Different distribution of breast ductal carcinoma in situ, ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion, and invasion breast cancer

Abstract

BackgroundBreast ductal cancer in situ (DCIS) can recur or progress to invasive ductal cancer (IDC), and the interim stage include DCIS with microinvasion (DCIS-Mi). In this article, we attempt to study the study the differences of clinicopathological features, imaging data, and immunohistochemical-based subtypes among DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC.MethodsIn this retrospective study, we attempt to compare the clinicopathological features, immunohistochemical results and imaging data of 866 patients (included 73 DCIS, 72 DCIS-Mi, and 721 IDC).ResultsPatients with DCIS and DCIS-Mi were younger than those with IDC (P = 0.007). DCIS and DCIS-Mi often happened in premenopausal women while IDC was opposite (P <0.001). The incidence of IDC with node-positive was significantly higher than it in DCIS and DCIS-Mi (P <0.001). We also observed that the Her2-positive was more often found in patients with pure DCIS compared to those with DCIS-Mi and DCIS-I (P <0.001). There was a significant difference between the four subgroups (Luminal-A, Luminal-B, ERBB2+, Basal-like) from DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC (P <0.001). Basal-like patients were fewer than other subgroups in DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC. The incidence of the first performance of ultrasound (catheter winded and nodular mass) and mammography (nodular mass) had significantly difference among patients with DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC (P <0.001).ConclusionsDifferent clinicopathological, immunohistochemical, and imaging features among DCIS, DCIS-Mi, and IDC indicate that they are distinct entities. A larger sample size is needed for further study.

Biologic behavior and long-term outcomes of breast ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion

“…Approximately 50~75% of DCIS were ER and/or PR-positive tumors, and reported expression rates of ER and/or PR in microinvasive carcinoma ranged from 50~68% [ 7 – 10 ], similar to the findings in our study. Expression of HR often correlated with low proliferation and better survival.…”

Factors Predicting Microinvasion in Ductal Carcinoma in situ

“…Our findings have shown a trend for an increased rate of HER2-neu overexpression in patients with DCISM in comparison to patients with pure DCIS which was not statistically significant due the small sample size. Some previous studies interestingly found HER2-neu overexpression was lower in invasive breast cancer than pure DCIS, whereas tumors with DCIS and DCISM showed similar rates of HER2-neu overexpression (Wei et al, 2012). However, Roses et al (2009) demonstrated that although high nuclear grade, large lesion size, and HER2 overexpression were all associated with the presence of invasive disease on univariate analysis, HER2 was the only significant predictor for the presence of invasive disease after multivariate adjustment (odds ratio, 6.4; P=0.01) (Roses et al, 2009).…”

Sacrificial Bioprinting of a Mammary Ductal Carcinoma Model

“…The staining at day 24 of culture clearly revealed a heterogeneous cell distribution, where those in the upper region of the specific microchannel invaded into the surrounding matrix much faster than the cells in the lower region of the same microchannel (Figure C). Not only did the cells invade into the surrounding matrix, the culture also led to their inward aggregation (Figure C), resembling the characteristics of late‐stage DCIS and early‐stage IDC . Orthogonal views of the same microchannels also illustrated the same process, where the cells gradually proliferated in the microchannel and invaded into the surrounding matrix along with inward growth (Figure D–F).…”

“…Interestingly, while most cells started to invade into the GelMA matrix after day 19 of culture when the entire microchannel was covered, there were local confluent regions even at earlier times that resulted in the sprouting of the MCF‐7 cells (Figure C–F,H). Such an observation suggested the biomimetic property of our model to reproduce some of the ductal carcinoma behaviors including proliferation of the cancer cells in local regions, as well as signs of invasion into the space outside the mammary duct area …”