Precursors of Breast Cancer

Česká verzia

Authors: K. Petrakova
Authors place of work: Klinika komplexní onkologické péče, Masarykův onkologický ústav, Brno
Published in the journal: Klin Onkol 2013; 26(Supplementum): 7-12

Summary

It has become apparent that estrogen receptor (ER) - positive and - negative breast lesions are completely distinct diseases. Precursors of low-grade breast cancer are low-grade premalignant lesions, usually ER and progesterone receptor (PR) positive and HER2 negative. On the other hand, precursors of high-grade breast cancer are high-grade premalignant lesions, usually ER and PR negative and HER2 positive. Lobular neoplasia (LN) and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) are important from the clinical point of view. LN increases the risk of bilateral breast cancer. This is why the recommendation for the treatment of LN is very different – from just following‑ up up to bilateral mastectomy. The complete surgical excision of the lesion with negative margins is the usual treatment of DCIS. Several big randomized clinical trials showed the benefit of adjuvant radiotherapy (RT). Some of them suppose that there is a group of patients who do not need adjuvant treatment. The benefit of adjuvant tamoxifen is clear only for patients with ER positive disease. The UK/ ANZ study showed the benefit of tamoxifen only in patients without RT.

Key words:
premalignant lesion – lobular carcinoma in situ – lobular neoplasia – ductal carcinoma in situ

This study was supported by RECAMO, CZ.1.05/2.1.00/03.0101.

The author declare she has no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study.

The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE “uniform requirements” for biomedical papers.

Submitted:
19. 9. 2013

Accepted:
16. 10. 2013

Zdroje

1. Chin K, De Vries S, Fridlyand J et al. Genomic and transcriptional aberrations linked to breast cancer pathophysiologies. Cancer Cell 2006; 10(6): 529– 541.

2. Cancer Genome Atlas Network. Comprehensive molecular portrait of human breast tumours. Nature 2012; 490 (7418): 61–70.

3. Page DL, Dupont WD. Benign breast diseases and premalignant breast disease. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998; 122(12): 1048– 1050.

4. Arpino G, Laucirica R, Elledge RM et al. Premalignant and in situ breast disease:biology and clinical implications. Ann Intern Med 2005; 143(6): 446– 457.

5. Allerd DC, Wu Y, Mao S et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ and the emergence of diversity during breast cancer evolution. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14(2): 370– 378.

6. London SJ, Conolly SJ, Schnitt SJ et al. A prospective study of benign breast disease and the risk of breast cancer. JAMA 1992; 267(7): 941– 944.

7. Tamimi RM, Rosner B, Colditz GA et al. Evaluation of a breast cancer risk prediction model expanded to include category of prior benign breast disease lesion. Cancer 2010; 116(21): 4944– 4953.

8. Adriance MC, Inman JL, Peterson OW et al. Myoepitelial celles: good fences make good neighbors. Breast Cancer Res 2005; 7(5): 190– 197.

9. Kleer CG, Bloushtain‑Qimron N, Chen YH et al. Epithelial and stromal catepsin K and CXCL14 expression in breast tumor progression. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14(17): 5357– 5367.

10. Hu M, Yao J, Carrol DK et al. Regulation of in situ to invasive breast carcinoma transition. Cancer Cell 2008; 13(5): 394– 406.

11. Balleine RL, Webster LR, Davis S et al. Molecular grading of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14(24): 8244– 8252.

12. Sotiriou C, Wirapati P, Lois S et al. Gene expression profilling in breast cancer: understanding the molecular basis of histologic grade to improve prognosis. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98(4): 262– 272.

13. Abdel‑ Fatah TM, Powe DG, Hodi Z et al. Morphologic and molecular evolutionary pathways of low nuclear grade invasive breast cancers and their putative precursor lesions: further evidence to support the concept of low grade breast neoplasia family. Am J Surg Pathol 2008; 32(4): 513– 523.

14. Lopez‑ Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Lacroix‑ Triki M et al. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathway. Histopathology 2010; 57(2): 171– 192.

15. Bodian CA, Perzin KH, Lattes R et al. Prognostic signifikance of benign proliferative breast disease. Cancer 1993; 71(12): 3896– 3907.

16. Manfrin E, Remo A, Falsirollo F et al. Risk of neoplastic transformation in asymptomatic radial scar. Analysis of 117 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2008; 107(3): 371– 377.

17. O’Malley FP, Bane A. An update on apocrine lesions of the breast. Histopathology 2008; 52(1): 838– 841.

18. Jones C, Merrett S, Thomas VA et al. Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of bilateral hyperplasia of usual type of the breast. J Patol 2003; 199(2): 152– 156.

19. Feeley L, Quinn CM. Columnar cell lesions of the breast. Histopathology 2008; 52(1): 11– 19.

20. Haagensen CD, Lane N, Lattes R et al. Lobular neoplasia (so‑ called lobular carcinoma in situ) of the breast. Cancer 1978; 42(2): 737– 769.

21. Fitzgibbons PL, Henson DE, Hutter RV et al. Benign breast changes and the risk of subsequent breast cancer: an update of the 1985 consensus statement. Cancer Committe of the College of American Pathologists. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1998; 122(12): 1053– 1055.

22. Fentiman IS. The dilemma of in situ carcinoma of the breast. Int J Clin Pract 2001; 55(10): 680– 683.

23. Arpino G, Laucirica R, Elledge RM et al. Premalignant and in situ breast disease: biology and clinical implications. Ann Intern Med 2005; 143(6): 446– 457.

