scholarly journals Subsequent risk of ipsilateral and contralateral invasive breast cancer after treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: incidence and the effect of radiotherapy in a population-based cohort of 10,090 women

2016 ◽  
Vol 159 (3) ◽  
pp. 553-563 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lotte E. Elshof ◽  
Michael Schaapveld ◽  
Marjanka K. Schmidt ◽  
Emiel J. Rutgers ◽  
Flora E. van Leeuwen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Subsequent Risk

scholarly journals Study of Estrogen Receptor and Progesterone Receptor Expression in Breast Ductal Carcinoma In Situ by Immunohistochemical Staining in ER/PgR-Negative Invasive Breast Cancer

ISRN Oncology ◽  
2011 ◽  
Vol 2011 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrei Dobrescu ◽  
Monique Chang ◽  
Vatsala Kirtani ◽  
George K. Turi ◽  
Randa Hennawy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Receptor Expression ◽  
Invasive Cancer ◽  
Positive Staining ◽  
Receptor Status

Background. To our knowledge, the hormone receptor status of noncontiguous ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) occurring concurrently in ER/PgR-negative invasive cancer has not been studied. The current study was undertaken to investigate the ER/PgR receptor status of DCIS of the breast in patients with ER/PgR-negative invasive breast cancer. Methods. We reviewed the immunohistochemical (IHC) staining for ER and PgR of 187 consecutive cases of ER/PgR-negative invasive breast cancers, collected from 1995 to 2002. To meet the criteria for the study, we evaluated ER/PgR expression of DCIS cancer outside of the invasive breast cancer. Results. A total of 37 cases of DCIS meeting the above criteria were identified. Of these, 16 cases (43.2%) showed positive staining for ER, PgR, or both. Conclusions. In our study of ER/PgR-negative invasive breast cancer we found that in 8% of cases noncontiguous ER/PR-positive DCIS was present. In light of this finding, it may be important for pathologists to evaluate the ER/PgR status of DCIS occurring in the presence of ER/PgR-negative invasive cancer, as this subgroup could be considered for chemoprevention.

Characteristics of Microinvasive Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Versus Noninvasive and Invasive Breast Cancer

2020 ◽  
Vol 254 ◽  
pp. 378-383
Author(s):  
Lauren R. Strang ◽  
James Sun ◽  
Weihong Sun ◽  
David Boulware ◽  
John V. Kiluk ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Invasive Breast Cancer ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma

scholarly journals Readmissions and complications in breast ductal carcinoma in situ: A retrospective study comparing screen- and non-screen-detected patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 174550652096589
Author(s):  
Julieta Politi ◽  
María Sala ◽  
Laia Domingo ◽  
María Vernet-Tomas ◽  
Marta Román ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Confidence Interval ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Odds Ratio ◽  
Carcinoma In Situ ◽  
Ductal Carcinoma ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
Population Based ◽  
Mammographic Screening

Objective: Population-wide mammographic screening programs aim to reduce breast cancer mortality. However, a broad view of the harms and benefits of these programs is necessary to favor informed decisions, especially in the earliest stages of the disease. Here, we compare the outcomes of patients diagnosed with breast ductal carcinoma in situ in participants and non-participants of a population-based mammographic screening program. Methods: A retrospective cohort study of all patients diagnosed with breast ductal carcinoma in situ between 2000 and 2010 within a single hospital. A total of 211 patients were included, and the median follow-up was 8.4 years. The effect of detection mode (screen-detected and non-screen-detected) on breast cancer recurrences, readmissions, and complications was evaluated through multivariate logistic regression analysis. Results: In the majority of women, breast ductal carcinoma in situ was screen-detected (63.5%). Screen-detected breast ductal carcinoma in situ was smaller in size compared to those non-screen-detected (57.53% < 20 mm versus 78.03%, p = 0.002). Overall, breast-conserving surgery was the most frequent surgery (86.26%); however, mastectomy was higher in non-screen-detected breast ductal carcinoma in situ (20.78% versus 9.7%, p = 0.024). Readmissions for mastectomy were more frequent in non-screen-detected breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Psychological complications, such as fatigue, anxiety, and depression, had a prevalence of 15% within our cohort. Risk of readmissions and complications was higher within the non-screen-detected group, as evidenced by an odds ratio = 6.25 (95% confidence interval = 1.95–19.99) for readmissions and an odds ratio = 2.41 (95% confidence interval = 1.95–4.86) for complications. Conclusions: Our findings indicate that women with breast ductal carcinoma in situ breast cancer diagnosed through population-based breast cancer screening program experience a lower risk of readmissions and complications than those diagnosed outside these programs. These findings can help aid women and health professionals make informed decisions regarding screening.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document