Abstract
The clinical management of high-risk breast lesions is intellectually challenging, continually evolving over time and occasionally controversial. The evaluation of all breast conditions begins with a thorough history and physical exam, appropriate breast imaging, and cytologic or histologic evaluation when indicated. Percutaneous core needle biopsy (CNB) has become the diagnostic modality of choice for both palpable and non-palpable breast lesions when histologic assessment is desired. In the treatment of breast cancer, preoperative diagnosis by CNB offers many advantages over open surgical biopsy. CNB provides preoperative clinical staging and tumor marker assessment, enables discussion of neoadjuvant options, and increases the rate of breast-conserving therapy. Yet, the majority of image-detected breast lesions are benign, and most patients who undergo a breast biopsy will not have a diagnosis of malignancy. When there is concordance among clinical history, physical examination, imaging, and needle biopsy pathology, CNB may obviate the need for surgery to prevent under- and overtreatment of patients. However, some CNB findings are considered “borderline” because the CNB reveals a nonmalignant diagnosis, but cancer might be present at the biopsy site, implying a sampling error.
Keywords
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsReferences
Silverstein MJ, Recht A, Lagios MD, et al. Special report: consensus conference III. Image-detected breast cancer: state-of-the-art diagnosis and treatment. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;209(4):504–20.
Silverstein M. Where’s the outrage? J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208(1):78–9.
Linebarger JH, Landercasper J, Ellis RL, et al. Core needle biopsy rate for new cancer diagnosis in an interdisciplinary breast center: evaluation of quality of care 2007–2008. Ann Surg. 2012;255(1):38–43.
Neal L, Tortorelli CL, Nassar A. Clinician’s guide to imaging and pathologic findings in benign breast disease. Mayo Clin Proc. 2010;85(3):274–9.
Corben AD, Edelweiss M, Brogi E. Challenges in the interpretation of breast core biopsies. Breast J. 2010;16 Suppl 1:S5–9.
Pinder SE, Ellis IO. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH)–current definitions and classification. Breast Cancer Res. 2003;5(5):254–7.
Deshaies I, Provencher L, Jacob S, et al. Factors associated with upgrading to malignancy at surgery of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed on core biopsy. Breast. 2011;20(1):50–5.
Hussain M, Cunnick GH. Management of lobular carcinoma in-situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia of the breast–a review. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37(4):279–89.
O’Malley FP. Lobular neoplasia: morphology, biological potential and management in core biopsies. Mod Pathol. 2010;23 Suppl 2:S14–25.
Masood S, Rosa M. Borderline breast lesions: diagnostic challenges and clinical implications. Adv Anat Pathol. 2011;18(3):190–8.
Fentiman IS. 8. The dilemma of in situ carcinoma of the breast. Int J Clin Pract. 2001;55(10):680–3.
Verschuur-Maes AH, van Deurzen CH, Monninkhof EM, van Diest PJ. Columnar cell lesions on breast needle biopsies: is surgical excision necessary? A systematic review. Ann Surg. 2012;255(2):259–65.
Sudarshan M, Meguerditchian AN, Mesurolle B, Meterissian S. Flat epithelial atypia of the breast: characteristics and behaviors. Am J Surg. 2011;201(2):245–50.
Verschuur-Maes AH, de Bruin PC, van Diest PJ. Epigenetic progression of columnar cell lesions of the breast to invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;136(3):705–15.
Bianchi S, Giannotti E, Vanzi E, et al. Radial scar without associated atypical epithelial proliferation on image-guided 14-gauge needle core biopsy: analysis of 49 cases from a single-centre and review of the literature. Breast. 2012;21(2):159–64.
Moore T, Lee AH. Expression of CD34 and bcl-2 in phyllodes tumours, fibroadenomas and spindle cell lesions of the breast. Histopathology. 2001;38(1):62–7.
Magro G, Bisceglia M, Michal M, Eusebi V. Spindle cell lipoma-like tumor, solitary fibrous tumor and myofibroblastoma of the breast: a clinico-pathological analysis of 13 cases in favor of a unifying histogenetic concept. Virchows Arch. 2002;440(3):249–60.
Magro G, Michal M, Bisceglia M. Benign spindle cell tumors of the mammary stroma: diagnostic criteria, classification, and histogenesis. Pathol Res Pract. 2001;197(7):453–66.
Brogi E. Benign and malignant spindle cell lesions of the breast. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2004;21(1):57–64.