24. Khalifeh IM, Albarracin C, Diaz LK et al. Clinical histopathologic and immunohistochemical features of microglandular adenosis and transition into in situ and invasive carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 2008; 32(4): 544– 552.

25. Middleton LP, Palacios DM, Bryant BR et al. Pleiomorphic lobular carcinoma: morphology, immunohistochemistry and molecular analysis. Am J Surg Pathol 2000; 24(12): 1650– 1656.

26. Vargas AC, Lakhani SR, Simpson PT et al. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast: molecular pathology and clinical impact. Future Oncol 2009; 5(2): 233– 243.

27. Li CI, Anderson BO, Daling JR et al. Changing incidence of lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002; 75(3): 259– 268.

28. Rosner D, Bedwani RN, Vana J et al. Noninvasive breast carcinoma: resultes of national survay by the American College od Surgeons. Ann Surg 1980; 192(2): 139– 147.

29. Renshaw AA, Derhagopian RP, Martinez P et al. Lobular neoplasia in breast core needle biopsy specimen is associated with a low risk of ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive carcinoma on subsequent excision. Am J Clin Pathol 2006; 126(2): 310– 313.

30. Bodian CA, Perzin KH, Lattes R et al. Lobular neoplasia: long term risk of breast cancer and relation to other factors. Cancer 1996; 78(5): 1024– 1034.

31. Georgian‑ Smith D, Lawton TJ. Calcification of lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: radiologic‑ pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2001; 176(5): 1255– 1259.

32. Londero V, Zuriani C, Linda A et al. Lobular neoplasia: core needle breast biopsy underestimation of malignancy in relation to radiologic and pathologic features. Breast 2008; 17(6): 623– 630.

33. Page DL, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD et al. Atypical lobular hyperplasia as a unilateral predictor of breast cancer risk: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet 2003; 361(9352): 125– 129.

34. Berg WA. Image‑ guided breast biopsy and management of high‑risk lesions. Radiol Clin North Am 2004; 42(5): 935– 946.

35. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Bilous M et al. Borderline breast core needle histology: predictive values for malignancy in lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3). Br J Cancer 2007; 96(8): 1253– 1257.

36. Lechner MC, Jackman RJ, Brem RF et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia at percutaneous biopsy with surgical correlation: a multi‑institutional study (abstr). Radiology 1999; 213(P): 106.

37. Fischer B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project P‑ 1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst 1998; 90(18): 1371– 1388.

38. Brinton LA, Sherman ME, Carreon JD et al. Recent trends in breast cancer among younger women in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 2008; 100(22): 1643– 1648.

39. Santamaría G, Velasco M, Farrús B et al. Preoperative MRI of pure intraductal breast carcinoma – a valuable adjunct to mammography in assessing cancer extent. Breast 2008; 17(2): 186– 194.

40. Schouten van der Velden AP, Boetes C, Bult P et al. The value of magnetic resonance imaging in diagnosis and size assessment of in situ and small invasive breast carcinoma. Am J Surg 2006; 192(2): 172– 178.

41. Lehman CD, Gatsonis C, Kuhl CK et al. MRI evaluation of the contralateral breast in women with recently diagnosed breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2007; 356(13): 1295– 1303.

42. Bruening W, Fontarosa J, Tipton K et al. Systematic review: comparative effectiveness of core‑needle and open surgical biopsy to diagnose breast lesions. Ann Intern Med 2010; 152(4): 238– 246.

43. Vrtělová P, Coufal O, Pavlík T et al. Viditelnost na ultrasonografii jako nejsilnější prediktor invazivity u duktálních karcinomů in situ v retrospektivní studii. Klin Onkol 2009; 22(6): 278– 283.

44. Fisher ER, Dignam J, Tan‑ Chiu E et al. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) eight‑year update of Protocol B‑ 17: intraductal carcinoma. Cancer 1999; 86(3): 429– 438.

45. Bijker N, Meijnen P, Peterse JL et al. Breast‑ conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma‑ in‑situ: ten‑year results of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized phase III trial 10853 – a study by the EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24(21): 3381– 3387.

46. Holmberg L, Garmo H, Granstrand B et al. Absolute risk reductions for local recurrence after postoperative radiotherapy after sector resection for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Clin Oncol 2008; 26(8): 1247– 1252.

47. Houghton J, George WD, Cuzick J et al. Radiotherapy and tamoxifen in women with completely excised ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in the UK, Australia, and New Zealand: randomised controlled trial. Lancet 2003; 362(9378): 95– 102.

48. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG), Correa C, McGale P et al. Overview of the randomised trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2010; 2010(41): 162– 177.

49. Hughes LL, Wang M, Page DL et al. Local excision alone without irradiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a trial of the eastern cooperative oncology group. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(3): 5319– 5324.

50. Silverstein MJ. The University of Southern California/ Van Nuys prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg 2003; 186(4): 337– 343.

51. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Pinder SE et al. Effect of tamoxifen and radiotherapy in women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ: long term resultes of the UK/ ANZ DCIS trial. Lancet Oncol 2011; 12(1): 21– 29.

52. Craigh DA, Anderson JS, Paik S et al. Adjuvant tamoxifen reduces subsequent breast cancer in women with estrogen receptor‑ positive ductal carcinoma in situ: a study based on NSABP protocol B‑ 24. J Clin Oncol 2012; 30(12): 1268– 1273.

53. Tuttle TD, Jarosek S, Habermann EB et al. Increasing rates of contralatreral prophylactic mastectomy among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27(9): 1362– 1367.