An Analysis of Clinical and Histopathological Features in 101 Cases of Carcinoma of Breast in Women Under 35 Years of Age

Brightmore, T. G. J.; Greening, W P; Hamlin, Iris M. E.

doi:10.1038/bjc.1970.78

Cited by 47 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Earlier studies, such as that by Eggers and associates,(29) related a 73% five-year survival for patients whose tumors were less than 2 cm, 24% for those with lesions measuring 3--6 cm, and only 15% when tumors measured 7 cm or more. These relationships between size of tumor, nodal metastases, and prognosis have, for the most part, been confirmed by more recent studiesY, 130,131l Yet, it is noteworthy that others 032 ,133) have failed to recognize such a correlation between tumor size and survival. Although in some instances there are apparent reasons for such a dichotomy (e.g., different types of treatment, different stages of disease, etc.…”

Section: Tumor Sizementioning

confidence: 87%

Pathology of Breast Cancer

Fisher

1977

Current Approaches to Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Tumor Sizementioning

confidence: 87%

Pathology of Breast Cancer

Fisher

1977

Current Approaches to Therapy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There is a general perception that young age at diagnosis of breast cancer is associated with a poor prognosis (Earley et al, 1969;Brightmore et al, 1970;Noyes et al, 1982;Adami et al, 1986;Host and Lund, 1986;Ries et al, 1991;Sant et al, 1991;De La Rochefordiere et al, 1993;Bonnier et al, 1995). However, other studies suggest that patients who develop breast cancer at a young age have a similar prognosis to older patients and that management of young breast cancer patients is best dictated by standard clinical and histopathological criteria (Birks et al, 1973;Gogas and Skalkeas, 1975;Wallgren et al, 1977;Rosen et al, 1984;Backhouse et al, 1987;Barchielli et al, 1994).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Early-onset breast cancer – histopathological and prognostic considerations

Kollias

Elston²,

Ellis³

et al. 1997

Br J Cancer

189

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Summary Young age at diagnosis is claimed to be a prognostic factor in the natural history of breast cancer. Of 2879 patients aged < 70 years treated for primary operable breast cancer (< 5 cm diameter) at Nottingham City Hospital between 1973 and 1993, 120 were less than 35 years of age at diagnosis. Histopathological and prognostic variables were compared between patients aged < 35, 35-50 and 51-70 years. A significant reduction in metastasis disease-free survival and actuarial survival was seen in breast cancer patients aged < 35 years compared with the two older age groups. Patients aged < 35 years at diagnosis presented more frequently with high-grade cancers and vascular invasion. No differences were seen for tumour size or lymph node stage. The Nottingham Prognostic Index (NPI) was used to stratify cancers in each age group. Because of the tendency to high grade, a greater percentage of patients aged < 35 years fell into the poorprognosis group. Within each prognostic group, no difference in actuarial survival was seen between age groups. The association of young age at diagnosis with a worse prognosis in this series is explained by a higher proportion of poorly differentiated cancers; age itself had no influence on the prognosis of the individual.

show abstract

“…The most consistent finding is the increased incidence of medullary carcinoma and ductal carcinoma in situ with a decreased incidence in tubular and lobular carcinoma. 5,24 The specific diagnosis of medullary carcinoma by FNA is difficult due to overlap with poorly differentiated infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Cytologic features that may suggest medullary carcinoma include the presence of numerous Grade 3 nuclei in loosely cohesive groups and as single cells.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%