scholarly journals Lumpectomy Margins for Invasive Breast Cancer and Ductal Carcinoma in Situ: Current Guideline Recommendations, Their Implications, and Impact

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (20) ◽  
pp. 2240-2245
Author(s):  
Stuart J. Schnitt ◽  
Meena S. Moran ◽  
Armando E. Giuliano
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Current Guideline ◽  
Lumpectomy Margins

scholarly journals Study of Estrogen Receptor and Progesterone Receptor Expression in Breast Ductal Carcinoma In Situ by Immunohistochemical Staining in ER/PgR-Negative Invasive Breast Cancer

ISRN Oncology ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei Dobrescu ◽  
Monique Chang ◽  
Vatsala Kirtani ◽  
George K. Turi ◽  
Randa Hennawy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Receptor Expression ◽  
Invasive Cancer ◽  
Positive Staining ◽  
Receptor Status

Background. To our knowledge, the hormone receptor status of noncontiguous ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) occurring concurrently in ER/PgR-negative invasive cancer has not been studied. The current study was undertaken to investigate the ER/PgR receptor status of DCIS of the breast in patients with ER/PgR-negative invasive breast cancer. Methods. We reviewed the immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for ER and PgR of 187 consecutive cases of ER/PgR-negative invasive breast cancers, collected from 1995 to 2002. To meet the criteria for the study, we evaluated ER/PgR expression of DCIS cancer outside of the invasive breast cancer. Results. A total of 37 cases of DCIS meeting the above criteria were identified. Of these, 16 cases (43.2%) showed positive staining for ER, PgR, or both. Conclusions. In our study of ER/PgR-negative invasive breast cancer we found that in 8% of cases noncontiguous ER/PR-positive DCIS was present. In light of this finding, it may be important for pathologists to evaluate the ER/PgR status of DCIS occurring in the presence of ER/PgR-negative invasive cancer, as this subgroup could be considered for chemoprevention.

Characteristics of Microinvasive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Versus Noninvasive and Invasive Breast Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 254 ◽  
pp. 378-383
Author(s):  
Lauren R. Strang ◽  
James Sun ◽  
Weihong Sun ◽  
David Boulware ◽  
John V. Kiluk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma

scholarly journals Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast: Can Biomarkers Improve Current Management?

2014 ◽  
Vol 60 (1) ◽  
pp. 60-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Bartlett ◽  
Sharon Nofech-Moses ◽  
Eileen Rakovitch
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Low Risk ◽  
Diagnostic Biomarkers ◽  
Repeated Calls ◽  
The Impact

Abstract BACKGROUND Screening for invasive cancer has led to a marked increase in the detection of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). DCIS is, if appropriately managed, a low-risk disease which has a small chance of impacting on patient life expectancy. However, despite significant advances in prognostic marker development in invasive breast cancer, there are no validated diagnostic assays to inform treatment choice for women with DCIS. Therefore we are unable to target effective treatment strategies to women at high risk and avoid over-treatment of women at low risk of progression to invasive breast cancer. Paradoxically, one effect of this uncertainty is undertreatment of some women. CONTENT We review current practice and research in the field to identify key challenges in the management of DCIS. The impact of clinical research, particularly on the over and undertreatment of women with DCIS is assessed. We note slow progress toward development of diagnostic biomarkers and highlight key opportunities to accelerate advances in this area. SUMMARY DCIS is a low-risk disease, its incidence is increasing, and current treatment is effective. However, many women are either over- or undertreated. Despite repeated calls for development of diagnostic biomarkers, progress in this area has been slow, reflecting a relative lack of investment of research effort and funding. Given the low event rate in treated patients and the lateness of recurrences, many previous studies have only limited power to identify independent prognostic and predictive biomarkers. However, the potential for such biomarkers to personalize treatment for DCIS is extremely high.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document