Toker C, Tang CK, Whitely JF, Berkheiser SW, Rachman R. Benign spindle cell breast tumor. Cancer. 1981;48(7):1615–22.
Gail MH, Brinton LA, Byar DP, et al. Projecting individualized probabilities of developing breast cancer for white females who are being examined annually. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81(24):1879–86.
Costantino JP, Gail MH, Pee D, et al. Validation studies for models projecting the risk of invasive and total breast cancer incidence. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1999;91(18):1541–8.
Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer: report of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 Study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1998;90(18):1371–88.
Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, et al. Tamoxifen for the prevention of breast cancer: current status of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project P-1 study. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97(22):1652–62.
Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA. Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93(5):358–66.
Wellings SR, Jensen HM, Marcum RG. An atlas of subgross pathology of the human breast with special reference to possible precancerous lesions. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1975;55(2):231–73.
Bombonati A, Sgroi DC. The molecular pathology of breast cancer progression. J Pathol. 2011;223(2):307–17.
Krishnamurthy S, Bevers T, Kuerer H, Yang WT. Multidisciplinary considerations in the management of high-risk breast lesions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2012;198(2):W132–40.
Wood WC. Should the use of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy be increasing as it is? Breast. 2009;18 Suppl 3:S93–5.
Haj M, Weiss M, Loberant N, Cohen I. Inflammatory pseudotumor of the breast: case report and literature review. Breast J. 2003;9(5):423–5.
Haagensen CD, Lane N, Lattes R, Bodian C. Lobular neoplasia (so-called lobular carcinoma in situ) of the breast. Cancer. 1978;42(2):737–69.
Rosner D, Bedwani RN, Vana J, Baker HW, Murphy GP. Noninvasive breast carcinoma: results of a national survey by the American College of Surgeons. Ann Surg. 1980;192(2):139–47.
Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Rados MS. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast. A long-term follow-up study. Cancer. 1985;55(11):2698–708.
McLaren BK, Schuyler PA, Sanders ME, et al. Excellent survival, cancer type, and Nottingham grade after atypical lobular hyperplasia on initial breast biopsy. Cancer. 2006;107(6):1227–33.
Martinez V, Azzopardi JG. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: incidence and variants. Histopathology. 1979;3(6):467–88.
Azzopardi JG, Ahmed A, Millis RR. Problems in breast pathology. Major Probl Pathol. 1979;11:i–xvi, 1–466.
Jacobs TW, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ. Nonmalignant lesions in breast core needle biopsies: to excise or not to excise? Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26(9):1095–110.
Agoff SN, Lawton TJ. Papillary lesions of the breast with and without atypical ductal hyperplasia: can we accurately predict benign behavior from core needle biopsy? Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;122(3):440–3.
Ivan D, Selinko V, Sahin AA, Sneige N, Middleton LP. Accuracy of core needle biopsy diagnosis in assessing papillary breast lesions: histologic predictors of malignancy. Mod Pathol. 2004;17(2):165–71.
Irfan K, Brem RF. Surgical and mammographic follow-up of papillary lesions and atypical lobular hyperplasia diagnosed with stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy. Breast J. 2002;8(4):230–3.
MacGrogan G, Tavassoli FA. Central atypical papillomas of the breast: a clinicopathological study of 119 cases. Virchows Arch. 2003;443(5):609–17.
Kil WH, Cho EY, Kim JH, Nam SJ, Yang JH. Is surgical excision necessary in benign papillary lesions initially diagnosed at core biopsy? Breast. 2008;17(3):258–62.
Rizzo M, Lund MJ, Oprea G, Schniederjan M, Wood WC, Mosunjac M. Surgical follow-up and clinical presentation of 142 breast papillary lesions diagnosed by ultrasound-guided core-needle biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(4):1040–7.
Rizzo M, Linebarger J, Lowe MC, et al. Management of papillary breast lesions diagnosed on core-needle biopsy: clinical pathologic and radiologic analysis of 276 cases with surgical follow-up. J Am Coll Surg. 2012;214(3):280–7.
Linda A, Zuiani C, Furlan A, et al. Radial scars without atypia diagnosed at imaging-guided needle biopsy: how often is associated malignancy found at subsequent surgical excision, and do mammography and sonography predict which lesions are malignant? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194(4):1146–51.
