Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Flat Epithelial Atypia on Core Biopsy and Upgrade to Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

No consensus exists on whether flat epithelial atypia (FEA) diagnosed percutaneously should be surgically excised. A systematic review and meta-analysis of the frequency of upgrade to cancer or an atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) at surgical excision of FEA was performed.

Methods

Embase, MEDLINE, Scopus, and Web of Science databases from January 2003 to November 2015 were searched. The inclusion criteria required a manuscript in English with original data on FEA diagnosed percutaneously, data including the presence or absence of other concurrent high-risk lesions, and data including outcome of cancer at surgical excision. Studies were assessed for quality, and two reviewers extracted data. Random-effects meta-analysis was used to pool estimates. The impact of study-level characteristics was assessed by stratified meta-analysis and meta-regression.

Results

The inclusion criteria was met by 32 studies. A total of 1966 core needle biopsies showed pure FEA, and 1517 (77%) showed surgical excision. The proportions of patients with upgrade to cancer varied from 0 to 42%, with an overall pooled estimate of 11.1%. Heterogeneity was observed, with the greatest impact based on whether a study included cases of FEA diagnosed before 2003. With restriction of the investigation to 16 higher-quality studies, the cancer upgrade pooled estimate was 7.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 5.4–10.4%), and the rate of invasive cancer was 3% (95% CI 1.9–4.5%). For upgrade to ADH, data from 22 studies including 937 patients were analyzed. The proportion of patients upgraded to ADH ranged from 0 to 60%, with a pooled estimate of 17.9% overall and 18.6% among high-quality studies.

Conclusions

With patient management change potential for approximately 25% of patients, this analysis supports a general recommendation for surgical excision of FEA diagnosed by core biopsy.

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
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Becker AK, Gordon PB, Harrison DA, et al. Flat ductal intraepithelial neoplasia 1A diagnosed at stereotactic core needle biopsy: is excisional biopsy indicated? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200:682–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tavassoli FA, Hoefler H, Rosai JH, Ellis RIO. Intraductal proliferative lesions. In: Tavassoli FA, Devilee P, editors. World Health Organization classification of tumours: pathology and genetics of tumours of the breast and female genital organs. Lyon: IARC Press; 2003, pp 63–73.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kunju LP, Kleer CG. Significance of flat epithelial atypia on mammotome core needle biopsy: should it be excised? Hum Pathol. 2007;38:35–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Said SM, Visscher DW, Nassar A, et al. Flat epithelial atypia and risk of breast cancer: a Mayo cohort study. Cancer. 2015;121:1548–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Mooney KL, Bassett LW, Apple SK. Upgrade rates of high-risk breast lesions diagnosed on core needle biopsy: a single-institution experience and literature review. Mod Pathol. 2016;29:1471–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schnitt SJ, Vincent-Salomon A. Columnar cell lesions of the breast. Adv Anat Pathol. 2003;10:113–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Stroup DF, Berlin JA, Morton SC, et al. Meta-analysis of observational studies in epidemiology: a proposal for reporting. Meta-analysis Of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) group. JAMA. 2000;283:2008–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. Br Med J. 2003;327:557–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Schwarzer G, Carpenter JR, Rucker G. META: general package for meta-analysis. R Package Version 4.3-2. Cham: Springer International Publishing; 2015.

  10. Viechtbauer W. Conducting meta-analyses in R with the metafor package. J Stat Softw. 2010;36:1–48.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. National Comprehensive Cancer Center. National Comprehensive Cancer Network Clinical Guidelines, Breast Cancer Risk Reduction, v1, 2017. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/breast_risk.pdf. Accessed 16 Dec 2016.

  12. Baum JK, Hanna LG, Acharyya S, et al. Use of BI-RADS 3: probably benign category in the American College of Radiology Imaging Network Digital Mammographic Imaging Screening Trial. Radiology. 2011;260:61–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  13. Esserman L, Yau C. Rethinking the standard for ductal carcinoma in situ treatment. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:881–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Park TS, Hwang ES. Current trends in the management of ductal carcinoma in situ. Oncology Williston Park. 2016;30:823–31.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Hartmann LC, Degnim AC, Santen RJ, Dupont WD, Ghosh K. Atypical hyperplasia of the breast: risk assessment and management options. N Engl J Med. 2015;372:78–89.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Hartmann LC, Radisky DC, Frost MH, et al. Understanding the premalignant potential of atypical hyperplasia through its natural history: a longitudinal cohort study. Cancer Prev Res Phila. 2014;7:211–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Degnim AC, Dupont WD, Radisky DC, et al. Extent of atypical hyperplasia stratifies breast cancer risk in 2 independent cohorts of women. Cancer. 2016;122:2971–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Coopey SB, Mazzola E, Buckley JM, et al. The role of chemoprevention in modifying the risk of breast cancer in women with atypical breast lesions. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;136:627–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. King TA, Pilewskie M, Muhsen S, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ: a 29-year longitudinal experience evaluating clinicopathologic features and breast cancer risk. J Clin Oncol. 2015;333945–52.

  20. Villa A, Chiesa F, Massa T, et al. Flat epithelial atypia: comparison between 9-gauge and 11-gauge devices. Clinl Breast Cancer. 2013;13:450–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Lavoue V, Roger CM, Poilblanc M, et al. Pure flat epithelial atypia (DIN 1a) on core needle biopsy: study of 60 biopsies with follow-up surgical excision. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;125:121–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Darling ML, Smith DN, Lester SC, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in situ as revealed by large-core needle breast biopsy: results of surgical excision. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2000;175:1341–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Lim CN, Ho BC, Bay BH, Yip G, Tan PH. Nuclear morphometry in columnar cell lesions of the breast: is it useful? J Clin Pathol. 2006;59:1283–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Martel M, Barron-Rodriguez P, Tolgay Ocal I, Dotto J, Tavassoli FA. Flat DIN 1 (flat epithelial atypia) on core needle biopsy: 63 cases identified retrospectively among 1751 core biopsies performed over an 8-year period (1992–1999). Virchows Arch. 2007;451:883–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Piubello Q, Parisi A, Eccher A, Barbazeni G, Franchini Z, Iannucci A. Flat epithelial atypia on core needle biopsy: which is the right management? Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:1078–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Chivukula M, Bhargava R, Tseng G, Dabbs DJ. Clinicopathologic implications of “flat epithelial atypia” in core needle biopsy specimens of the breast. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;131:802–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Senetta R, Campanino PP, Mariscotti G, et al. Columnar cell lesions associated with breast calcifications on vacuum-assisted core biopsies: clinical, radiographic, and histological correlations. Mod Pathol. 2009;22:762–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Hayes BD, Quinn CM. Pathology of B3 lesions of the breast. Diagn Histopathol. 2009;15:459–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Darvishian F, Singh B, Simsir A, Ye W, Cangiarella JF. Atypia on breast core needle biopsies: reproducibility and significance. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2009;39:270–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Tomasino RM, Morello V, Gullo A, et al. Assessment of “grading” with Ki-67 and c-kit immunohistochemical expressions may be a helpful tool in management of patients with flat epithelial atypia (FEA) and columnar cell lesions (CCLs) on core breast biopsy. J Cell Physiol. 2009;221:343–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Noske A, Pahl S, Fallenberg E, et al. Flat epithelial atypia is a common subtype of B3 breast lesions and is associated with noninvasive cancer but not with invasive cancer in final excision histology. Hum Pathol. 2010;41:522–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Lee TY, Macintosh RF, Rayson D, Barnes PJ. Flat epithelial atypia on breast needle core biopsy: a retrospective study with clinical-pathological correlation. Breast J. 2010;16:377–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Ingegnoli A, d’Aloia C, Frattaruolo A, et al. Flat epithelial atypia and atypical ductal hyperplasia: carcinoma underestimation rate. Breast J. 2010;16:55–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Noel JC, Buxant F, Engohan-Aloghe C. Immediate surgical resection of residual microcalcifications after a diagnosis of pure flat epithelial atypia on core biopsy: a word of caution. Surg Oncol. 2010;19:243–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Flegg KM, Flaherty JJ, Bicknell AM, Jain S. Surgical outcomes of borderline breast lesions detected by needle biopsy in a breast screening program. World J Surg Oncol. 2010;8:78.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  36. Sohn V, Porta R, Brown T. Flat epithelial atypia of the breast on core needle biopsy: an indication for surgical excision. Mil Med. 2011;176:1347–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Rakha EA, Lee AH, Jenkins JA, Murphy AE, Hamilton LJ, Ellis IO. Characterization and outcome of breast needle core biopsy diagnoses of lesions of uncertain malignant potential (B3) in abnormalities detected by mammographic screening. Int J Cancer. 2011;129:1417–24.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Solorzano S, Mesurolle B, Omeroglu A, et al. Flat epithelial atypia of the breast: pathological-radiological correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197:740–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Verschuur-Maes AH, Witkamp AJ, de Bruin PC, van der Wall E, van Diest PJ. Progression risk of columnar cell lesions of the breast diagnosed in core needle biopsies. Int J Cancer. 2011;129:2674–80.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Peres A, Barranger E, Becette V, Boudinet A, Guinebretiere JM, Cherel P. Rates of upgrade to malignancy for 271 cases of flat epithelial atypia (FEA) diagnosed by breast core biopsy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;133:659–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Uzoaru I, Morgan BR, Liu ZG, et al. Flat epithelial atypia with and without atypical ductal hyperplasia: to re-excise or not: results of a 5-year prospective study. Virchows Arch. 2012;461:419–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Bianchi S, Bendinelli B, Castellano I, et al. Morphological parameters of flat epithelial atypia (FEA) in stereotactic vacuum-assisted needle core biopsies do not predict the presence of malignancy on subsequent surgical excision. Virchows Arch. 2012;461:405–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Biggar MA, Kerr KM, Erzetich LM, Bennett IC. Columnar cell change with atypia (flat epithelial atypia) on breast core biopsy-outcomes following open excision. Breast J. 2012;18:578–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Yamaguchi R, Tanaka M, Tse GM, et al. Pure flat epithelial atypia is uncommon in subsequent breast excisions for atypical epithelial proliferation. Cancer Sci. 2012;103:1580–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Polom K, Murawa D, Murawa P. Flat epithelial atypia diagnosed on core needle biopsy: clinical challenge. Rep Pract Oncol Radiother. 2012;17:93–6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  46. Khoumais NA, Scaranelo AM, Moshonov H, et al. Incidence of breast cancer in patients with pure flat epithelial atypia diagnosed at core-needle biopsy of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:133–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Ceugnart L, Doualliez V, Chauvet MP, et al. Pure flat epithelial atypia: is there a place for routine surgery? Diagn Interv Imaging. 2013;94:861–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Uzan C, Mazouni C, Ferchiou M, et al. A model to predict the risk of upgrade to malignancy at surgery in atypical breast lesions discovered on percutaneous biopsy specimens. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2850–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Dialani V, Venkataraman S, Frieling G, Schnitt SJ, Mehta TS. Does isolated flat epithelial atypia on vacuum-assisted breast core biopsy require surgical excision? Breast J. 2014;20:606–14.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Calhoun BC, Sobel A, White RL, et al. Management of flat epithelial atypia on breast core biopsy may be individualized based on correlation with imaging studies. Mod Pathol. 2015;28:670–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We sincerely thank to Marilyn Churchward for assistance with manuscript preparation.

Conflict of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Anatoliy V. Rudin MD, Aodhnait Fahy BMBCh & Amy C. Degnim MD

  2. Biomedical Statistics and Informatics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Tanya L. Hoskin MS

  3. Mayo Clinic Libraries, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Ann M. Farrell MD

  4. Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA

    Aziza Nassar MD

  5. Breast Clinic, General Internal Medicine, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Karthik Ghosh MD

Authors
  1. Anatoliy V. Rudin MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tanya L. Hoskin MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Aodhnait Fahy BMBCh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Ann M. Farrell MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Aziza Nassar MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Karthik Ghosh MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Amy C. Degnim MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Amy C. Degnim MD.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 42 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rudin, A.V., Hoskin, T.L., Fahy, A. et al. Flat Epithelial Atypia on Core Biopsy and Upgrade to Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 24, 3549–3558 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6059-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6059-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation