Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Treatment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Considerations for Tailoring Therapy in the Contemporary Era

  • Non-Invasive Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment (ES Hwang, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Breast Cancer Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Standard options for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) include breast-conserving surgery (BCS) alone; BCS with radiotherapy or endocrine therapy, or both; and mastectomy. Survival is excellent with all options, but rates of local recurrence (LR) vary, as do quality-of-life measures. Here, we discuss treatment outcomes, risk factors for LR, and tools for risk estimation.

Recent Findings

After BCS, radiotherapy reduces the risk of LR by half, and endocrine therapy reduces the risk by a third. Young age, inadequate margins, and greater volume of disease are associated with higher risk of LR after BCS, while young age, high grade, and microinvasion are associated with higher risk of locoregional recurrence after mastectomy. Clinical tools, including the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) DCIS nomogram, provide LR risk estimates after BCS that appear more accurate than current genomic assays. The safety of active surveillance for seemingly low-risk patients remains uncertain.

Summary

Estimation of LR risk, utilizing a multitude of clinicopathologic and treatment factors, can help a woman balance that risk with her values and priorities, and allow her to choose the optimal treatment option for her.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2016. CA Cancer J Clin. 2016;66(1):7–30. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21332.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. • Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V, Sopik V, Sun P. Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(7):888–96 This observational study of women in the SEER database demonstrates a 20-year breast cancer-specific mortality of 3.3% among women with DCIS, and found age at diagnosis and black ethnicity to be important risk factors for death.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Warnberg F, Garmo H, Emdin S, Hedberg V, Adwall L, Sandelin K, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ: 20 years follow-up in the randomized SweDCIS trial. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(32):3613–8. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2014.56.2595.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Forsyth S, Bundred NJ, et al. Effect of tamoxifen and radiotherapy in women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ: long-term results from the UK/ANZ DCIS trial. Lancet Oncol. 2011;12(1):21–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1470-2045(10)70266-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Donker M, Litiere S, Werutsky G, Julien JP, Fentiman IS, Agresti R, et al. Breast-conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ: 15-year recurrence rates and outcome after a recurrence, from the EORTC 10853 randomized phase III trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(32):4054–9. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2013.49.5077.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B, Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Long-term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(6):478–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djr027.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. • Correa C, McGale P, Taylor C, Wang Y, Clarke M, Davies C, et al. Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010(41):162–77 This individual-level meta-analysis of the early randomized trials of adjuvant radiotherapy after BCS for DCIS demonstrated a 50% reduction in local recurrence, and no survival benefit.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Park HL, Chang J, Lal G, Lal K, Ziogas A, Anton-Culver H. Trends in treatment patterns and clinical outcomes in young women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ. Clin Breast Cancer. 2018;18(2):e179–e85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clbc.2017.08.001.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Rutter CE, Park HS, Killelea BK, Evans SB. Growing use of mastectomy for ductal carcinoma-in situ of the breast among young women in the United States. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(7):2378–86. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4334-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Katz SJ, Lantz PM, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, Schwartz K, Liu L, et al. Patterns and correlates of local therapy for women with ductal carcinoma-in-situ. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(13):3001–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2005.04.028.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Stuart KE, Houssami N, Taylor R, Hayen A, Boyages J. Long-term outcomes of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis. BMC Cancer. 2015;15:890. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-015-1904-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  12. Pyfer B, Chatterjee A, Chen L, Nigriny J, Czerniecki B, Tchou J, et al. Early postoperative outcomes in breast conservation surgery versus simple mastectomy with implant reconstruction: a NSQIP analysis of 11,645 patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(1):92–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4770-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Montazeri A, Vahdaninia M, Harirchi I, Ebrahimi M, Khaleghi F, Jarvandi S. Quality of life in patients with breast cancer before and after diagnosis: an eighteen months follow-up study. BMC Cancer. 2008;8:330. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2407-8-330.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L, Greco M, Saccozzi R, Luini A, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):1227–32. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa020989.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, Margolese RG, Deutsch M, Fisher ER, et al. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(16):1233–41. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa022152.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. van Dongen JA, Voogd AC, Fentiman IS, Legrand C, Sylvester RJ, Tong D, et al. Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10801 trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(14):1143–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Poggi MM, Danforth DN, Sciuto LC, Smith SL, Steinberg SM, Liewehr DJ, et al. Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinoma with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: the National Cancer Institute Randomized Trial. Cancer. 2003;98(4):697–702. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11580.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. • Subhedar P, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M, Van Zee KJ. Decreasing recurrence rates for ductal carcinoma in situ: analysis of 2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery over 30 years. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(10):3273–81 This study of 2996 patients with DCIS treated over a 32-year period found that 10-year recurrence rates declined from 20% among those treated from 1978 to 1988, to 14% among those treated from 1999 to 2010. After adjustment for numerous factors, among those not receiving RT, there remained a 38% lower risk in recent years as compared with earlier years.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Wong JS, Chen YH, Gadd MA, Gelman R, Lester SC, Schnitt SJ, et al. Eight-year update of a prospective study of wide excision alone for small low- or intermediate-grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014;143(2):343–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2813-6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Solin LJ, Gray R, Hughes LL, Wood WC, Lowen MA, Badve SS, et al. Surgical excision without radiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: 12-year results from the ECOG-ACRIN E5194 study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(33):3938–44. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.60.8588.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  21. McCormick B, Winter K, Hudis C, Kuerer HM, Rakovitch E, Smith BL, et al. RTOG 9804: a prospective randomized trial for good-risk ductal carcinoma in situ comparing radiotherapy with observation. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(7):709–15. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2014.57.9029.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. •• McCormick B. Randomized trial evaluating radiation following surgical excision for “good risk” DCIS: 12-year report from NRG/RTOG 9804. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2018;102(5):1603.2018 ASTRO Late-Breaking Abstract #1. This randomized trial found a 12-year cumulative incidence of local recurrence of 2.8% among patients with “good risk” DCIS treated with excision and WBRT, compared with 11.4% among those treated with excision alone.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Henson KE, McGale P, Taylor C, Darby SC. Radiation-related mortality from heart disease and lung cancer more than 20 years after radiotherapy for breast cancer. Br J Cancer. 2013;108(1):179–82. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2012.575.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Grantzau T, Overgaard J. Risk of second non-breast cancer among patients treated with and without postoperative radiotherapy for primary breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis of population-based studies including 522,739 patients. Radiother Oncol. 2016;121(3):402–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2016.08.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Allred DC, Anderson SJ, Paik S, Wickerham DL, Nagtegaal ID, Swain SM, et al. Adjuvant tamoxifen reduces subsequent breast cancer in women with estrogen receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ: a study based on NSABP protocol B-24. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(12):1268–73. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2010.34.0141.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Forbes JF, Sestak I, Howell A, Bonanni B, Bundred N, Levy C, et al. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2016;387(10021):866–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(15)01129-0.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Margolese RG, Cecchini RS, Julian TB, Ganz PA, Costantino JP, Vallow LA, et al. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial. Lancet. 2016;387(10021):849–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(15)01168-x.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Miller ME, Muhsen S, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M, Van Zee KJ. Contralateral breast cancer risk in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: is it high enough to justify bilateral mastectomy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(10):2889–97. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5931-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  29. Anderson C, Meyer AM, Wheeler SB, Zhou L, Reeder-Hayes KE, Nichols HB. Endocrine therapy initiation and medical oncologist utilization among women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ. Oncologist. 2017;22(5):535–41. https://doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2016-0397.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. • Van Zee KJ, Subhedar P, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M. Relationship between margin width and recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ: analysis of 2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery for 30 years. Ann Surg. 2015;262(4):623–31. https://doi.org/10.1097/sla.0000000000001454This series elucidated the association of margin width and local recurrence, stratified by use of radiation and controlled for numerous clinicopathologic factors. It showed that there was a strong correlation between wider margins and lower local recurrence rates among those not receiving radiation, while there was no clear relationship for those receiving radiation.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. •• Cronin PA, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M, Van Zee KJ. Impact of age on risk of recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ: outcomes of 2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery over 30 years. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(9):2816–24 This study demonstrated that the 10-year rates of LR decrease with age, being highest among women younger than age 40 years, and lowest among those older than age 80 years.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Muhsen S, Barrio AV, Miller M, Olcese C, Patil S, Morrow M, et al. Outcomes for women with minimal-volume ductal carcinoma in situ completely excised at core biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(13):3888–95. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6043-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Van Zee KJ, Liberman L, Samli B, Tran KN, McCormick B, Petrek JA, et al. Long term follow-up of women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery: the effect of age. Cancer. 1999;86(9):1757–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19991101)86:9<1757::aid-cncr18>3.0.co;2-v.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. •• Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ, Houssami N, Chavez-MacGregor M, Harris JR, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology-American Society of Clinical Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery With Whole-Breast Irradiation in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(33):4040-6. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2016.68.3573These consensus guidelines established a margin threshold of ≥ 2 mm as minimizing risk of LR, as compared to more narrow margins among women with DCIS undergoing BCS and RT.

