Clinicopathologic study of invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast

Tang, Shenli; Yang, Jiqiao; Du, Zhenggui; Tan, Qiuwen; Zhou, Yuting; Zhang, Di; Lv, Qing

doi:10.18632/oncotarget.16405

Cited by 39 publications

(56 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Twenty-five studies were excluded for not providing adequate, detailed statistics or not comparing with IDC. Thus, based on the criteria described above, 14 publications were eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis [ 12 , 17 , 19 – 30 ]. The search strategy and filters applied are shown in Fig.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Numerous reports have been published in the past three decades to compare the prognostic difference between IMPC and IDC [ 12 , 17 , 19 – 30 ]. Chen et al [ 20 ], using the US National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, found that the overall prognostic results of IMPC were similar to those of IDC and showed a more favorable DSS than IDC patients, although lymph node metastasis was more common in the former.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma compared with invasive ductal carcinoma in the breast: a meta-analysis

Zhang

Yang

2017

BMC Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInvasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) of the breast is a rare variant of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). The prognosis of IMPC compared with that of IDC remains controversial; we conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the prognostic difference between IMPC and IDC.MethodsWe searched the PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases for relevant studies comparing overall survival (OS), disease-specific survival (DSS), relapse-free survival (RFS), local-regional recurrence-free survival (LRRFS) or distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) rates between IMPC and IDC. Fixed-effect and random-effect models were utilized based on the heterogeneity of the eligible studies. Heterogeneity was further evaluated by subgroup and sensitivity analyses.ResultsFourteen studies with 1888 IMPC patients were included in the meta-analysis. The summarized odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI) was calculated to estimate the prognostic difference between IMPC and IDC. IMPC patients showed an unfavorable prognosis for RFS (OR; 2.04; 95% CI: 1.63–2.55) and LRRFS (OR: 2.82; 95% CI: 1.90–4.17) compared with IDC. However, no significant difference was observed in OS (OR: 0.93; 95% CI: 0.78–1.10), DSS (OR: 1.16; 95% CI: 0.95–1.40) and DMFS (OR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.67–1.35) between IMPC and IDC. No obvious statistical heterogeneity was detected, except for DSS. Funnel plots and Egger’s tests did not reveal publication bias, except for RFS.ConclusionsThis analysis showed that IMPC patients have a higher rate of loco-regional recurrence than IDC patients. However, OS, DSS and DMFS were not significantly different between IMPC and IDC. These results could help clinicians select therapeutic and follow-up strategies for IMPC patients.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-017-3855-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma compared with invasive ductal carcinoma in the breast: a meta-analysis

Zhang

Yang

2017

BMC Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While histological type, lymphovascular invasion (LVI), number of involved sentinel lymph nodes and extranodal extension were assumed to attribute to lymph node involvement of IDC, and their effects on IMPC need to be further research [ 29 – 32 ]. Thus, currently almost all IMPC patients were treated according to standard IDC treatments [ 33 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nomogram for predicting preoperative lymph node involvement in patients with invasive micropapillary carcinoma of breast: a SEER population-based study

Chen

et al. 2018

BMC Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundInvasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) is an unusual and distinct subtype of invasive breast tumor with high propensity for regional lymph node metastases. This study was to identify risk factors accounting for IMPC of the breast and to develop a nomogram to preoperatively predict the probability of lymph node involvement.MethodsA retrospective review of the clinical and pathology records was performed in patients diagnosed with IMPC between 2003 and 2014 from Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The cohort was divided into training and validation sets. Training set comprised patients diagnosed between 2003 and 2009, while validation set included patients diagnosed thereafter. A logistic regression model was used to construct the nomogram in the training set and then varified in the validation set. Nomogram performance was quantified with respect to discrimination and calibration using R 3.4.1 software.ResultsOverall, 1407 patients diagnosed with IMPC were enrolled, of which 527 in training set and 880 in validation set. Logistic regression analysis indicated larger lesions, younger age at diagnosis, black ethnic and lack of hormone receptor expression were significantly related to regional nodes involvement. The AUC of the nomogram was 0.735 (95% confidential interval (CI) 0.692 to 0.777), demonstrating a good prediction performance. Calibration curve for the nomogram was plotted and the slope was close to 1, which demonstrated excellent calibration of the nomogram. The performance of the nomogram was further validated in the validation set, with AUC of 0.748 (95% CI 0.701 to 0.767).ConclusionsThe striking difference between IMPC and IDC remains the increased lymph node involvement in IMPC and therefore merits aggressive treatment. The nomogram based on the clinicalpathologic parameters was established, which could accurately preoperatively predict regional lymph node status. This nomogram would facilitate evaluating lymph node state preoperatively and thus treatment decision-making of individual patients.

show abstract

“…Outcome data are controversial. However, increased lymphovascular invasion is seen in this special subtype compared to IBC NST [4,5,[83][84][85][86][87][88][89][90].…”

Section: Invasive Micropapillary Breast Carcinomamentioning

confidence: 99%

Histology of Luminal Breast Cancer

Erber

Hartmann²

2020

Breast Care

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Invasive breast cancer (IBC) can be categorized into prognostic and predictive molecular subtypes (including luminal breast cancer) using gene expression profiling. Luminal IBC comprises a variety of histological subtypes with varying clinical and pathological features. Summary: IBC of no special subtype is the most common histological subtype in general and likewise within luminal IBC. Classical invasive lobular breast cancer, typically clustering into luminal subgroup, is characterized by discohesive growth and loss of E-cadherin expression. Infrequent, morphologically distinct luminal IBC subtypes are tubular, invasive cribriform, mucinous, and invasive micropapillary carcinomas. Breast carcinoma with apocrine differentiation, with characteristic expression of androgen receptor (AR), often clusters into the luminal AR category. Rarely, neuroendocrine neoplasms of the breast can be seen. IBC of the male breast usually matches with the luminal subtype. Key Messages: Independently from histological subtypes, invasive breast cancer (IBC) can be divided into molecular subtypes based on mRNA gene expression levels. Using this molecular subtyping, risk scores based on gene expression profiling (established for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative IBC), grading, and Ki-67 index, prognosis of patients with luminal breast cancer and response to chemotherapy can be predicted. In routine diagnostics, the expression of estrogen receptor (ER) and progesterone receptor (PR), HER2 status, and the proliferation rate (Ki-67) are used to determine a surrogate (molecular-like) subtype. Within luminal(-like) IBC, no special sub-type and invasive lobular breast carcinoma are the most common histological subtypes. Other rare histological subtypes (e.g., tubular carcinoma) should be recognized due to their distinct clinical and pathological features.

show abstract

Clinicopathologic study of invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast

Cited by 39 publications

References 28 publications

The prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma compared with invasive ductal carcinoma in the breast: a meta-analysis

The prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma compared with invasive ductal carcinoma in the breast: a meta-analysis

Nomogram for predicting preoperative lymph node involvement in patients with invasive micropapillary carcinoma of breast: a SEER population-based study

Histology of Luminal Breast Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About