ABSTRACT
Breast cancer (BC) is a common and often life-altering diagnosis for affected women and their families. Studies have indicated approximately 10% of breast cancer cases are inheritable. When patients are aware of their genetic status early, they are better equipped to make therapy decisions related to their cancer. Additionally, if patients are aware of pathogenic mutations, they can evaluate options such as chemoprevention with endocrine agents, prophylactic surgery, and have the ability to inform family members of their potential risk. Unfortunately, the shortage of genetic counselors has led to a large clinical demand delaying consultation. Although our institution employs genetic counselors on staff, the national shortage of counselors with this expertise has led to a disproportionate availability of providers to meet the clinical volume. This can lead to genetic counseling consultation often occurring beyond the patient's cancer treatment phase. Therefore, we sought to evaluate our referral patterns in an effort to determine whether qualifying patients were scheduled, evaluate delays in consultation, examine completion rates for genetic testing, and assess whether genetic counseling affected their subsequent care.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Genetic Counseling , Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast Neoplasms/genetics , Counseling , Female , Genetic Testing , Humans , Referral and ConsultationABSTRACT
Excision of high-risk breast lesions (HRL) continues to be standard of care. Previous studies have shown that HRLs can be upgraded to carcinoma in situ (CIS) or invasive carcinoma (IC) upon excision. A single institution retrospective review was conducted to determine the rate of upgrade of HRLs and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) identified on image-guided biopsy upon excision. Eight hundred and fifty-seven patients who underwent core needle biopsy (CNB) following the detection of suspicious lesions (BI-RADS IV) on mammograms were identified. HRLs and DCIS warranting subsequent surgical excision were found in 129 of 857 patients (15.1%). Overall, 19.6% (10/51) of DCIS, 52.4% (11/21) of ADH, and 17.6% (3/17) of papillomas were upgraded on surgical excision. A statistically significant difference was found between the concordant and discordant groups regarding the number of cores obtained (P = 0.01) and the needle size used to retrieve specimens on CNB (P = 0.01). This study reveals an upgrade rate of 26.7% of HRLs and DCIS diagnosed by CNB on surgical excision and emphasizes the continued use of large bore needles with an adequate number of core specimens when investigating a suspicious breast lesion.
Subject(s)
Biopsy, Large-Core Needle/methods , Breast Diseases/pathology , Breast Neoplasms/pathology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/pathology , Aged , Breast Diseases/surgery , Breast Neoplasms/diagnostic imaging , Breast Neoplasms/surgery , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/diagnosis , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/surgery , Female , Humans , Image-Guided Biopsy , Mammography , Middle Aged , Papilloma/diagnostic imaging , Papilloma/pathologySubject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/diagnosis , Breast/diagnostic imaging , Rhabdomyosarcoma, Alveolar/diagnosis , Adolescent , Biopsy , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Chemoradiotherapy, Adjuvant , Diagnosis, Differential , Female , Humans , Mastectomy/methods , Positron Emission Tomography Computed Tomography , Rhabdomyosarcoma, Alveolar/therapy , Ultrasonography, MammaryABSTRACT
For years, lobular carcinoma In Situ (LCIS) has been considered a high-risk marker for developing breast cancer. It is well known that ductal carcinoma In Situ is a precursor for the development of invasive ductal carcinoma, and ductal carcinoma In Situ is reported to be present in invasive ductal carcinoma in at least 40 per cent of cases. A similar relationship between LCIS and invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) remains in question. This study evaluates the incidence of synchronous LCIS and ILC at our institution. This is a retrospective review of our tumor registry database of women diagnosed with LCIS or ILC from 2000 to 2014. Pathology reports were evaluated to determine the incidence of pure ILC and mixed ILC/LCIS. Those with both LCIS/ILC (mixed group) and those with pure ILC (pure group) were compared for age, surgical intervention, lymph node involvement, tumor size, nuclear grade, and margins between these two groups. A total of 182 women were identified with LCIS, ILC, or mixed LCIS and ILC. There were 76 subjects with pure ILC and 90 with mixed LCIS and ILC. The median and age range for each group were 63.6 (range: 40-97) for the mixed and 64.1 (range: 40-86) for pure groups. Tumor size was evaluated for each group and the median tumor size was 2.5 cm (range: 0.1-7.0cm) for the mixed group and 3.0 cm (range: 0.5-12.5 cm) for the pure group. Nodal involvement was present in 35.23 per cent of the mixed group and 46.3 per cent in the pure group. Surgical treatment for each group was similar, with mastectomy being the preferred surgical option over breast conservation therapy in the mixed and pure groups, 67.07 and 64.71 per cent, respectively. Presently, LCIS is considered a marker, or risk factor, for development of future breast cancer. This retrospective study does identify a strong relationship, 54 per cent, between LCIS and ILC at diagnosis. This high percentage of concurrent LCIS and ILC in surgical/pathological specimens supports the notion that LCIS may in fact have a precursory role in development of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Additional studies to further investigate this relationship between LCIS and ILC, including genomic analysis, are presently underway.