  35. •• Marinovich ML, Azizi L, Macaskill P, Irwig L, Morrow M, Solin LJ et al. The Association of Surgical Margins and Local Recurrence in Women with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Treated with Breast-Conserving Therapy: A Meta-Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(12):3811-21. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5446-2This study-level meta-analysis formed the basis of the 2016 consensus guidelines, demonstrating the adequacy of using a negative margin threshold of 2 mm among 7883 women from 20 studies.

  36. Owen D, Tyldesley S, Alexander C, Speers C, Truong P, Nichol A, et al. Outcomes in patients treated with mastectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;85(3):e129–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.10.020.

  37. Klein J, Kong I, Paszat L, Nofech-Mozes S, Hanna W, Thiruchelvam D, et al. Close or positive resection margins are not associated with an increased risk of chest wall recurrence in women with DCIS treated by mastectomy: a population-based analysis. Springerplus. 2015;4:335. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-1032-5.

  38. Fitzsullivan E, Lari SA, Smith B, Caudle AS, Krishnamurthy S, Lucci A, et al. Incidence and consequence of close margins in patients with ductal carcinoma-in situ treated with mastectomy: is further therapy warranted? Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(13):4103–12. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-013-3194-0.

  39. Rashtian A, Iganej S, Amy Liu IL, Natarajan S. Close or positive margins after mastectomy for DCIS: pattern of relapse and potential indications for radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72(4):1016–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.06.1954

  40. •• Mamtani A, Nakhlis F, Downs-Canner S, Zabor EC, Morrow M, King TA, et al. Impact of Age on Locoregional and Distant Recurrence After Mastectomy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ With or Without Microinvasion. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(13):4264-71. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07693-1. This study of over 3000 women with DCIS treated with mastectomy demonstrated that while overall 10-year rates of locoregional recurrence are low, a higher risk is seen among those age < 40 years, with high nuclear grade, and micronivasion.

  41. • Rudloff U, Jacks LM, Goldberg JI, Wynveen CA, Brogi E, Patil S et al. Nomogram for predicting the risk of local recurrence after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(23):3762-9. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.26.8847. This was the initial publication and internal validation of the MSKCC DCIS Nomogram, which incorporates 10 clinocopathologic and treatment factors into risk estimation of LR after BCS for DCIS, and has since been externally validated in multiple populations.

  42. Sweldens C, Peeters S, van Limbergen E, Janssen H, Laenen A, Patil S, et al. Local relapse after breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: a European single-center experience and external validation of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center DCIS nomogram. Cancer J. 2014;20(1):1–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/ppo.0000000000000025.

  43. Collins LC, Achacoso N, Haque R, Nekhlyudov L, Quesenberry CP Jr, Schnitt SJ, et al. Risk prediction for local breast cancer recurrence among women with DCIS treated in a community practice: a nested, case-control study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(Suppl 3):S502–8. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4641-x.

