Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Lobular Breast Lesions

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Practical Breast Pathology

Part of the book series: Practical Anatomic Pathology ((PAP))

Abstract

Invasive lobular carcinoma is the most common “special type” of breast carcinoma, accounting for 5–15% of invasive carcinomas. Lobular carcinomas have characteristic cytologic features and dyscohesive architecture, with one of the molecular hallmarks being loss of the cell adhesion molecule E-cadherin in atypical lobular hyperplasia, lobular carcinoma in situ, and invasive lobular carcinoma. In its classic form, invasive lobular carcinoma is usually estrogen receptor+/Her2- and shares other molecular alterations with luminal A/low-grade carcinomas. We present classic and variant forms of invasive and in situ lobular neoplasia, with clinical and radiologic correlation, and updated immunohistochemical and molecular features.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Lakhani SR, Rakha E, Simpson PT. Invasive lobular carcinoma. In: Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ, editors. WHO classification of Tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC; 2012. p. 40–5.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hoda SA, Brogi E, Koerner FC, Rosen PP. Chapter 32, Invasive lobular carcinoma. In: Rosen’s breast pathology. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2014. p. 855–92.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Eheman CR, Shaw KM, Ryerson AB, Miller JW, Ajani UA, White MC. The changing incidence of in situ and invasive ductal and lobular breast carcinomas: United States, 1999–2004. Cancer Epidemiol Biomark Prev. 2009;18(6):1763–9.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dossus L, Benusiglio PR. Lobular breast cancer: incidence and genetic and non-genetic risk factors. Breast Cancer Res. 2015;17:37.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Brem RF, Ioffe M, Rapelyea JA, Yost KG, Weigert JM, Bertrand ML, et al. Invasive lobular carcinoma: detection with mammography, sonography, MRI, and breast-specific gamma imaging. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;192(2):379–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Savaridas SL, Bristow GD, Cox J. Invasive lobular Cancer of the breast: a pictorial essay of imaging findings on mammography, sonography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Can Assoc Radiol J. 2016;67(3):263–76.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Jacobs C, Clemons M, Addison C, Robertson S, Arnaout A. Issues affecting the loco-regional and systemic Management of Patients with invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast J. 2016;22(1):45–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chamming’s F, Kao E, Aldis A, Ferré R, Omeroglu A, Reinhold C, et al. Imaging features and conspicuity of invasive lobular carcinomas on digital breast tomosynthesis. Br J Radiol. 2017;90(1073):20170128.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Christgen M, Steinemann D, Kühnle E, Länger F, Gluz O, Harbeck N, et al. Lobular breast cancer: clinical, molecular and morphological characteristics. Pathol Res Pract. 2016;212(7):583–97.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Purushotham A, Pinder S, Cariati M, Harries M, Goldhirsch A. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy: not the best option in estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, invasive classical lobular carcinoma of the breast? J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(22):3552–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lester SC, Connolly JL, Amin MB. College of American Pathologists protocol for the reporting of ductal carcinoma in situ. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133(1):13–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Fitzgibbons PL, Bose S, Chen Y-Y, Connolly JL, de Baca ME, Edgerton M, et al. Protocol for the examination of specimens from patients with ductal carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) of the Breast. College of American Pathologists Cancer Protocol Template. http://www.cap.org/ShowProperty?nodePath=/UCMCon/Contribution%20Folders/WebContent/pdf/cp-breast-dcis-18protocol-4100.pdf. Accessed 17 Feb 2018.

  13. Grin A, Horne G, Ennis M, O’Malley FP. Measuring extent of ductal carcinoma in situ in breast excision specimens: a comparison of 4 methods. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009;133(1):31–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Dabbs DJ, Schnitt SJ, Geyer FC, Weigelt B, Baehner FL, Decker T, et al. Lobular neoplasia of the breast revisited with emphasis on the role of E-cadherin immunohistochemistry. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37(7):e1–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. McCart Reed AE, Kutasovic JR, Lakhani SR, Simpson PT. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: morphology, biomarkers and 'omics. Breast Cancer Res. 2015;17:12.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schnitt SJ, Collins L. Biopsy interpretation of the breast. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2018. p. 315–26.

    Google Scholar 

  17. 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Brogi E, Murray MP, Corben AD. Lobular carcinoma, not only a classic. Breast J. 2010;16(Suppl 1):S10–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Schnitt SJ, Collins L. Chapter 10, invasive breast cancer: invasive lobular carcinoma. In: Biopsy interpretation of the breast. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2018. p. 315–26.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Weidner N, Semple JP. Pleomorphic variant of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Hum Pathol. 1992;23(10):1167–71.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Iorfida M, Maiorano E, Orvieto E, Maisonneuve P, Bottiglieri L, Rotmensz N, et al. Invasive lobular breast cancer: subtypes and outcome. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;133(2):713–23.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Monhollen L, Morrison C, Ademuyiwa FO, Chandrasekhar R, Khoury T. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma: a distinctive clinical and molecular breast cancer type. Histopathology. 2012;61(3):365–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Tan PH, Harada O, Thike AA, Tse GM. Histiocytoid breast carcinoma: an enigmatic lobular entity. J Clin Pathol. 2011;64(8):654–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Costarelli L, Campagna D, Ascarelli A, Cavaliere F, Colavito MH, Ponzani T, et al. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma: is it more similar to a classic lobular cancer or to a high-grade ductal cancer? Breast Cancer (Dove Med Press). 2017;9:581–6.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lien HC, Chen YL, Juang YL, Jeng YM. Frequent alterations of HER2 through mutation, amplification, or overexpression in pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;150(2):447–55.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Simpson PT, Reis-Filho JS, Lambros MB, Jones C, Steele D, Mackay A, et al. Molecular profiling pleomorphic lobular carcinomas of the breast: evidence for a common molecular genetic pathway with classic lobular carcinomas. J Pathol. 2008;215(3):231–44.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Yoder BJ, Wilkinson EJ, Massoll NA. Molecular and morphologic distinctions between infiltrating ductal and lobular carcinoma of the breast. Breast J. 2007;13(2):172–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Dieci MV, Smutná V, Scott V, Yin G, Xu R, Vielh P, et al. Whole exome sequencing of rare aggressive breast cancer histologies. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;156(1):21–32.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Ellis IO, Simpson JF. Grading. In: Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ, editors. WHO classification of Tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC; 2012. p. 19–20.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Lester S, Weaver D, Morrow M. Staging. In: Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ, editors. WHO classification of Tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC; 2012. p. 20–2.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hortobagyi GN, Connolly JL, D’Orsi CJ, Edge SB, Mittendorf ES, Rugo HA, et al. Breast. In: American joint committee on Cancer, AJCC Cancer staging manual. 8th ed. Chicago: Springer; 2017. p. 589–628.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Gamallo C, Palacios J, Suarez A, Pizarro A, Navarro P, Quintanilla M, et al. Correlation of E-cadherin expression with differentiation grade and histological type in breast carcinoma. Am J Pathol. 1993;142(4):987–93.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Moll R, Mitze M, Frixen UH, Birchmeier W. Differential loss of E-cadherin expression in infiltrating ductal and lobular breast carcinomas. Am J Pathol. 1993;143(6):1731–42.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  34. Berx G, Cleton-Jansen AM, Nollet F, de Leeuw WJ, van de Vijver M, Cornelisse C, et al. E-cadherin is a tumour/invasion suppressor gene mutated in human lobular breast cancers. EMBO J. 1995;14(24):6107–15.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. Berx G, Becker KF, Höfler H, van Roy F. Mutations of the human E-cadherin (CDH1) gene. Hum Mutat. 1998;12(4):226–37.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. De Leeuw WJ, Berx G, Vos CB, Peterse JL, Van de Vijver MJ, Litvinov S, et al. Simultaneous loss of e-cadherin and catenins in invasive lobular breast cancer and lobular carcinoma in situ. J Pathol. 1997;183:404–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Gonzalez MA, Pinder SE, Wencyk PM, Bell JA, Elston CW, Nicholson RI, et al. An immunohistochemical examination of the expression of E-cadherin, alpha- and beta/gamma-catenins, and alpha2- and beta1-integrins in invasive breast cancer. J Pathol. 1999;187(5):523–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Berx G, Van Roy F. The E-cadherin/catenin complex: an important gatekeeper in breast cancer tumorigenesis and malignant progression. Breast Cancer Res. 2001;3(5):289–93.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. de Deus MR, Wludarski SC, Carvalho FM, Bacchi CE. Immunohistochemistry applied to the differential diagnosis between ductal and lobular carcinoma of the breast. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2013;21(1):1–12.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Canas-Marques R, Schnitt SJ. E-cadherin immunohistochemistry in breast pathology: uses and pitfalls. Histopathology. 2016;68(1):57–69.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Hansford S, Kaurah P, Li-Chang H, Woo M, Senz J, Pinheiro H, et al. Hereditary diffuse gastric Cancer syndrome: CDH1 mutations and beyond. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1(1):23–32.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Corso G, Intra M, Trentin C, Veronesi P, Galimberti V. CDH1 germline mutations and hereditary lobular breast cancer. Familial Cancer. 2016;15(2):215–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Ciriello G, Gatza ML, Beck AH, Wilkerson MD, Rhie SK, Pastore A, et al. Comprehensive molecular portraits of invasive lobular breast Cancer. Cell. 2015;163(2):506–19.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  44. Desmedt C, Zoppoli G, Gundem G, Pruneri G, Larsimont D, Fornili M, et al. Genomic characterization of primary invasive lobular breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(16):1872–81.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Desmedt C, Zoppoli G, Sotiriou C, Salgado R. Transcriptomic and genomic features of invasive lobular breast cancer. Semin Cancer Biol. 2017;44:98–105.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Karayiannakis AJ, Nakopoulou L, Gakiopoulou H, Keramopoulos A, Davaris PS, Pignatelli M. Expression patterns of beta-catenin in in situ and invasive breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2001;27(1):31–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Sarrio´ D, Perez-Mies B, Hardisson D, Moreno-Bueno G, Suárez A, Cano A, et al. Cytoplasmic localization of p120ctn and E-cadherin loss characterize lobular breast carcinoma from preinvasive to metastatic lesions. Oncogene. 2004;23:3272–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Mastracci TL, Tjan S, Bane AL, O’Malley FP, Andrulis IL. E-cadherin alterations in atypical lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Mod Pathol. 2005;18(6):741–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Dabbs DJ, Bhargava R, Chivukula M. Lobular versus ductal breast neoplasms: the diagnostic utility of p120 catenin. Am J Surg Pathol. 2007;31(3):427–37.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Dabbs DJ, Kaplai M, Chivukula M, Kanbour A, Kanbour-Shakir A, Carter GJ. The spectrum of morphomolecular abnormalities of the E-cadherin/catenin complex in pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2007;15(3):260–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Da Silva L, Parry S, Reid L, Keith P, Waddell N, Kossai M, et al. Aberrant expression of E-cadherin in lobular carcinomas of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(5):773–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Rakha EA, Patel A, Powe DG, Benhasouna A, Green AR, Lambros MB, et al. Clinical and biological significance of E-cadherin protein expression in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34(10):1472–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Acs G, Lawton TJ, Rebbeck TR, LiVolsi VA, Zhang PJ. Differential expression of E-cadherin in lobular and ductal neoplasms of the breast and its biologic and diagnostic implications. Am J Clin Pathol. 2001;115(1):85–98.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Wheeler DT, Tai LH, Bratthauer GL, Waldner DL, Tavassoli FA. Tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast: an analysis of 27 cases of a tumor with a hybrid morphology and immunoprofile. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28(12):1587–93.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Kuroda H, Tamaru J, Takeuchi I, Ohnisi K, Sakamoto G, Adachi A, et al. Expression of E-cadherin, alpha-catenin, and beta-catenin in tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast. Virchows Arch. 2006;448(4):500–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Esposito NN, Chivukula M, Dabbs DJ. The ductal phenotypic expression of the E-cadherin/catenin complex in tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast: an immunohistochemical and clinicopathologic study. Mod Pathol. 2007;20(1):130–8.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Naidoo K, Beardsley B, Carder PJ, Deb R, Fish D, Girling A, et al. Accuracy of classification of invasive lobular carcinoma on needle core biopsy of the breast. J Clin Pathol. 2016;69(12):1122–3.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Rakha EA, Abd El Rehim D, Pinder SE, Lewis SA, Ellis IO. E-cadherin expression in invasive non-lobular carcinoma of the breast and its prognostic significance. Histopathology. 2005;46(6):685–93.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Rakha EA, Gill MS, El-Sayed ME, Khan MM, Hodi Z, Blamey RW, et al. The biological and clinical characteristics of breast carcinoma with mixed ductal and lobular morphology. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;114(2):243–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Arps DP, Healy P, Zhao L, Kleer CG, Pang JC. Invasive ductal carcinoma with lobular features: a comparison study to invasive ductal and invasive lobular carcinomas of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;138(3):719–26.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE, Harris JR, Khan SA, Horton J, et al. Society of Surgical Oncology-American Society for Radiation Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole-breast irradiation in stages I and II invasive breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;88(3):553–64.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  62. Korkola JE, DeVries S, Fridlyand J, Hwang ES, Estep AL, Chen YY, et al. Differentiation of lobular versus ductal breast carcinomas by expression microarray analysis. Cancer Res. 2003;63(21):7167–75.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Zhao H, Langerød A, Ji Y, Nowels KW, Nesland JM, Tibshirani R, et al. Different gene expression patterns in invasive lobular and ductal carcinomas of the breast. Mol Biol Cell. 2004;15(6):2523–36.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Bertucci F, Orsetti B, Nègre V, Finetti P, Rougé C, Ahomadegbe JC, et al. Lobular and ductal carcinomas of the breast have distinct genomic and expression profiles. Oncogene. 2008;27(40):5359–72.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Weigelt B, Geyer FC, Natrajan R, Lopez-Garcia MA, Ahmad AS, Savage K, et al. The molecular underpinning of lobular histological growth pattern: a genome-wide transcriptomic analysis of invasive lobular carcinomas and grade- and molecular subtype-matched invasive ductal carcinomas of no special type. J Pathol. 2010;220(1):45–57.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, Kim C, Baker J, Cronin M, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative primary breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2817–26.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Paik A, Tang G, Shuk S, Kim C, Baker J, Kim W, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3726–34.

    CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  68. Conlon N, Ross DS, Howard J, Catalano JP, Dickler MN, Tan LK. Is there a role for Oncotype dx testing in invasive lobular carcinoma? Breast J. 2015;21(5):514–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  69. Tsai ML, Lillemoe TJ, Finkelstein MJ, Money JE, Susnik B, Grimm E, et al. Utility of Oncotype DX risk assessment in patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. Clin Breast Cancer. 2016 Feb;16(1):45–50.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  70. Felts JL, Zhu J, Han B, Smith SJ, Truica CI. An analysis of Oncotype DX recurrence scores and Clinicopathologic characteristics in invasive lobular breast Cancer. Breast J. 2017;23(6):677–86.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  71. Michaut M, Chin SF, Majewski I, Severson TM, Bismeijer T, de Koning L, et al. Integration of genomic, transcriptomic and proteomic data identifies two biologically distinct subtypes of invasive lobular breast cancer. Sci Rep. 2016;6:18517.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  72. Moten A, Obirieze A, Wilson LL. Characterizing lobular carcinoma of the male breast using the SEER database. J Surg Res. 2013;185(2):e71–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Maguire A, Brogi E. Sentinel lymph nodes for breast carcinoma: an update on current practice. Histopathology. 2016;68(1):152–67.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  74. Rosen PP. Chapter 44, pathologic examination of breast and lymph node specimens, including sentinel lymph nodes. In: Rosen’s breast pathology. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 1034–102.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Cserni G, Bianchi S, Vezzosi V, Peterse H, Sapino A, Arisio R, et al. The value of cytokeratin immunohistochemistry in the evaluation of axillary sentinel lymph nodes in patients with lobular breast carcinoma. J Clin Pathol. 2006;59(5):518–22.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  76. Patel A, D’Alfonso T, Cheng E, Hoda SA. Sentinel lymph nodes in classic invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: cytokeratin immunostain ensures detection, and precise determination of extent, of involvement. Am J Surg Pathol. 2017;41(11):1499–505.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz PW, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2011;305(6):569–75.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Giuliano AE, Ballman KV, McCall L, Beitsch PD, Brennan MB, Kelemen PR, et al. Effect of axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection on 10-year overall survival among women with invasive breast Cancer and sentinel node metastasis: the ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318(10):918–26.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  79. Weaver DL, Ashikaga T, Krag DN, Skelly JM, Anderson SJ, Harlow SP, et al. Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(5):412–21.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  80. Sapino A, Cassoni P, Ferrero E, Bongiovanni M, Righi L, Fortunati N, et al. Estrogen receptor alpha is a novel marker expressed by follicular dendritic cells in lymph nodes and tumor-associated lymphoid infiltrates. Am J Pathol. 2003;163(4):1313–20.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  81. Grube BJ, Hansen NM, Ye X, Giuliano AE. Tumor characteristics predictive of sentinel node metastases in 105 consecutive patients with invasive lobular carcinoma. Am J Surg. 2002;184(4):372–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  82. Classe JM, Loussouarn D, Campion L, Fiche M, Curtet C, Dravet F, et al. Validation of axillary sentinel lymph node detection in the staging of early lobular invasive breast carcinoma: a prospective study. Cancer. 2004;100(5):935–41.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  83. Jensen AJ, Naik AM, Pommier RF, Vetto JT, Troxell ML. Factors influencing accuracy of axillary sentinel lymph node frozen section for breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2010;199(5):629–35.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  84. Taras AR, Hendrickson NA, Pugliese MS, Lowe KA, Atwood M, Beatty JD. Intraoperative evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg. 2009;197(5):643–6; discussion 646–7

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  85. Creager AJ, Geisinger KR, Perrier ND, Shen P, Shaw JA, Young PR, Case D, Levine EA. Intraoperative imprint cytologic evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes for lobular carcinoma of the breast. Ann Surg. 2004;239(1):61–6.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  86. Howard-McNatt M, Geisinger KR, Stewart JH 4th, Shen P, Levine EA. Is intraoperative imprint cytology evaluation still feasible for the evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes for lobular carcinoma of the breast? Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(3):929–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  87. Tavassoli FA, Eusebi V. Chapter8, major variants of carcinoma: invasive lobular carcinoma. In: Tumors of the mammary gland. Washington DC: ARP press; 2009. p. 156–68.

    Google Scholar 

  88. Miettinen M, PA MC, Sarlomo-Rikala M, Rys J, Czapiewski P, Wazny K, et al. GATA3: a multispecific but potentially useful marker in surgical pathology: a systematic analysis of 2500 epithelial and nonepithelial tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2014;38(1):13–22.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  89. Wendroth SM, Mentrikoski MJ, Wick MR. GATA3 expression in morphologic subtypes of breast carcinoma: a comparison with gross cystic disease fluid protein 15 and mammaglobin. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2015;19:6–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  90. Asch-Kendrick R, Cimino-Mathews A. The role of GATA3 in breast carcinomas: a review. Hum Pathol. 2016;48:37–47.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  91. Raju U, Ma CK, Shaw A. Signet ring variant of lobular carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathologic and immunohistochemical study. Mod Pathol. 1993;6(5):516–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  92. Gown AM, Fulton RS, Kandalaft PL. Markers of metastatic carcinoma of breast origin. Histopathology. 2016;68(1):86–95.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  93. Habashy HO, Powe DG, Rakha EA, Ball G, Macmillan RD, Green AR, Ellis IO. The prognostic significance of PELP1 expression in invasive breast cancer with emphasis on the ER-positive luminal-like subtype. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;120(3):603–12.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  94. Davis DG, Siddiqui MT, Oprea-Ilies G, Stevens K, Osunkoya AO, Cohen C, et al. GATA-3 and FOXA1 expression is useful to differentiate breast carcinoma from other carcinomas. Hum Pathol. 2016;47(1):26–31.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  95. Peng Y, Butt YM, Chen B, Zhang X, Tang P. Update on Immunohistochemical analysis in breast lesions. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2017;141(8):1033–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  96. Robens J, Goldstein L, Gown AM, Schnitt SJ. Thyroid transcription factor-1 expression in breast carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010;34:1881–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  97. Provenzano E, Byrne DJ, Russell PA, Wright GM, Generali D, Fox SB. Differential expression of immunohistochemical markers in primary lung and breast cancers enriched for triple-negative tumours. Histopathology. 2016;68:367–77.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  98. Chu PG, Weiss LM. Immunohistochemical characterization of signet-ring cell carcinomas of the stomach, breast, and colon. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;121(6):884–92.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  99. Mahmud N, Ford JM, Longacre TA, Parent R, Norton JA. Metastatic lobular breast carcinoma mimicking primary signet ring adenocarcinoma in a patient with a suspected CDH1 mutation. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(4):e19–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  100. Ellis CL, Chang AG, Cimino-Mathews A, Argani P, Youssef RF, Kapur P, et al. GATA-3 immunohistochemistry in the differential diagnosis of adenocarcinoma of the urinary bladder. Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37(11):1756–60.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  101. Borhan WM, Cimino-Mathews AM, Montgomery EA, Epstein JI. Immunohistochemical differentiation of Plasmacytoid Urothelial carcinoma from secondary carcinoma involvement of the bladder. Am J Surg Pathol. 2017;41(11):1570–5.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  102. Su MC, Yuan RH, Lin CY, Jeng YM. Cadherin-17 is a useful diagnostic marker for adenocarcinomas of the digestive system. Mod Pathol. 2008;21(11):1379–86.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  103. Laury AR, Perets R, Piao H, Krane JF, Barletta JA, French C, et al. A comprehensive analysis of PAX8 expression in human epithelial tumors. Am J Surg Pathol. 2011;35(6):816–26.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  104. Recine MA, Deavers MT, Middleton LP, Silva EG, Malpica A. Serous carcinoma of the ovary and peritoneum with metastases to the breast and axillary lymph nodes: a potential pitfall. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28(12):1646–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  105. Nonaka D, Chiriboga L, Soslow RA. Expression of PAX8 as a useful marker in distinguishing ovarian carcinomas from mammary carcinomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32:1566–71.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  106. Bhargava R, Beriwal S, Dabbs DJ. Mammaglobin vs GCDFP-15: an immunohistologic validation survey for sensitivity and specificity. Am J Clin Pathol. 2007;127:103–13.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  107. Onuma K, Dabbs DJ, Bhargava R. Mammaglobin expression in the female genital tract: immunohistochemical analysis in benign and neoplastic endocervix and endometrium. Int J Gynecol Pathol. 2008;27:418–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  108. Kandalaft PL, Simon RA, Isacson C, Gown AM. Comparative sensitivities and specificities of antibodies to breast markers GCDFP-15, mammaglobin a, and different clones of antibodies to GATA-3: a study of 338 tumors using whole sections. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2016;24:609–14.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  109. So JS, Epstein JI. GATA3 expression in paragangliomas: a pitfall potentially leading to misdiagnosis of urothelial carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2013;26(10):1365–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  110. Barbareschi M, Maisonneuve P, Aldovini D, Cangi MG, Pecciarini L, Angelo Mauri F, et al. High syndecan-1 expression in breast carcinoma is related to an aggressive phenotype and to poorer prognosis. Cancer. 2003;98(3):474–83.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  111. Kambham N, Kong C, Longacre TA, Natkunam Y. Utility of syndecan-1 (CD138) expression in the diagnosis of undifferentiated malignant neoplasms: a tissue microarray study of 1,754 cases. Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2005;13(4):304–10.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  112. Cessna MH, Zhou H, Perkins SL, Tripp SR, Layfield L, Daines C, et al. Are myogenin and myoD1 expression specific for rhabdomyosarcoma? A study of 150 cases, with emphasis on spindle cell mimics. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25(9):1150–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  113. Charville GW, Varma S, Forgó E, Dumont SN, Zambrano E, Trent JC, et al. PAX7 expression in Rhabdomyosarcoma, related soft tissue tumors, and small round blue cell neoplasms. Am J Surg Pathol. 2016;40(10):1305–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  114. Rogers WM, Dobo E, Norton JA, Van Dam J, Jeffrey RB, Huntsman DG, et al. Risk-reducing total gastrectomy for germline mutations in E-cadherin (CDH1): pathologic findings with clinical implications. Am J Surg Pathol. 2008;32(6):799–809.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  115. Fox MD, Xiao L, Zhang M, Kamat AM, Siefker-Radtke A, Zhang L, et al. Plasmacytoid Urothelial carcinoma of the urinary bladder: a Clinicopathologic and Immunohistochemical analysis of 49 cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 2017;147(5):500–6.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  116. Lakhani SR, Schnitt SJ, O’Malley F, van de Vijver MJ, Simpson PT, Palcios J. Lobular neoplasia. In: Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ, editors. WHO classification of Tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC; 2012. p. 77–80.

    Google Scholar 

  117. 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(12):1471–84.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  118. Calhoun BC, Collins LC. Recommendations for excision following core needle biopsy of the breast: a contemporary evaluation of the literature. Histopathology. 2016;68:138–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  119. Clark CJ, Whang S, Paige KT. Incidence of precancerous lesions in breast reduction tissue: a pathologic review of 562 consecutive patients. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2009;124(4):1033–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  120. Ambaye AB, Goodwin AJ, MacLennan SE, Naud S, Weaver DL. Recommendations for pathologic evaluation of reduction mammoplasty specimens: a prospective study with systematic tissue sampling. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2017;141(11):1523–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  121. Portschy PR, Marmor S, Nzara R, Virnig BA, Tuttle TM. Trends in incidence and management of lobular carcinoma in situ: a population-based analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(10):3240–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  122. Li CI, Anderson BO, Daling JR, Moe RE. Changing incidence of lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2002;75(3):259–68.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  123. Scoggins M, Krishnamurthy S, Santiago L, Yang W. Lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: clinical, radiological, and pathological correlation. Acad Radiol. 2013;20(4):463–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  124. Amos B, Chetlen A, Williams N. Atypical lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ at core needle biopsy of the breast: an incidental finding or are there characteristic imaging findings? Breast Dis. 2016;36(1):5–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  125. Maxwell AJ, Clements K, Dodwell DJ, Evans AJ, Francis A, Hussain M, et al. The radiological features, diagnosis and management of screen-detected lobular neoplasia of the breast: findings from the Sloane project. Breast. 2016;27:109–15.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  126. Choi BB, Kim SH, Park CS, Cha ES, Lee AW. Radiologic findings of lobular carcinoma in situ: mammography and ultrasonography. J Clin Ultrasound. 2011;39(2):59–63.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  127. Heller SL, Elias K, Gupta A, Greenwood HI, Mercado CL, Moy L. Outcome of high-risk lesions at MRI-guided 9-gauge vacuum- assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2014;202(1):237–45.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  128. Flanagan MR, Rendi MH, Calhoun KE, Anderson BO, Javid SH. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ: radiologic-pathologic features and clinical management. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(13):4263–9.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  129. Hoda SA, Brogi E, Koerner FC, Rosen PP. Chapter 31 lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia. In: Rosen’s breast pathology. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2014. p. 797–854.

    Google Scholar 

  130. Schnitt SJ, Collins L. Chapter 5, lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia. In: Biopsy interpretation of the breast. 3rd ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer; 2018. p. 141–79.

    Google Scholar 

  131. Tavassoli FA, Eusebi V. Chapter 3, lobular intraepithelial neoplasia. In: Tumors of the mammary gland. Washington DC: ARP Press; 2009. p. 53–66.

    Google Scholar 

  132. American Society of Breast Surgeons. Consensus guideline on concordance assessment of image-guided breast biopsies and management of borderline or high-risk lesions. https://www.breastsurgeons.org/new_layout/about/statements/PDF_Statements/Concordance_and_High%20RiskLesions.pdf. Accessed 29 Oct 2017.

  133. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology: Breast cancer. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/default.aspx Version 2.2017. Accessed 29 Oct 2017.

  134. Page DL, Kidd TE Jr, Dupont WD, Simpson JF, Rogers LW. Lobular neoplasia of the breast: higher risk for subsequent invasive cancer predicted by more extensive disease. Hum Pathol. 1991;22(12):1232–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  135. Rendi MH, Dintzis SM, Lehman CD, Calhoun KE, Allison KH. Lobular in-situ neoplasia on breast core needle biopsy: imaging indication and pathologic extent can identify which patients require excisional biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(3):914–21.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  136. Susnik B, Day D, Abeln E, Bowman T, Krueger J, Swenson KK, et al. Surgical outcomes of lobular neoplasia diagnosed in Core biopsy: prospective study of 316 cases. Clin Breast Cancer. 2016;16(6):507–13.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  137. Wong SM, King T, Boileau JF, Barry WT, Golshan M. Population-based analysis of breast Cancer incidence and survival outcomes in women diagnosed with lobular carcinoma in situ. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(9):2509–17.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  138. King TA, Pilewskie M, Muhsen S, Patil S, Mautner SK, Park A, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ: a 29-year longitudinal experience evaluating Clinicopathologic features and breast Cancer risk. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(33):3945–52.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  139. Jorns J, Sabel MS, Pang JC. Lobular neoplasia: morphology and management. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2014;138(10):1344–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  140. Andrade VP, Ostrovnaya I, Seshan VE, Morrogh M, Giri D, Olvera N, et al. Clonal relatedness between lobular carcinoma in situ and synchronous malignant lesions. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14(4):R103.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  141. Sakr RA, Schizas M, Carniello JV, Ng CK, Piscuoglio S, Giri D, et al. Targeted capture massively parallel sequencing analysis of LCIS and invasive lobular cancer: repertoire of somatic genetic alterations and clonal relationships. Mol Oncol. 2016;10(2):360–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  142. Begg CB, Ostrovnaya I, Carniello JV, Sakr RA, Giri D, Towers R, et al. Clonal relationships between lobular carcinoma in situ and other breast malignancies. Breast Cancer Res. 2016;18(1):66.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  143. Rosen PP, Kosloff C, Lieberman PH, Adair F, Braun DW Jr. Lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Detailed analysis of 99 patients with average follow-up of 24 years. Am J Surg Pathol. 1978;2(3):225–51.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  144. Bodian CA, Perzin KH, Lattes R. Lobular neoplasia. Long term risk of breast cancer and relation to other factors. Cancer. 1996;78(5):1024–34.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  145. Page DL, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD, Jensen RA, Plummer WD Jr, Simpson JF. Atypical lobular hyperplasia as a unilateral predictor of breast cancer risk: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet. 2003;361(9352):125–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  146. Collins LC, Baer HJ, Tamimi RM, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Schnitt SJ. Magnitude and laterality of breast cancer risk according to histologic type of atypical hyperplasia: results from the Nurses’ health study. Cancer. 2007;109(2):180–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  147. Coopey SB, Mazzola E, Buckley JM, Sharko J, Belli AK, Kim EM, 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(3):627–33.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  148. Simpson PT, Gale T, Fulford LG, Reis-Filho JS, Lakhani SR. The diagnosis and management of pre-invasive breast disease: pathology of atypical lobular hyperplasia and lobular carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer Res. 2003;5(5):258–62.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  149. O’Malley FP. Lobular neoplasia: morphology, biological potential and management in core biopsies. Mod Pathol. 2010;23(Suppl 2):S14–25.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  150. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW. Ductal involvement by cells of atypical lobular hyperplasia in the breast: a long-term follow-up study of cancer risk. Hum Pathol. 1988;19(2):201–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  151. Downs-Kelly E, Bell D, Perkins GH, Sneige N, Middleton LP. Clinical implications of margin involvement by pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2011;135(6):737–43.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  152. Khoury T, Karabakhtsian RG, Mattson D, Yan L, Syriac S, Habib F, et al. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: clinicopathological review of 47 cases. Histopathology. 2014;64(7):981–93.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  153. Chen YY, Hwang ES, Roy R, DeVries S, Anderson J, Wa C, Fitzgibbons PL, et al. Genetic and phenotypic characteristics of pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33(11):1683–94.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  154. Boldt V, Stacher E, Halbwedl I, Popper H, Hultschig C, Moinfar F, Ullmann R, Tavassoli FA. Positioning of necrotic lobular intraepithelial neoplasias (LIN, grade 3) within the sequence of breast carcinoma progression. Genes Chromosom Cancer. 2010;49(5):463–70.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  155. Shin SJ, Lal A, De Vries S, Suzuki J, Roy R, Hwang ES, Schnitt SJ, Waldman FM, Chen YY. Florid lobular carcinoma in situ: molecular profiling and comparison to classic lobular carcinoma in situ and pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ. Hum Pathol. 2013;44(10):1998–2009.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  156. Fasola CE, Chen JJ, Jensen KC, Allison KH, Horst KC. Characteristics and clinical outcomes of pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast J. 2018;24(1):66–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  157. Pieri A, Harvey J, Bundred N. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: can the evidence guide practice? World J Clin Oncol. 2014;5(3):546–53.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  158. Fadare O, Dadmanesh F, Alvarado-Cabrero I, Snyder R, Stephen Mitchell J, Tot T, et al. Lobular intraepithelial neoplasia [lobular carcinoma in situ] with comedo-type necrosis: a clinicopathologic study of 18 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30(11):1445–53.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  159. Bagaria SP, Shamonki J, Kinnaird M, Ray PS, Giuliano AE. The florid subtype of lobular carcinoma in situ: marker or precursor for invasive lobular carcinoma? Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(7):1845–51.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  160. Bratthauer GL, Tavassoli FA. Lobular intraepithelial neoplasia: previously unexplored aspects assessed in 775 cases and their clinical implications. Virchows Arch. 2002;440(2):134–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  161. Bussolati G, Botto Micca FB, Eusebi V, Betts CM. Myoepithelial cells in lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: a parallel immunocytochemical and ultrastructural study. Ultrastruct Pathol. 1981;2(3):219–30.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  162. Wang Y, Jindal S, Martel M, Wu Y, Schedin P, Troxell M. Myoepithelial cells in lobular carcinoma in situ: distribution and immunophenotype. Hum Pathol. 2016;55:126–34.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  163. Sahoo S, Green I, Rosen PP. Bilateral Paget disease of the nipple associated with lobular carcinoma in situ. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2002;126(1):90–2.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  164. Vos CB, Cleton-Jansen AM, Berx G, de Leeuw WJ, ter Haar NT, van Roy F, et al. E-cadherin inactivation in lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: an early event in tumorigenesis. Br J Cancer. 1997;76(9):1131–3.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  165. Bratthauer GL, Moinfar F, Stamatakos MD, Mezzetti TP, Shekitka KM, Man YG, et al. Combined E-cadherin and high molecular weight cytokeratin immunoprofile differentiates lobular, ductal, and hybrid mammary intraepithelial neoplasias. Hum Pathol. 2002;33(6):620–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  166. Logan GJ, Dabbs DJ, Lucas PC, Jankowitz RC, Brown DD, Clark BZ, et al. Molecular drivers of lobular carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer Res. 2015;17:76.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  167. Mastracci TL, Shadeo A, Colby SM, Tuck AB, O’Malley FP, Bull SB, et al. Genomic alterations in lobular neoplasia: a microarray comparative genomic hybridization signature for early neoplastic proliferation in the breast. Genes Chromosom Cancer. 2006 Nov;45(11):1007–17.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  168. Lu YJ, Osin P, Lakhani SR, Di Palma S, Gusterson BA, Shipley JM. Comparative genomic hybridization analysis of lobular carcinoma in situ and atypical lobular hyperplasia and potential roles for gains and losses of genetic material in breast neoplasia. Cancer Res. 1998;58(20):4721–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  169. Hwang ES, Nyante SJ, Yi Chen Y, Moore D, DeVries S, Korkola JE, et al. Clonality of lobular carcinoma in situ and synchronous invasive lobular carcinoma. Cancer. 2004;100(12):2562–72.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  170. Buerger H, Simon R, Schäfer KL, Diallo R, Littmann R, Poremba C, et al. Genetic relation of lobular carcinoma in situ, ductal carcinoma in situ, and associated invasive carcinoma of the breast. Mol Pathol. 2000;53(3):118–21.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  171. Tazaki E, Shishido-Hara Y, Mizutani N, Nomura S, Isaka H, Ito H, et al. Histopathological and clonal study of combined lobular and ductal carcinoma of the breast. Pathol Int. 2013;63(6):297–304.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  172. Ang DC, Warrick AL, Shilling A, Beadling C, Corless CL, Troxell ML. Frequent phosphatidylinositol-3-kinase mutations in proliferative breast lesions. Mod Pathol. 2014;27(5):740–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  173. Resetkova E, Albarracin C, Sneige N. Collagenous spherulosis of breast: morphologic study of 59 cases and review of the literature. Am J Surg Pathol. 2006;30(1):20–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  174. Eisenberg RE, Hoda SA. Lobular carcinoma in situ with collagenous spherulosis: clinicopathologic characteristics of 38 cases. Breast J. 2014;20(4):440–1.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  175. Singer B, Lin C-Y, West R. Fibroepithelial lesions of the breast involved by atypical epithelial proliferations: a 12-year single institution study. Mod Pathol. 2017;30(supple 2):71A.

    Google Scholar 

  176. Sin EI, Wong CY, Yong WS, Ong KW, Madhukumar P, Tan VK, et al. Breast carcinoma and phyllodes tumour: a case series. J Clin Pathol. 2016;69(4):364–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  177. Middleton LP, Perkins GH, Tucker SL, Sahin AA, Singletary SE. Expression of ERalpha and ERbeta in lobular carcinoma in situ. Histopathology. 2007;50(7):875–80.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  178. De Brot M, Koslow Mautner S, Muhsen S, Andrade VP, Mamtani A, et al. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: a single institution experience with clinical follow-up and centralized pathology review. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;165(2):411–20.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  179. Masannat YA, Bains SK, Pinder SE, Purushotham AD. Challenges in the management of pleomorphic lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast. 2013;22(2):194–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  180. Fisher B, Costantino JP, Wickerham DL, Redmond CK, Kavanah M, Cronin WM, 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  181. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Thorat MA. Impact of preventive therapy on the risk of breast cancer among women with benign breast disease. Breast. 2015;24(Suppl 2):S51–5.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  182. Bevers TB. Breast cancer risk reduction therapy: the low-hanging fruit. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2015;13(4):376–8.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Norm Cyr for providing expert assistance with figures.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Stanford University School of Medicine, Department of Pathology, Stanford, CA, USA

    Megan L. Troxell & Kimberly H. Allison

  2. University of Washington, Department of Radiology, Seattle, WA, USA

    Yun An Chen

  3. Magee-Womens Hospital, University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

    Jing Yu

  4. Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA

    Debra M. Ikeda

Authors
  1. Megan L. Troxell
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Yun An Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jing Yu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Debra M. Ikeda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Kimberly H. Allison
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Megan L. Troxell .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology, UT Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA

    Yan Peng

  2. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Loyola University Medical Center, Maywood, IL, USA

    Ping Tang

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Troxell, M.L., Chen, Y.A., Yu, J., Ikeda, D.M., Allison, K.H. (2019). Lobular Breast Lesions. In: Peng, Y., Tang, P. (eds) Practical Breast Pathology. Practical Anatomic Pathology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16518-5_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-16518-5_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-16517-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-16518-5

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation