Surgical Upstaging Rates for Vacuum Assisted Biopsy Proven DCIS: Implications for Active Surveillance Trials
- 449 Downloads
This study was designed to determine invasive cancer upstaging rates at surgical excision following vacuum-assisted biopsy of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) among women meeting eligibility for active surveillance trials.
Patients with vacuum-assisted, biopsy-proven DCIS at a single center from 2008 to 2015 were retrospectively reviewed. Imaging and pathology reports were interrogated for the imaging appearance, tumor grade, hormone receptor status, and presence of comedonecrosis. Subsequent surgical reports were reviewed for upstaging to invasive disease. Cases were classified by eligibility criteria for the COMET, LORIS, and LORD DCIS active surveillance trials.
Of 307 DCIS diagnoses, 15 (5%) were low, 95 (31%) intermediate, and 197 (64%) high nuclear grade. The overall upstage rate to invasive disease was 17% (53/307). Eighty-one patients were eligible for the COMET Trial, 74 for the LORIS trial, and 10 for the LORD Trial, although LORIS trial eligibility also included real-time, multiple central pathology review, including elements not routinely reported. The upstaging rates to invasive disease were 6% (5/81), 7% (5/74), and 10% (1/10) for the COMET, LORIS, and LORD trials, respectively. Among upstaged cancers (n = 5), four tumors were Stage IA invasive ductal carcinoma and one was Stage IIA invasive lobular carcinoma; all were node-negative.
DCIS upstaging rates in women eligible for active surveillance trials are low (6–10%), and in this series, all those with invasive disease were early-stage, node-negative. The careful patient selection for DCIS active surveillance trials has a low risk of missing occult invasive cancer and additional studies will determine clinical outcomes.
The authors are grateful for the feedback from Adele Francis for the interpretation of results and manuscript editing. The authors have no financial conflicts of interest to disclose.
- 6.Alvarado M, Ozanne E, Esserman L. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer. American Society of Clinical Oncology Meeting. American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book/ASCO. 2012:e40–45.Google Scholar
- 11.Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L, 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 12.Comparison of operative versus medical endocrine therapy for low risk DCIS: the COMET Trial. http://www.pcori.org/research-results/2016/comparison-operative-versus-medical-endocrine-therapy-low-risk-dcis-comet. Accessed 8 Aug 2016.
- 13.LORIS A phase III trial of surgery versus active monitoring for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). http://www.birmingham.ac.uk/research/activity/mds/trials/crctu/trials/loris/index.aspx. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.
- 14.Management of low-risk DCIS (LORD). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02492607. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.
- 15.Ryser MD, Worni M, Turner EL, Marks JR, Durrett R, Hwang ES. Outcomes of active surveillance for ductal carcinoma in situ: a computational risk analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108(5).Google Scholar
- 19.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.Google Scholar
- 23.Familial breast cancer: classification, care and managing breast cancer and related risks in people with a family history of breast cancer. https://www.nice.org.uk/guidance/cg164. Accessed 19 Nov 2016.