We may confidently state that axillary US and US-FNAB have to be included in the preoperative work-up of breast cancer patients.

As far as recent breast cancer molecular subtype classification is concerned, much work has dealt with clinical outcomes for triple negative and Her2 patients. Less is known about the course of patients in the remaining subtypes. Molecular classification based on immunohistochemistry is widely available and correlates well with genetic microarray assessment, but at a lower cost. The aim of our investigation was to correlate immunohistochemical subtypes of breast cancer with clinical characteristics and patient outcomes. Since 1998, 1167 patients operated for 1191 invasive breast tumours were included in our database. Patients were regularly followed up until March 2010. Disease-free survival, overall mortality, and breast cancer-specific mortality at 5 years were calculated for the cohort. 72% of tumours were ER+PR±HER2- group, 13% triple negative (ER-PR-HER2-), 10% ER+PR±HER2+ group, and 5% Her2 (ER-PR-HER2+). Cancer-specific survival was 94.2% for the ER+PR+HER2- subtype, 84.8% for the Her2 subtype, 83.3% for the ER+PR-HER2- subtype, and 78.6% for triple negatives. Distant metastases prevalence ranged from 7% to 22% across subtypes, increasing stepwise from ER+PR+HER2-, ER+PR+HER2+, ER+PR-HER2-, ER+PR-HER2+, ER-PR-HER2+ through triple negative. Small, low-grade tumours with low axillary burden were more likely to belong to the ER+PR±HER2- group. Conversely, larger high-grade tumours with significant axillary burden were more likely to belong to Her2 or triple negative groups. ER+PR±HER2- group patients with negative PR receptors performed more like Her2 or triple negative than like the rest of ER+PR±HER2± groups patients. Molecular classification of breast tumours based only on immunohistochemistry is quite useful on practical clinical grounds, as expected. ER+PR±HER2- group patients with negative PR receptors seem to be at high risk and deserve further consideration.

Our aim was to compare histologic and immunohistochemical features, surgical treatment and clinical course, including disease recurrence, distant metastases, and mortality between patients with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) or invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC). We included 1,745 patients operated for 1,789 breast tumors, with 1,639 IDC (1,600 patients) and 145 patients with ILC and 150 breast tumors. The median follow-up was 76 months. ILC was significantly more likely to be associated with a favorable phenotype. Prevalence of contralateral breast cancer was slightly higher for ILC patients than for IDC patients (4.0% versus 3.2%; p = n.s). ILC was more likely multifocal, estrogen receptor positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-2 (HER2) negative, and with lower proliferative index compared to IDC. Considering conservative surgery, ILC patients required more frequently re-excision and/or mastectomy. Prevalence of stage IIB and III stages were significantly more frequent in ILC patients than in IDC patients (37.4% versus 25.3%, p = 0.006). Positive nodes were significantly more frequent in the ILC patients (44.6% versus 37.0%, p = 0.04). After adjustment for tumor size and nodal status, frequencies of recurrence/metastasis, disease-free and specific survival were similar among patients with IDC and patients with ILC. In conclusion, women with ILC do not have worse clinical outcomes than their counterparts with IDC. Management decisions should be based on individual patient and tumor biologic characteristics rather than on lobular versus ductal histology.

Decision aid represents a rather innovative approach for a health insurance fund to develop and offer this format of information and decision support. This opens a new field of study for nurses to empower patients in the decision-making process and develop new roles in this area.