  44. Yi M, Meric-Bernstam F, Kuerer HM, Mittendorf EA, Bedrosian I, Lucci A, et al. Evaluation of a breast cancer nomogram for predicting risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ after local excision. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(6):600–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2011.36.4976

  45. Sedloev T, Valsileva M, Kundurzheiv T, Hadjieva T. Validation of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center nomogram in the prediction of local recurrence risks after conserving surgery for Bulgarian women with DCIS of the breast. Conference Paper presented at the 2nd World Congress on Controversies in Breast Cancer (CoBrCa), Barcelona, Spain, September 2016.

  46. Wang F, Li H, Tan PH, Chua ET, Yeo RM, Lim FL, et al. Validation of a nomogram in the prediction of local recurrence risks after conserving surgery for Asian women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2014;26(11):684–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2014.08.004.

  47. Solin LJ, Gray R, Baehner FL, Butler SM, Hughes LL, Yoshizawa C, et al. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(10):701–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt067.

  48. Rakovitch E, Nofech-Mozes S, Hanna W, Baehner FL, Saskin R, Butler SM, et al. A population-based validation study of the DCIS Score predicting recurrence risk in individuals treated by breast-conserving surgery alone. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;152(2):389–98. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3464-6.

  49. Rakovitch E, Gray R, Baehner FL, Sutradhar R, Crager M, Gu S, et al. Refined estimates of local recurrence risks by DCIS score adjusting for clinicopathological features: a combined analysis of ECOG-ACRIN E5194 and Ontario DCIS cohort studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;169(2):359–69. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-018-4693-2.

  50. •• Van Zee KJ, Zabor EC, Di Donato R, Harmon B, Fox J, Morrow M, et al. Comparison of Local Recurrence Risk Estimates After Breast-Conserving Surgery for DCIS: DCIS Nomogram Versus Refined Oncotype DX Breast DCIS Score. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(10):3282–8 This study demonstrated concordance of the DCIS Nomogram with LR risk predicted by the Refined Oncotype DX Breast DCIS Score (RDS) in 92% of cases, while showing that the RDS underestimated risk in the discordant cases, which all had close margins.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Francis A, Thomas J, Fallowfield L, Wallis M, Bartlett JM, Brookes C, et al. Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS; the LORIS trial. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(16):2296–303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2015.07.017.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L, van Leeuwen-Stok AE, Skinner VP, Dif N, et al. Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ - The LORD study. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(12):1497–510. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2015.05.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Youngwirth LM, Boughey JC, Hwang ES. Surgery versus monitoring and endocrine therapy for low-risk DCIS: The COMET Trial. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2017;102(1):62–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Pilewskie M, Stempel M, Rosenfeld H, Eaton A, Van Zee KJ, Morrow M. Do LORIS trial eligibility criteria identify a ductal carcinoma in situ patient population at low risk of upgrade to invasive carcinoma? Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(11):3487–93. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5268-2.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  55. Pilewskie M, Olcese C, Patil S, Van Zee KJ. Women with low-risk DCIS eligible for the LORIS trial after complete surgical excision: how low is their risk after standard therapy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(13):4253–61. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5595-3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  56. Ward WH, DeMora L, Handorf E, Sigurdson ER, Ross EA, Daly JM, et al. Preoperative delays in the treatment of DCIS and the associated incidence of invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(2):386-96. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07844-4.

  57. Sagara Y, Freedman RA, Vaz-Luis I, Mallory MA, Wong SM, Aydogan F, et al. Patient prognostic score and associations with survival improvement offered by radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ: a population-based longitudinal cohort study. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(11):1190–6. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2015.65.1869.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 East 66th Street, New York, NY, 10065, USA

    Anita Mamtani & Kimberly J. Van Zee

Authors
  1. Anita Mamtani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kimberly J. Van Zee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kimberly J. Van Zee.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. The preparation of this article was supported in part by NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant No. P30CA008748 to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Non-Invasive Breast Cancer Diagnosis and Treatment

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mamtani, A., Van Zee, K.J. Treatment of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Considerations for Tailoring Therapy in the Contemporary Era. Curr Breast Cancer Rep 12, 98–106 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12609-020-00360-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12609-020-00360-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation