nach oben

Current Oncology Reports

Erschienen in:

01.04.2018 | Breast Cancer (B Overmoyer, Section Editor)

How Do We Approach Benign Proliferative Lesions?

verfasst von: Faina Nakhlis

Erschienen in: Current Oncology Reports | Ausgabe 4/2018

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The aim of this review is to summarize recently published literature addressing atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), lobular neoplasia (atypical lobular hyperplasia [ALH] and classic lobular carcinoma in situ [C-LCIS]), non-classic lobular carcinoma in situ (NC-LCIS), papillary lesions, and flat epithelial atypia (FEA).

Recent Findings

While ADH, ALN, and C-LCIS are well-established markers of an increased risk of future breast cancers, the risk implications are less clear for papillary lesions and FEA. NC-LCIS is the least well-characterized lesion, with scant published literature on its natural history and surgical management when encountered on needle biopsy.

Summary

Recent data suggest that lobular neoplasia on core biopsy of a BI-RADS ≤ 4 concordant lesion does not require an excision, while ADH, atypical papillomas, and NC-LCIS should be excised. Evidence on FEA and papillomas without atypia suggests a low risk of upgrade on excision, and prospective studies on the upgrade of these lesions are ongoing.

Mercado CL. BI-RADS update. Radiol Clin N Am. 2014;52:481–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcl.2014.02.008.CrossRefPubMed

Hoda SA, Brogi E, Koerner FC, Rosen PP, editors. Rosen’s breast pathology. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins; 2014.

Nguyen CV, Albarracin CT, Whitman GJ, Lopez A, Sneige N. Atypical ductal hyperplasia in directional vacuum-assisted biopsy of breast microcalcifications: considerations for surgical excision. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:752–61. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1127-8.CrossRefPubMed

Menes TS, Kerlikowske K, Lange J, Jaffer S, Rosenberg R, Miglioretti DL. Subsequent breast cancer risk following diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia on needle biopsy. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3:36–41. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.3022.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Hartmann LC, Radisky DC, Frost MH, Santen RJ, Vierkant RA, Benetti LL, et al. Understanding the premalignant potential of atypical hyperplasia through its natural history: a longitudinal cohort study. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2014;7:211–7. https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-13-0222.CrossRef

Hartmann LC, Degnim AC, Santen RJ, Dupont WD, Ghosh K. Atypical hyperplasia of the breast—risk assessment and management options. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:78–89. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMsr1407164.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, Evans WP 3rd, Lechner MC, Richardson TR, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic breast biopsy: improved reliability with 14-gauge, directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy. Radiology. 1997;204:485–8. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiology.204.2.9240540.CrossRefPubMed

Eby PR, Ochsner JE, DeMartini WB, Allison KH, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Frequency and upgrade rates of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: 9-versus 11-gauge. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192:229–34. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.08.1342.CrossRefPubMed

Hoang JK, Hill P, Cawson JN. Can mammographic findings help discriminate between atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ after needle core biopsy? Breast. 2008;17:282–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2007.10.016.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Kohr JR, Eby PR, Allison KH, DeMartini WB, Gutierrez RL, Peacock S, et al. Risk of upgrade of atypical ductal hyperplasia after stereotactic breast biopsy: effects of number of foci and complete removal of calcifications. Radiology. 2010;255:723–30. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.09091406.CrossRefPubMed

11.

Menen RS, Ganesan N, Bevers T, Ying J, Coyne R, Lane D, et al. Long-term safety of observation in selected women following core biopsy diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:70–6. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5512-9.CrossRefPubMed

12.

McGhan LJ, Pockaj BA, Wasif N, Giurescu ME, McCullough AE, Gray RJ. Atypical ductal hyperplasia on core biopsy: an automatic trigger for excisional biopsy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3264–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2575-0.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Dominici L, Liao GS, Brock J, Iglehart JD, Lotfi P, Meyer J, et al. Large needle core biopsy of atypical ductal hyperplasia: results of surgical excision. Breast J. 2012;18:506–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1524-4741.2012.01296.x.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Renshaw AA, Gould EW. Long term clinical follow-up of atypical ductal hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ in breast core needle biopsies. Pathology. 2016;48:25–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2015.11.015.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Mooney KL, Bassett LW, Apple SK. Upgrade rates of high-risk breast lesions diagnosed on core needle biopsy: a single-institution experience and literature review. Mod Pathol. 2016;29:1471–84. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2016.127.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Polat AK, Soran A, Kanbour-Shakir A, Menekse E, Levent Balci F, Johnson R. The role of molecular biomarkers for predicting adjacent breast cancer of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed on core biopsy. Cancer Biomark. 2016;17:293–300. https://doi.org/10.3233/CBM-160641.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, Cecchini RS, Cronin WM, Robidoux A, et al. Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:1652–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dji372.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Vogel VG, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, Cronin WM, Cecchini RS, Atkins JN, et al. Update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Study of Tamoxifen and Raloxifene (STAR) P-2 Trial: preventing breast cancer. Cancer Prev Res (Phila). 2010;3:696–706. https://doi.org/10.1158/1940-6207.CAPR-10-0076.CrossRef

19.

Goss PE, Ingle JN, Ales-Martinez JE, Cheung AM, Chlebowski RT, Wactawski-Wende J, et al. Exemestane for breast-cancer prevention in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:2381–91. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1103507.CrossRefPubMed

20.

Cuzick J, Sestak I, Forbes JF, Dowsett M, Knox J, Cawthorn S, et al. Anastrozole for prevention of breast cancer in high-risk postmenopausal women (IBIS-II): an international, double-blind, randomised placebo-controlled trial. Lancet. 2014;383:1041–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(13)62292-8.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Bevers T, Ward JH, Arun B, Colditz G, Cowan KH, Daly M, et al. NCCN breast cancer risk reduction guidelines, version 1.2017: National Comprehensive Cancer Network; Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast_risk.pdf.

22.

Rosen PP: Lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia. In: Rosen’s breast pathology. 2nd ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams and Wilkin; 2001. p. 581–618.

23.

Beute BJ, Kalisher L, Hutter RV. Lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: clinical, pathologic, and mammographic features. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1991;157:257–65. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.157.2.1853802.CrossRefPubMed

24.

Bauer VP, Ditkoff BA, Schnabel F, Brenin D, El-Tamer M, Smith S. The management of lobular neoplasia identified on percutaneous core breast biopsy. Breast J. 2003;9:4–9.CrossRefPubMed

25.

Foster MC, Helvie MA, Gregory NE, Rebner M, Nees AV, Paramagul C. Lobular carcinoma in situ or atypical lobular hyperplasia at core-needle biopsy: is excisional biopsy necessary? Radiology. 2004;231:813–9. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.2313030874.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Liberman L, Sama M, Susnik B, Rosen PP, LaTrenta LR, Morris EA, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ at percutaneous breast biopsy: surgical biopsy findings. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:291–9. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.173.2.10430122.CrossRefPubMed

27.

O'Driscoll D, Britton P, Bobrow L, Wishart GC, Sinnatamby R, Warren R. Lobular carcinoma in situ on core biopsy-what is the clinical significance? Clin Radiol. 2001;56:216–20. https://doi.org/10.1053/crad.2000.0615.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Renshaw AA, Cartagena N, Derhagopian RP, Gould EW. Lobular neoplasia in breast core needle biopsy specimens is not associated with an increased risk of ductal carcinoma in situ or invasive carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002;117:797–9. https://doi.org/10.1309/T4XF-C61J-C95Y-VR4Q.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Dmytrasz K, Tartter PI, Mizrachy H, Chinitz L, Rosenbaum Smith S, Estabrook A. The significance of atypical lobular hyperplasia at percutaneous breast biopsy. Breast J. 2003;9:10–2.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Middleton LP, Grant S, Stephens T, Stelling CB, Sneige N, Sahin AA. Lobular carcinoma in situ diagnosed by core needle biopsy: when should it be excised? Mod Pathol. 2003;16:120–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.MP.0000051930.68104.92.CrossRefPubMed

31.

Arpino G, Allred DC, Mohsin SK, Weiss HL, Conrow D, Elledge RM. Lobular neoplasia on core-needle biopsy—clinical significance. Cancer. 2004;101:242–50. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20318.CrossRefPubMed

32.

Cangiarella J, Guth A, Axelrod D, Darvishian F, Singh B, Simsir A, et al. Is surgical excision necessary for the management of atypical lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ diagnosed on core needle biopsy? A report of 38 cases and review of the literature. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2008;132:979–83. https://doi.org/10.1043/1543-2165(2008)132[979:ISENFT]2.0.CO;2.

33.

Chaudhary S, Lawrence L, McGinty G, Kostroff K, Bhuiya T. Classic lobular neoplasia on core biopsy: a clinical and radio-pathologic correlation study with follow-up excision biopsy. Mod Pathol. 2013;26:762–71. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2012.221.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Murray MP, Luedtke C, Liberman L, Nehhozina T, Akram M, Brogi E. Classic lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia at percutaneous breast core biopsy: outcomes of prospective excision. Cancer. 2013;119:1073–9. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.27841.CrossRefPubMed

35.

• Nakhlis F, Gilmore L, Gelman R, Bedrosian I, Ludwig K, Hwang ES, et al. Incidence of adjacent synchronous invasive carcinoma and/or ductal carcinoma in-situ in patients with lobular neoplasia on core biopsy: results from a prospective multi-institutional registry (TBCRC 020). Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:722–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4922-4. This is a prospective, multi-institutional, single arm trial of excisional biopsies for lobular neoplasia of core biopsy specifically designed to best estimate the upgrade rate to carcinoma. One of its other strengths is central pathology review. CrossRefPubMed

36.

•• King TA, Pilewskie M, Muhsen S, Patil S, Mautner SK, Park A, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ: a 29-year longitudinal experience evaluating clinicopathologic features and breast cancer risk. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:3945–52. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.61.4743. This study reports the largest series of patients with C-LCIS with the longest prospective follow-up to date, detailing the natural history of C-LCIS, including the future breast cancer risk magnitude. CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

37.

Frost AR, Tsangaris TN, Silverberg SG. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ. Pathol Case Rev. 1996;1:27–30.CrossRef

38.

Sneige N, Wang J, Baker BA, Krishnamurthy S, Middleton LP. Clinical, histopathologic, and biologic features of pleomorphic lobular (ductal-lobular) carcinoma in situ of the breast: a report of 24 cases. Mod Pathol. 2002;15:1044–50. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.MP.0000027624.08159.19.CrossRefPubMed

39.

Gomes DS, Porto SS, Balabram D, Gobbi H. Inter-observer variability between general pathologists and a specialist in breast pathology in the diagnosis of lobular neoplasia, columnar cell lesions, atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Diagn Pathol. 2014;9:121. https://doi.org/10.1186/1746-1596-9-121.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

40.

Georgian-Smith D, Lawton TJ. Calcifications of lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: radiologic-pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2001;176:1255–9. https://doi.org/10.2214/ajr.176.5.1761255.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Lavoue V, Graesslin O, Classe JM, Fondrinier E, Angibeau H, Leveque J. Management of lobular neoplasia diagnosed by core needle biopsy: study of 52 biopsies with follow-up surgical excision. Breast. 2007;16:533–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2007.04.005.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Chivukula M, Haynik DM, Brufsky A, Carter G, Dabbs DJ. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ (PLCIS) on breast core needle biopsies: clinical significance and immunoprofile. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32:1721–6. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e31817dc3a6.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Carder PJ, Shaaban A, Alizadeh Y, Kumarasuwamy V, Liston JC, Sharma N. Screen-detected pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ (PLCIS): risk of concurrent invasive malignancy following a core biopsy diagnosis. Histopathology. 2010;57:472–8. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2010.03634.x.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Niell B, Specht M, Gerade B, Rafferty E. Is excisional biopsy required after a breast core biopsy yields lobular neoplasia? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;199:929–35. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.8447.CrossRefPubMed

45.

Meroni S, Bozzini AC, Pruneri G, Moscovici OC, Maisonneuve P, Menna S, et al. Underestimation rate of lobular intraepithelial neoplasia in vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. Eur Radiol. 2014;24:1651–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00330-014-3132-y.CrossRefPubMed

46.

Flanagan MR, Rendi MH, Calhoun KE, Anderson BO, Javid SH. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ: radiologic-pathologic features and clinical management. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:4263–9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4552-x.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

47.

Nakhlis F, Harrison BT, Lester S, Hughes KS, Coopey SB, King TA. Evaluating the risk of upgrade to invasive breast cancer and/or DCIS on excision following a diagnosis of non-classic lobular carcinoma in situ. [Poster at San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, TX]. In press Dec 2017.

48.

Downs-Kelly E, Bell D, Perkins GH, Sneige N, Middleton LP. Clinical implications of margin involvement by pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135:737–43. https://doi.org/10.1043/2010-0204-OA.1.PubMed

49.

Neal L, Sandhu NP, Hieken TJ, Glazebrook KN, Mac Bride MB, Dilaveri CA, et al. Diagnosis and management of benign, atypical, and indeterminate breast lesions detected on core needle biopsy. Mayo Clin Proc. 2014;89:536–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mayocp.2014.02.004.CrossRefPubMed

50.

Nakhlis F, Ahmadiyeh N, Lester S, Raza S, Lotfi P, Golshan M. Papilloma on core biopsy: excision vs. observation. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:1479–82. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4091-x.CrossRefPubMed

51.

Weisman PS, Sutton BJ, Siziopikou KP, Hansen N, Khan SA, Neuschler EI, et al. Non-mass-associated intraductal papillomas: is excision necessary? Hum Pathol. 2014;45:583–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2013.10.027.CrossRefPubMed

52.

Rizzo M, Linebarger J, Lowe MC, Pan L, Gabram SG, Vasquez L, et al. Management of papillary breast lesions diagnosed on core-needle biopsy: clinical pathologic and radiologic analysis of 276 cases with surgical follow-up. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214:280–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2011.12.005.CrossRefPubMed

53.

Khan S, Diaz A, Archer KJ, Lehman RR, Mullins T, Cardenosa G, et al. Papillary lesions of the breast: to excise or observe? Breast J 2017 Aug 27 [Epub ahead of print]. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12907.

54.

Armes JE, Galbraith C, Gray J, Taylor K. The outcome of papillary lesions of the breast diagnosed by standard core needle biopsy within a BreastScreen Australia service. Pathology. 2017;49:267–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pathol.2016.12.346.CrossRefPubMed

55.

Hong YR, Song BJ, Jung SS, Kang BJ, Kim SH, Chae BJ. Predictive factors for upgrading patients with benign breast papillary lesions using a core needle biopsy. J Breast Cancer. 2016;19:410–6. https://doi.org/10.4048/jbc.2016.19.4.410.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

56.

Pareja F, Corben AD, Brennan SB, Murray MP, Bowser ZL, Jakate K, et al. Breast intraductal papillomas without atypia in radiologic-pathologic concordant core-needle biopsies: rate of upgrade to carcinoma at excision. Cancer. 2016;122:2819–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.30118.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

57.

Nayak A, Carkaci S, Gilcrease MZ, Liu P, Middleton LP, Bassett RL Jr, et al. Benign papillomas without atypia diagnosed on core needle biopsy: experience from a single institution and proposed criteria for excision. Clin Breast Cancer. 2013;13:439–49. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2013.08.007.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

58.

Ko D, Kang E, Park SY, Kim SM, Jang M, Yun B, et al. The management strategy of benign solitary intraductal papilloma on breast Core biopsy. Clin Breast Cancer. 2017;17:367–72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2017.03.016.CrossRefPubMed

59.

Boufelli G, Giannotti MA, Ruiz CA, Barros N, Chala LF, Maesaka JY, et al. Papillomas of the breast: factors associated with underestimation. Eur J Cancer Prev. 2017. doi: https://doi.org/10.1097/CEJ.0000000000000343.

60.

Tatarian T, Sokas C, Rufail M, Lazar M, Malhotra S, Palazzo JP, et al. Intraductal papilloma with benign pathology on breast Core biopsy: to excise or not? Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:2501–7. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5182-7.CrossRefPubMed

61.

Jaffer S, Bleiweiss IJ, Nagi C. Incidental intraductal papillomas (<2 mm) of the breast diagnosed on needle core biopsy do not need to be excised. Breast J. 2013;19:130–3. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12073.CrossRefPubMed

62.

Swapp RE, Glazebrook KN, Jones KN, Brandts HM, Reynolds C, Visscher DW, et al. Management of benign intraductal solitary papilloma diagnosed on core needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:1900–5. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2846-9.CrossRefPubMed

63.

Shamonki J, Chung A, Huynh KT, Sim MS, Kinnaird M, Giuliano A. Management of papillary lesions of the breast: can larger core needle biopsy samples identify patients who may avoid surgical excision? Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:4137–44. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3191-3.CrossRefPubMed

64.

Mosier AD, Keylock J, Smith DV. Benign papillomas diagnosed on large-gauge vacuum-assisted core needle biopsy which span <1.5 cm do not need surgical excision. Breast J. 2013;19:611–7. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12180.CrossRefPubMed

65.

Lewis JT, Hartmann LC, Vierkant RA, Maloney SD, Shane Pankratz V, Allers TM, et al. An analysis of breast cancer risk in women with single, multiple, and atypical papilloma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30:665–72.CrossRefPubMed

66.

Lu Q, Tan EY, Ho B, Chen JJ, Chan PM. Surgical excision of intraductal breast papilloma diagnosed on core biopsy. ANZ J Surg. 2012;82:168–72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2011.05969.x.CrossRefPubMed

67.

Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver M, editors. WHO classification of tumours, volume 4. 4th ed. Lyon: IARC; 2012.

68.

Schnitt SJ, Vincent-Salomon A. Columnar cell lesions of the breast. Adv Anat Pathol. 2003;10:113–24.CrossRefPubMed

69.

Becker AK, Gordon PB, Harrison DA, Hassell PR, Hayes MM, van Niekerk D, et al. Flat ductal intraepithelial neoplasia 1A diagnosed at stereotactic core needle biopsy: is excisional biopsy indicated? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:682–8. https://doi.org/10.2214/AJR.11.8090.CrossRefPubMed

70.

Rudin AV, Hoskin TL, Fahy A, Farrell AM, Nassar A, Ghosh K, et al. Flat epithelial atypia on core biopsy and upgrade to cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:3549–58. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6059-0.CrossRefPubMed

71.

Kunju LP, Kleer CG. Significance of flat epithelial atypia on mammotome core needle biopsy: Should it be excised? Hum Pathol. 2007;38:35–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.humpath.2006.08.008.CrossRefPubMed

72.

Khoumais NA, Scaranelo AM, Moshonov H, Kulkarni SR, Miller N, McCready DR, et al. Incidence of breast cancer in patients with pure flat epithelial atypia diagnosed at core-needle biopsy of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:133–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2591-0.CrossRefPubMed

73.

Bianchi S, Bendinelli B, Castellano I, Piubello Q, Renne G, Cattani MG, et al. Morphological parameters of flat epithelial atypia (FEA) in stereotactic vacuum-assisted needle core biopsies do not predict the presence of malignancy on subsequent surgical excision. Virchows Arch. 2012;461:405–17. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-012-1279-y.CrossRefPubMed

74.

Dialani V, Venkataraman S, Frieling G, Schnitt SJ, Mehta TS. Does isolated flat epithelial atypia on vacuum-assisted breast core biopsy require surgical excision? Breast J. 2014;20:606–14. https://doi.org/10.1111/tbj.12332.CrossRefPubMed

75.

Said SM, Visscher DW, Nassar A, Frank RD, Vierkant RA, Frost MH, et al. Flat epithelial atypia and risk of breast cancer: a Mayo cohort study. Cancer. 2015;121:1548–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.29243.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

76.

Aroner SA, Collins LC, Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Tamimi RM. Columnar cell lesions and subsequent breast cancer risk: a nested case-control study. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12:R61. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2624.CrossRefPubMedCentralPubMed

77.

Bevers T, Helvie M, Bonaccio E, Calhoun KE, Daly M, Farrar W, et al. NCCN breast cancer screening and diagnosis guidelines, version 1.2017: National Comprehensive Cancer Network; Available from: https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/breast-screening.pdf.

78.

Saslow D, Boetes C, Burke W, Harms S, Leach MO, Lehman CD, et al. American Cancer Society guidelines for breast screening with MRI as an adjunct to mammography. CA Cancer J Clin. 2007;57:75–89.CrossRefPubMed

79.

Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, Corle DK, Green SB, Schairer C, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81:1879–86.CrossRefPubMed

Titel: How Do We Approach Benign Proliferative Lesions?
verfasst von: Faina Nakhlis
Publikationsdatum: 01.04.2018
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Current Oncology Reports / Ausgabe 4/2018
Print ISSN: 1523-3790
Elektronische ISSN: 1534-6269
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11912-018-0682-1

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

24.05.2024 Mammakarzinom Nachrichten

In der MONARCHE-3-Studie lebten Frauen mit fortgeschrittenem Hormonrezeptor-positivem, HER2-negativem Brustkrebs länger, wenn sie zusätzlich zu einem nicht steroidalen Aromatasehemmer mit Abemaciclib behandelt wurden; allerdings verfehlte der numerische Zugewinn die statistische Signifikanz.

ADT zur Radiatio nach Prostatektomie: Wenn, dann wohl länger

24.05.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Welchen Nutzen es trägt, wenn die Strahlentherapie nach radikaler Prostatektomie um eine Androgendeprivation ergänzt wird, hat die RADICALS-HD-Studie untersucht. Nun liegen die Ergebnisse vor. Sie sprechen für länger dauernden Hormonentzug.

Das sind die führenden Symptome junger Darmkrebspatienten

23.05.2024 Leitsymptome in der Hausarztpraxis Nachrichten

Darmkrebserkrankungen in jüngeren Jahren sind ein zunehmendes Problem, das häufig längere Zeit übersehen wird, gerade weil die Patienten noch nicht alt sind. Welche Anzeichen Ärzte stutzig machen sollten, hat eine Metaanalyse herausgearbeitet.

„Überwältigende“ Evidenz für Tripeltherapie beim metastasierten Prostata-Ca.

22.05.2024 Prostatakarzinom Nachrichten

Patienten mit metastasiertem hormonsensitivem Prostatakarzinom sollten nicht mehr mit einer alleinigen Androgendeprivationstherapie (ADT) behandelt werden, mahnt ein US-Team nach Sichtung der aktuellen Datenlage. Mit einer Tripeltherapie haben die Betroffenen offenbar die besten Überlebenschancen.

Update Onkologie

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.

Newsletter bestellen

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

How Do We Approach Benign Proliferative Lesions?

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

ADT zur Radiatio nach Prostatektomie: Wenn, dann wohl länger

Das sind die führenden Symptome junger Darmkrebspatienten

„Überwältigende“ Evidenz für Tripeltherapie beim metastasierten Prostata-Ca.

Update Onkologie

Die Highlights vom Kongress des American College of Cardiology 2024

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Recent Findings

Summary

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2018

Electronic Health Information Exchange Opportunities for Self-management of Care: Responses from Older Adults With and Without Cancer History in the United States

Hematopoietic Stem Cell Transplantation for Adult Philadelphia-Negative Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia in the First Complete Remission in the Era of Minimal Residual Disease

Development and Application of Liquid Biopsies in Metastatic Prostate Cancer

Marginal Zone Lymphoma: Clinicopathologic Variations and Approaches to Therapy

Systemic Treatment Options for Advanced-Stage Mycosis Fungoides and Sézary Syndrome

Integrated Behavioral Medicine in Cancer Care: Utilizing a Training Program Model to Provide Psychological Services in an Urban Cancer Center

Neu im Fachgebiet Onkologie

Mehr Lebenszeit mit Abemaciclib bei fortgeschrittenem Brustkrebs?

ADT zur Radiatio nach Prostatektomie: Wenn, dann wohl länger

Das sind die führenden Symptome junger Darmkrebspatienten

„Überwältigende“ Evidenz für Tripeltherapie beim metastasierten Prostata-Ca.

Update Onkologie