Diagnostic delay in moderately/poorly differentiated breast cancer types

Abstract

Background Diagnostic delay of breast cancer related to the false-negative assessment of the healthcare provider leads to tumor progression and might worsen the outcome. Previous studies found some factors associated with provider-related diagnostic delay; however, tumor biology has tended not to be considered. The aim of our study was to find differences in diagnostic delay of poorly differentiated breast cancer types.Methods Data of 970 patients with newly diagnosed moderately/poorly differentiated (G2/3) breast cancer at the age ≥40 years was retrospectively analyzed regarding breast cancer type, diagnostic delay and its consequence, clinical factors and physician's assessment. Multivariate analysis was used to evaluate associated factors with diagnostic delay. ResultsWe observed a diagnostic delay in 3.8% (n = 37) of all patients. Mean delay time was 128 days, and clinically relevant tumor growth was observed in 43.2% of these cases. Delay was significantly higher in the group of triple-negative breast cancer (9.9% versus 2.7, 5.3 and 1.8% in hormonal receptor (HR)+/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)−, HR−/Her2+ and HR+/Her2+, respectively; P value <0.001). Age, breast density and reason for presentation were not correlated to diagnostic delay. ConclusionPatients with triple-negative breast cancer are at higher risk of receiving a false-negative assessment and experiencing a diagnostic delay. Our results emphasize the importance of a detailed consideration of clinical risk factors and provider training and suggest a broad indication for a core needle biopsy. European

Evolutionary Profil of Triple-Negative Breast Cancer and Influence of Histopronostic Factors: Experience of Oncology Department Chu Ibn Rochd Casablanca

“…The upper exterior quadrant was the most afflicted in 58% of patients in our study. clinically detectable tumor than at the stage of a mammographic finding with a high false-negative rate during complementary examinations, thus increasing the time to diagnosis [14]. In our series, the delay was longer than 3 months in 80% of instances, which is consistent with the findings of another study, which found a delay of more than 3 months in 57% of cases [15].…”

Germline pathogenic variants in metaplastic breast cancer patients and the emerging role of the BRCA1 gene

“…The TNBC phenotype appears with an aggressive pattern [13] and to be closely associated with a hereditary cause of the disease [14], most frequently the Hereditary Breast and Ovarian Cancer (HBOC) syndrome. HBOC is an autosomal dominant condition caused by germline mutations in BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes.…”

Metaplastic breast cancer: an all-round multidisciplinary consensus

“…MpBC is rarely seen in general radiology practice, even in BC referral centers (Shin et al ., 2007; Elfgen et al ., 2022). Although there are few studies describing the main diagnostic imaging findings of MpBC, it usually shows a mass with an oval/round shape and indistinct margins (Park et al ., 2000; Günhan-Bilgen et al ., 2002; Yang et al ., 2007; Choi and Shu, 2012; Leddy et al ., 2012; Langlands et al ., 2016; Kim et al ., 2018; Alhaidary et al ., 2022).…”