Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Microinvasive/Borderline Breast Cancer pp 109–115Cite as

Role of Genetic Profiling and Recurrence Scores in Treatment Planning for DCIS

  • Chapter
  • First Online:

  • 1198 Accesses

Abstract

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) comprises a heterogeneous group of noninvasive breast cancers. The widespread use of screening mammography, coupled with improvements in technology, has led to the identification of large numbers of women with DCIS, many of which are detected at relatively small sizes. However, significant debate surrounds the proper management of patients with DCIS who are eligible for breast-conserving therapy. Some advocate for routine use of adjuvant radiation, while others recommend only wide local excision. Most would agree that a more personalized approach is the goal. Currently, there are no standard clinicopathologic features that accurately predict which patients will experience a recurrence. Molecular profiling represents the most promising area of research to predict recurrence risk based on the individual tumor biology. In this chapter, we will review the data regarding the role of molecular diagnostics in patients with DCIS, their potential to guide treatment decisions, and their limitations to date. Further, we will discuss future directions of molecular profiling that may refine the treatment algorithm for patients diagnosed with DCIS.

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

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   159.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Ernster VL, Barclay J, Kerlikowske K, et al. Incidence of and treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Am Med Assoc. 1996;275:913–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Schwartz GF, Solin LJ, Olivotto IA, Ernster VL, Pressman PI, Consensus Conference Committee. Consensus conference on the treatment of in situ ductal carcinoma of the breast, April 22–25, 1999. Cancer. 2000;88:946–54.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Ernster VL, Barclay J, Kerlikowske K, et al. Mortality among women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in the population-based surveillance, epidemiology and end results program. Arch Intern Med. 2000;160:953–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:2672–85.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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;90:1371–88.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N, et al. Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-24 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1999;353:1993–2000.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Julien JP, Bijker N, Fentiman IS, et al. Radiotherapy in breast-conserving treatment for ductal carcinoma in situ: first results of the EORTC randomised phase III trial 10853. EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and EORTC Radiotherapy Group. Lancet. 2000;355:528–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Fisher ES, Welch HG. Avoiding the unintended consequences of growth in medical care: how might more be worse? J Am Med Assoc. 1999;281:446–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Winchester DJ, Menck HR, Winchester DP. The National Cancer Data Base report on the results of a large nonrandomized comparison of breast preservation and modified radical mastectomy. Cancer. 1997;80:162–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Winchester DJ, Menck HR, Winchester DP. National treatment trends for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Arch Surg. 1997;132:660–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Winchester DP, Menck HR, Osteen RT, Kraybill W. Treatment trends for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol. 1995;2:207–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Winchester DP, Osteen RT, Menck HR. The National Cancer Data Base report on breast carcinoma characteristics and outcome in relation to age. Cancer. 1996;78:1838–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J, 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;347:1233–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Benson JR, Wishart GC. Predictors of recurrence for ductal carcinoma in situ after breast-conserving surgery. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:e348–57.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Carlson RW, Allred DC, Anderson BO, et al. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: breast cancer. Fort Washington: National Comprehensive Cancer Network. 2008. http://www.nccnorg. Accessed 23 Aug 2013.

  16. Silverstein MJ. The University of Southern California/Van Nuys prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg. 2003;186:337–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Gauthier ML, Berman HK, Miller C, et al. Abrogated response to cellular stress identifies DCIS associated with subsequent tumor events and defines basal-like breast tumours. Cancer Cell. 2007;12:479–91.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Solin L, Gray R, Baehner F, et al. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105:701–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Hughes LL, Wang M, Page DL, et al. Local excision alone without irradiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a trial of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5319–24.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Mamounas E, Tang G, Fisher B, et al. Association between the 21-gene recurrence score assay and risk of locoregional recurrence in node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-14 and NSABP B-20. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1677–83.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Habel LA, Shak S, Jacobs MK, et al. A population-based study of tumor gene expression and risk of breast cancer death among lymph node-negative patients. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8:R25.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Kaur H, Mao S, Shah S, et al. Next-generation sequencing: a powerful tool for the discovery of molecular markers in breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Expert Rev Mol Diagn. 2013;13:151–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sarode VR, Han JS, Morris DH, Peng Y, Rao R. A comparative analysis of biomarker expression and molecular subtypes of pure ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast carcinoma by image analysis: relationship of the subtypes with histologic grade, Ki67, p53 overexpression, and DNA ploidy. Int J Breast Cancer. 2011;2011:217060.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Hoque A, Carter J, Xia W, et al. Loss of aurora A/STK15/BTAK overexpression correlates with transition of in situ to invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2003;12:1518–22.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Barnes N, Haywood P, Flint P, Knox WF, Bundred NJ. Survivin expression in in situ and invasive breast cancer relates to COX-2 expression and DCIS recurrence. Br J Cancer. 2006;94:253–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Bostrom P, Soderstrom M, Palokangas T, et al. Analysis of cyclins A, B1, D1 and E in breast cancer in relation to tumour grade and other prognostic factors. BMC Res Notes. 2009;2:140.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Cheang M, Chia SK, Voduc D, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:736–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Claus EB, Chu P, Howe CL, et al. Pathobiologic findings in DCIS of the breast: morphologic features, angiogenesis, HER-2/neu and hormone receptors. Exp Mol Path. 2001;70:303–16.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Barnes NL, Boland GP, Davenport A, Knox WF, Bundred NJ. Relationship between hormone receptor status and tumour size, grade and comedo necrosis in ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg. 2005;92:429–34.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010;2010:162–77.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Allred DC, Anderson SJ, Paik S, 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;30:1268–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Fisher ER, Gregorio RM, Fisher B, Redmond C, Vellios F, Sommers SC. The pathology of invasive breast cancer: a syllabus derived from the findings of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (protocol no. 4). Cancer. 1975;36:1–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Steinman S, Wang J, Bourne P, Yang Q, Tang P. Expression of cytokeratin markers, Er-alpha, PR, HER-2/neu, and EGFR in pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and DCIS with co-existing invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the breast. Ann Clin Lab Sci. 2007;37:127–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Giardina C, Serio G, Lepore G, et al. Pure ductal carcinoma in situ and in situ component of ductal invasive carcinoma of the breast: a preliminary morphometric study. J Exp Clin Cancer Res. 2003;22:279–88.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Ottesen GL. Carcinoma in situ of the female breast: a clinic-pathological, immunohistological, and DNA ploidy study. APMIS Suppl. 2003;108:1–67.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Buerger H, Otterbach F, Simon R, et al. Comparative genomic hybridization of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: evidence of multiple genetic pathways. J Pathol. 1999;187:396–402.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Buerger H, Otterbach F, Simon R, et al. Different genetic pathways in the evolution of invasive breast cancer are associated with distinct morphologic subtypes. J Pathol. 1999;189:521–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Jensen RA, Schuyler PA. Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15–25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy. Cancer. 1995;76:1197–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Sanders ME, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD, Page DL. The natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women treated by biopsy only revealed over 30 years of long-term follow-up. Cancer. 2005;103:2481–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Jang MH, Kim EJ, Choi Y, et al. FGFR1 is amplified during the progression of in situ to invasive breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14:R115.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Burkhardt L, Grob TJ, Hermann I, et al. Gene amplification in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;123:757–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Robanus-Maandag EC, Bosch CA, Kristel PM, et al. Association of C-MYC amplification with progression from the in situ to the invasive stage in C-MYC-amplified breast carcinomas. J Pathol. 2003;201:75–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Park K, Han S, Kim JH, Kim J, Shin E. HER2 status in pure ductal carcinoma in situ and in the intraductal and invasive components of invasive ductal carcinoma determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. Histopathology. 2006;48:702–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Hernandez L, Wilkerson PM, Lambros MB, et al. Genomic and mutational profiling of ductal carcinomas in situ and matched adjacent invasive breast cancers reveals intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity and clonal selection. J Pathol. 2012;227:42–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Heselmeyer-Haddad K, Berroa Garcia LY, Bradley A, et al. Single-cell genetic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer reveals enormous tumor heterogeneity yet conserved genomic imbalances and gain of MYC during progression. Am J Pathol. 2012;181:1807–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Vincent-Salomon A, Lucchesi C, Gruel N, et al. Integrated genomic and transcriptomic analysis of ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Cancer Res. 2008;14:1956–65.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Cowell CF, Weigelt B, Sakr R, et al. Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: revisited. Mol Oncol. 2013;7:859–69.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Mwenifumbo JC, Marra MA. Cancer genome-sequencing study design. Nat Rev Genet. 2013;14:321–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, 660 S. Euclid Avenue, Campus Box 8109, 63110, St. Louis, MO, USA

    Julie A. Margenthaler MD, FACS & Amy E. Cyr MD, FACS

Authors
  1. Julie A. Margenthaler MD, FACS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Amy E. Cyr MD, FACS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julie A. Margenthaler MD, FACS .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Lisa A. Newman

  2. Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA

    Jessica M. Bensenhaver

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer Science+Business Media New York

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Margenthaler, J., Cyr, A. (2015). Role of Genetic Profiling and Recurrence Scores in Treatment Planning for DCIS. In: Newman, L., Bensenhaver, J. (eds) Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Microinvasive/Borderline Breast Cancer. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2035-8_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4939-2035-8_11

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4939-2034-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4939-2035-8

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation