Measuring Extent of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Breast Excision Specimens A Comparison of 4 Methods

Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathobiology, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
Archives of pathology & laboratory medicine (Impact Factor: 2.84). 02/2009; 133(1):31-7. DOI: 10.1043/1543-2165-133.1.31
Source: PubMed


Measuring the extent of nonpalpable ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in a breast specimen is challenging but important because it influences patient management. There is no standardized method for estimating the extent of DCIS, although serial sequential sampling with mammographic correlation is considered an accurate method.
To estimate the extent of DCIS using various methods and to compare these estimations with the extent as determined by the serial sequential sampling method.
A total of 78 primary breast excisions with DCIS were retrospectively reviewed. All specimens had been sampled using the serial sequential sampling method, which involved mapping the location of each block on the sliced specimen radiograph and calculating the extent through 3-dimensional reconstruction. The other measures for estimating extent included (1) calculating size based on areas of calcification, (2) recording the number of blocks involved by DCIS and multiplying that number by 0.3 cm, and (3) measuring the largest extent of DCIS on a single slide.
All 3 alternative methods tended to underestimate the DCIS. Discrepancies became more pronounced as size increased. The percentage of cases estimated to within 1 cm of the serial sequential sampling method were 81%, 72%, and 50%, respectively, for the calcification, blocks, and single-slide methods; differences of more than 2 cm were seen in 9%, 8%, and 30% of cases, respectively.
The single-slide method performed poorly and should be used only when DCIS is limited to a single slide. Although the calcification and the blocks methods gave better estimates, both produced substantial underestimates and/or overestimates that could affect clinical decision making.

29 Reads
  • Source
    • "The result is a diminution or loss of local breast and tumor anatomic relationships. In some centers, mammographic examinations are routinely performed on intact tissue slices [22] [23] [35] "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Modern breast imaging, including magnetic resonance imaging, provides an increasingly clear depiction of breast cancer extent, often with suboptimal pathologic confirmation. Pathologic findings guide management decisions, and small increments in reported tumor characteristics may rationalize significant changes in therapy and staging. Pathologic techniques to grossly examine resected breast tissue have changed little during this era of improved breast imaging and still rely primarily on the techniques of gross inspection and specimen palpation. Only limited imaging information is typically conveyed to pathologists, typically in the form of wire-localization images from breast-conserving procedures. Conventional techniques of specimen dissection and section submission destroy the three-dimensional integrity of the breast anatomy and tumor distribution. These traditional methods of breast specimen examination impose unnecessary limitations on correlation with imaging studies, measurement of cancer extent, multifocality, and margin distance. Improvements in pathologic diagnosis, reporting, and correlation of breast cancer characteristics can be achieved by integrating breast imagers into the specimen examination process and the use of large-format sections which preserve local anatomy. This paper describes the successful creation of a large-format pathology program to routinely serve all patients in a busy interdisciplinary breast center associated with a community-based nonprofit health system in the United States.
    Full-text · Article · Dec 2012
  • Source
    • "In order to demonstrate the largest cross-section of the involved lobe, the segmentectomy specimen has to be sliced into 3-4 mm slices parallel to the pectoralis fascia, but not perpendicular to it. The perpendicular slicing method leads to a substantial underestimate of the extent of the disease in the vast majority of ductal carcinoma in situ cases [20, 21]. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Breast cancer subgross morphological parameters (disease extent, lesion distribution, and tumor size) provide significant prognostic information and guide therapeutic decisions. Modern multimodality radiological imaging can determine these parameters with increasing accuracy in most patients. Large-format histopathology preserves the spatial relationship of the tumor components and their relationship to the resection margins and has clear advantages over traditional routine pathology techniques. We report a series of 1000 consecutive breast cancer cases worked up with large-format histology with detailed radiological-pathological correlation. We confirmed that breast carcinomas often exhibit complex subgross morphology in both early and advanced stages. Half of the cases were extensive tumors and occupied a tissue space ≥40 mm in its largest dimension. Because both in situ and invasive tumor components may exhibit unifocal, multifocal, and diffuse lesion distribution, 17 different breast cancer growth patterns can be observed. Combining in situ and invasive tumor components, most cases fall into three aggregate growth patterns: unifocal (36%), multifocal (35%), and diffuse (28%). Large-format histology categories of tumor size and disease extent were concordant with radiological measurements in approximately 80% of the cases. Noncalcified, low-grade in situ foci, and invasive tumor foci <5 mm were the most frequent causes of discrepant findings.
    Full-text · Article · Oct 2012
  • Source

    Full-text · Article ·
Show more