4.5 Article

Upstaging to invasive ductal carcinoma after mastectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ: predictive factors and role of sentinel lymph node biopsy

Journal

BREAST CANCER
Volume 25, Issue 6, Pages 663-670

Publisher

SPRINGER JAPAN KK
DOI: 10.1007/s12282-018-0871-7

Keywords

Breast cancer; Ductal carcinoma in situ; Sentinel lymph node biopsy; Mastectomy

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background The aim of this study was to investigate preoperative factors associated with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) upstaged to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and sentinel lymph node (SLN) status in patients who underwent mastectomy for a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS. Methods The medical records of 220 patients who underwent mastectomy for a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS were retrospectively reviewed. Results Fifty-one (22.6%) of 226 lesions were upgraded to IDC after mastectomy. Preoperative factors associated with upstaging to IDC included patient-reported signs and symptoms, a clinically palpable mass, ultrasound findings classified as category 4 or 5, the ultrasound appearance of a mass or widely distributed non-mass abnormality (NMA), and a high Ki67 index. The prevalence of SLN macrometastasis was 0.9%. IDC was diagnosed for 10.9% of lesions of a preoperative ultrasound category of 0-3, 13.0% of those with no mass or NMA detected by ultrasonography, and 14.1% of lesions preoperatively diagnosed by methods other than core needle biopsy (CNB). Of those lesions, none was associated with SLN metastasis. Conclusions Routinely performing SLN biopsy for patients undergoing mastectomy for a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS is overtreatment, because the prevalence of SLN metastasis was low. SLN biopsy can be omitted for most patients. In particular, we suggest omitting SLN biopsy for patients who have lesions of ultrasound category 0-3, who have neither a mass nor NMA detected by ultrasound, or whose initial diagnosis was made based on a specimen obtained by methods other than CNB.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available