Sohn VY, Causey MW, Steele SR, Keylock JB, Brown TA. The treatment of radial scars in the modern era–surgical excision is not required. Am Surg. 2010;76(5):522–5.
Sanders ME, Page DL, Simpson JF, Schuyler PA, Dale Plummer W, Dupont WD. Interdependence of radial scar and proliferative disease with respect to invasive breast carcinoma risk in patients with benign breast biopsies. Cancer. 2006;106(7):1453–61.
Jacobs TW, Byrne C, Colditz G, Connolly JL, Schnitt SJ. Radial scars in benign breast-biopsy specimens and the risk of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1999;340(6):430–6.
Wechselberger G, Schoeller T, Piza-Katzer H. Juvenile fibroadenoma of the breast. Surgery. 2002;132(1):106–7.
Goel NB, Knight TE, Pandey S, Riddick-Young M, de Paredes ES, Trivedi A. Fibrous lesions of the breast: imaging-pathologic correlation. Radiographics. 2005;25(6):1547–59.
Kuijper A, Buerger H, Simon R, et al. Analysis of the progression of fibroepithelial tumours of the breast by PCR-based clonality assay. J Pathol. 2002;197(5):575–81.
Bernstein L, Deapen D, Ross RK. The descriptive epidemiology of malignant cystosarcoma phyllodes tumors of the breast. Cancer. 1993;71(10):3020–4.
Cohn-Cedermark G, Rutqvist LE, Rosendahl I, Silfversward C. Prognostic factors in cystosarcoma phyllodes. A clinicopathologic study of 77 patients. Cancer. 1991;68(9):2017–22.
Norris HJ, Taylor HB. Relationship of histologic features to behavior of cystosarcoma phyllodes. Analysis of ninety-four cases. Cancer. 1967;20(12):2090–9.
Moffat CJ, Pinder SE, Dixon AR, Elston CW, Blamey RW, Ellis IO. Phyllodes tumours of the breast: a clinicopathological review of thirty-two cases. Histopathology. 1995;27(3):205–18.
Choi J, Koo JS. Comparative study of histological features between core needle biopsy and surgical excision in phyllodes tumor. Pathol Int. 2012;62(2):120–6.
Taira N, Takabatake D, Aogi K, et al. Phyllodes tumor of the breast: stromal overgrowth and histological classification are useful prognosis-predictive factors for local recurrence in patients with a positive surgical margin. Jpn J Clin Oncol. 2007;37(10):730–6.
Wahner-Roedler DL, Sebo TJ, Gisvold JJ. Hamartomas of the breast: clinical, radiologic, and pathologic manifestations. Breast J. 2001;7(2):101–5.
Panikar N, Agarwal S. Sclerosing lobular hyperplasia of the breast: fine-needle aspiration cytology findings–a case report. Diagn Cytopathol. 2004;31(5):340–1.
Fisher CJ, Hanby AM, Robinson L, Millis RR. Mammary hamartoma–a review of 35 cases. Histopathology. 1992;20(2):99–106.
Anani PA, Hessler C. Breast hamartoma with invasive ductal carcinoma. Report of two cases and review of the literature. Pathol Res Pract. 1996;192(12):1187–94.
Rosen PP. Mucocele-like tumors of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 1986;10(7):464–9.
Glazebrook K, Reynolds C. Original report. Mucocele-like tumors of the breast: mammographic and sonographic appearances. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2003;180(4):949–54.
Kim SM, Kim HH, Kang DK, et al. Mucocele-like tumors of the breast as cystic lesions: sonographic-pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;196(6):1424–30.
Fisher CJ, Millis RR. A mucocoele-like tumour of the breast associated with both atypical ductal hyperplasia and mucoid carcinoma. Histopathology. 1992;21(1):69–71.
Hamele-Bena D, Cranor ML, Rosen PP. Mammary mucocele-like lesions. Benign and malignant. Am J Surg Pathol. 1996;20(9):1081–5.
Weaver MG, Abdul-Karim FW, al-Kaisi N. Mucinous lesions of the breast. A pathological continuum. Pathol Res Pract. 1993;189(8):873–6.
Kim JY, Han BK, Choe YH, Ko YH. Benign and malignant mucocele-like tumors of the breast: mammographic and sonographic appearances. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2005;185(5):1310–6.
Jaffer S, Bleiweiss IJ, Nagi CS. Benign mucocele-like lesions of the breast: revisited. Mod Pathol. 2011;24(5):683–7.
Leibman AJ, Staeger CN, Charney DA. Mucocelelike lesions of the breast: mammographic findings with pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006;186(5):1356–60.
Carder PJ, Murphy CE, Liston JC. Surgical excision is warranted following a core biopsy diagnosis of mucocoele-like lesion of the breast. Histopathology. 2004;45(2):148–54.
Al-Nafussi A. Spindle cell tumours of the breast: practical approach to diagnosis. Histopathology. 1999;35(1):1–13.
Chan KW, Ghadially FN, Alagaratnam TT. Benign spindle cell tumour of breast–a variant of spindled cell lipoma or fibroma of breast? Pathology. 1984;16(3):331–6.
Begin LR. Intracisternal microtubular aggregates in classic (non chondroid) chordoma. J Submicrosc Cytol Pathol. 1995;27(3):295–301.
Damiani S, Miettinen M, Peterse JL, Eusebi V. Solitary fibrous tumour (myofibroblastoma) of the breast. Virchows Arch. 1994;425(1):89–92.
Eyden BP, Shanks JH, Ioachim E, Ali HH, Christensen L, Howat AJ. Myofibroblastoma of breast: evidence favoring smooth-muscle rather than myofibroblastic differentiation. Ultrastruct Pathol. 1999;23(4):249–57.
Vuitch MF, Rosen PP, Erlandson RA. Pseudoangiomatous hyperplasia of mammary stroma. Hum Pathol. 1986;17(2):185–91.
Ibrahim RE, Sciotto CG, Weidner N. Pseudoangiomatous hyperplasia of mammary stroma. Some observations regarding its clinicopathologic spectrum. Cancer. 1989;63(6):1154–60.
Wieman SM, Landercasper J, Johnson JM, et al. Tumoral pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia of the breast. Am Surg. 2008;74(12):1211–4.
Gow KW, Mayfield JK, Lloyd D, Shehata BM. Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia of the breast in two adolescent females. Am Surg. 2004;70(7):605–8.
Degnim AC, Frost MH, Radisky DC, et al. Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia and breast cancer risk. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(12):3269–77.
Powell CM, Cranor ML, Rosen PP. Pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia (PASH). A mammary stromal tumor with myofibroblastic differentiation. Am J Surg Pathol. 1995;19(3):270–7.
Stanley MW, Skoog L, Tani EM, Horwitz CA. Nodular fasciitis: spontaneous resolution following diagnosis by fine-needle aspiration. Diagn Cytopathol. 1993;9(3):322–4.
Haggitt RC, Booth JL. Bilateral fibromatosis of the breast in Gardner’s syndrome. Cancer. 1970;25(1):161–6.
Abraham SC, Reynolds C, Lee JH, et al. Fibromatosis of the breast and mutations involving the APC/beta-catenin pathway. Hum Pathol. 2002;33(1):39–46.
Rosen PP, Ernsberger D. Mammary fibromatosis. A benign spindle-cell tumor with significant risk for local recurrence. Cancer. 1989;63(7):1363–9.
el-Naggar A, Abdul-Karim FW, Marshalleck JJ, Sorensen K. Fine-needle aspiration of fibromatosis of the breast. Diagn Cytopathol. 1987;3(4):320–2.
Cederlund CG, Gustavsson S, Linell F, Moquist-Olsson I, Andersson I. Fibromatosis of the breast mimicking carcinoma at mammography. Br J Radiol. 1984;57(673):98–101.
Pettinato G, Manivel JC, Insabato L, De Chiara A, Petrella G. Plasma cell granuloma (inflammatory pseudotumor) of the breast. Am J Clin Pathol. 1988;90(5):627–32.
Sari A, Yigit S, Peker Y, Morgul Y, Coskun G, Cin N. Inflammatory pseudotumor of the breast. Breast J. 2011;17(3):312–4.
Website Cited in this Chapter
Concordance assessment of image-guided breast biopsies and management of borderline or high-risk lesions. https://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/index.php. Approved 15 Aug 2011.
Management of fibroadenomas of the breast. https://www.breastsurgeons.org/statements/index.php. Revised 29 Apr 2008
https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp#breast_screening
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Linebarger, J., Zellmer, J., Rizzo, M. (2015). Management of the High-Risk Breast Lesion. In: Riker, A. (eds) Breast Disease. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1145-5_5
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-1145-5_5
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-1144-8
Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-1145-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)