Update on atypical epithelial hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ

References

• Lakhani S, Collins N, Stratton M, Sloane J. Atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast: clonal proliferation with loss of heterozygosity on chromosomes 16q and 17p. J Clin Pathol 1995; 48: 611–615
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann L, Sellers T, Frost M, et al. Benign breast diseae and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2005; 353: 229–237
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Degnim A, Visscher D, Berman H, et al. Stratification of breast cancer sik in women with atypia: a Mayo cohort study. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25: 2671–2677
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupont W, Page D. Risk factors for breast cancer in women with proliferative breast disease. N Engl J Med 1985; 312: 146–151
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dupont W, Parl F, Hartmann W, et al. Breast cancer risk associated with proliferative breast disease and atypical hyperplasia. Cancer 1993; 71: 1258–1265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• London S, Connolly J, Schnitt S, Colditz G. A prospective study of benign breast disease and the risk of breast cancer. JAMA 1992; 267: 941–944
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacGrogan G, Arnould L, Mascarel I D, et al. Impact of immunohistochemical markers, CK5/6 and E-cadherin on diagnostic agreement in non-invasive proliferative breast lesions. Histopathology 2008; 52: 689–697
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Houssami N, Ciatto S, Ellis I, Ambrogetti D. Underestimation of malignancy of breast core-needle biopsy. Cancer 2007; 109: 487–495
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sohn V, Arthurs Z, Herbert G, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: improved accuracy with the 11-gauge vacuum-assisted versus the 14-gauge core biopsy needle. Ann Surg Oncol 2007; 14: 2497–2501
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ely K, Carter B, Jensen R, Simpson J, Page D. Core biopsy of the breast with atypical dutcal hyperplasia: a probabilistic approach to reporting. Am J Surg Pathol 2001; 25: 1017–1021
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forgeard C, Benchaib M, Guerin N, et al. Is surgical biopsy mandatory in case of atypical ductal hyperplasia on 11-gauge core needle biopsy? a retrospective study of 300 patients. Am J Surg 2008; 196: 339–345
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Page D, Dupont W, Rogers L, Jensen R, Schuyler P. Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15–25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biospy. Cancer 1995; 76: 1197–1200
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins L C, Achacoso N A, Nekhlyudov L, et al. Clinical and pathologic features of ductal carcinoma in situ associated with the presence of flat epithelial atypia: an analysis of 543 patients. Mod Pathol 2007; 20: 1149–1155
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Collins L C, Tamimi R M, Baer H J, Connolly J L, Colditz G A, Schnitt S J. Outcome of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ untreated after diagnostic biopsy: results from the Nurses' Health Study. Cancer 2005; 103: 1778–1784
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guerra L E, Smith R M, Kaminski A, Lagios M D, Silverstein M J. Invasive local recurrence increased after radiation therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ. Am J Surg 2008; 196: 552–555
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gilleard O, Goodman A, Cooper M, Davies M, Dunn J. The significance of the Van Nuys prognostic index in the management of ductal carcinoma in situ. World J Surg Oncol 2008; 6: 61
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sorlie T, Perou C, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001; 100: 8418–8423
   Google Scholar
• Bryan B B, Schnitt S J, Collins L C. Ductal carcinoma in situ with basal-like phenotype: a possible precursor to invasive basal-like breast cancer. Mod Pathol 2006; 19: 617–621
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tamimi R M, Baer H J, Marotti J, et al. Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res 2008; 10: R67
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ellsworth R E, Vertrees A, Love B, Hooke J A, Ellsworth D L, Shriver C D. Chromosomal alterations associated with the transition from in situ to invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2008; 15: 2519–2525
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Iakovlev V V, Arneson N C, Wong V, et al. Genomic differences between pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast and that associated with invasive disease: a calibrated aCGH study. Clin Cancer Res 2008; 14: 4446–4454
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lagios M D, Margolin F R, Westdahl P R, Rose M R. Mammographically detected duct carcinoma in situ. Frequency of local recurrence following tylectomy and prognostic effect of nuclear grade on local recurrence. Cancer 1989; 63: 2323–2325
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Polom K, Murawa D, Wasiewicz J, Nowakowski W, Murawa P. The role of sentinel node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Eur J Surg Oncol 2008; Aug 22, (Epub ahead of print)
   Google Scholar
• Ansari B, Ogston S A, Purdie C A, Adamson D J, Brown D C, Thompson A M. Meta-analysis of sentinel node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Br J Surg 2008; 95: 547–554
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carter B, Jensen R, Simpson J, Page D. Benign transport of breast epithelium into axillary lymph nodes after biopsy. Am J Clin Pathol 2000; 113: 259–265
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bleiweiss I, Nagi C, Jaffer S. Axillary sentinel lymph nodes can be falsely positive due to iatrogenic displacement and transport of benign epithelial cells in patients with breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24: 2013–2018
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yi M, Krishnamurthy S, Kuerer H M, et al. Role of primary tumor characteristics in predicting positive sentinel lymph nodes in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ or microinvasive breast cancer. Am J Surg 2008; 196: 81–87
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar