Feasibility of the Less Is More Approach in Treating Low-Risk Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Diagnosed on Core Needle Biopsy: Ten-Year Review of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Upgraded to Invasion at Surgery.

CONTEXT: - Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) represents 20% of screen-detected breast cancers. The likelihood that certain types of DCIS are slow growing and may never progress to invasion suggests that our current standards of treating DCIS could result in overtreatment. The LORIS (LOw RISk DCIS) and LORD (LOw Risk DCIS) trials address these concerns by randomizing patients with low-risk DCIS to either active surveillance or conventional treatment. OBJECTIVE: - To determine the upgrade rate of DCIS diagnosed on core needle biopsy to invasive carcinoma at surgery and to evaluate the safety of managing low-risk DCIS with surveillance alone, by characterizing the pathologic and clinical features of upgraded cases and applying criteria of the LORD and LORIS trials to these cases. DESIGN: - A 10-year retrospective analysis of DCIS on core needle biopsy with subsequent surgery. RESULTS: - We identified 1271 cases of DCIS on core needle biopsy: 200 (16%) low grade, 649 (51%) intermediate grade, and 422 (33%) high grade. Of the 1271 cases, we found an 8% upgrade rate to invasive carcinoma (n = 105). Nineteen of the 105 upgraded cases (18%) had positive lymph nodes. Low-grade DCIS was least likely to upgrade to invasion, comprising 10% (10 of 105) of upgraded cases. Three of the 105 upgraded cases (3%) met criteria for the LORD trial, and all were low-grade DCIS on core needle biopsy with favorable biology on follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: - There is a clear risk of upgrade to invasion on follow-up excision; however, applying strict criteria of the LORD trial effectively decreases the likelihood of a missed invasive component or missed aggressive pathologic features.

New insight into the enigmatic white cord in Rembrandt's The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp (1632).

The anatomic accuracy of Rembrandt's The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp (1632) has been debated in the literature for many years. The white cord that courses along the ulnar aspect of the carpus and small finger of the cadaver in Dr. Tulp's dissection conforms to no normal anatomic structure and is believed to represent an anomalous branch of the ulnar nerve, an artistic error, or a combination of both. After the discovery of an accessory abductor digiti minimi (AADM) during a routine dissection of a late-middle-aged male cadaver, we noted that the course of its tendon over the hypothenar eminence resembled the white cord in the painting. After conducting a detailed literature search and anatomic interpretation of the painting, we established 4 criteria for identifying the white cord. Using these criteria, we evaluated the plausibility of an AADM being represented in the painting. We conclude that an AADM should be considered as a possible explanation for the white cord.