
Yoshiaki NAKANO ◽  
Toshio NISHI ◽  
Ayaka NISHIMAE ◽  
Masaru YAMASAKI ◽  
Tetsuya YOSHIDA ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma ◽  
Phyllodes Tumor ◽  
Lobular Carcinoma In Situ
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document