Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia on Core Biopsy: An Automatic Trigger for Excisional Biopsy?

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

Abstract

Introduction

Excisional biopsy is currently recommended for atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) diagnosed on core needle breast biopsy (CNB), due to risk of upstaging to invasive or in situ carcinoma (DCIS). The study goal was to identify patients who may potentially forego excisional biopsy if the risk of upstaging is low.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective review of patients diagnosed with ADH on CNB who underwent excisional biopsy at one institution (5/2000–5/2011). We evaluated the upstaging rate and clinicopathologic factors associated with increased upstaging risk.

Results

A total of 114 cases of ADH were diagnosed on CNB. The median patient age was 64 years. On mammography, a mass/density/area of distortion was present in 23 % of cases; calcifications were present in 77 %. Most biopsies (79 %) were performed stereotactically. Twenty lesions (18 %) were upstaged to infiltrating carcinoma (5 %) or DCIS (13 %). Residual ADH was present in 43 biopsies (38 %). On univariate analysis, significant variables associated with upstaging included age >50 years, a mass lesion on mammography, and shorter length of biopsy core (p < 0.05). No patient ≤50 years of age was upstaged. Three patients who were not upstaged (3 %) developed ipsilateral disease (2 DCIS and 1 infiltrating ductal carcinoma) at a median time of 37 months.

Conclusions

The rate of upstaging when ADH is diagnosed on CNB at our institution is 18 %, and routine excisional biopsy is currently recommended for all patients. However, patients <50 years old with focal atypia only and no residual calcifications postbiopsy may represent a low-risk group who could potentially avoid excisional 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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nguyen CV, Albarracin CT, Whitman GJ, Lopez A, Sneige N. Atypical ductal hyperplasia in directional vacuum-assisted biopsy of breast microcalcifications: considerations for surgical excision. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18(3):752–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Winchester DJ, Bernstein JR, Jeske JM, et al. Upstaging of atypical ductal hyperplasia after vacuum-assisted 11-gauge stereotactic core needle biopsy. Arch Surg. 2003;138(6):619–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Polat AK, Kanbour-Shakir A, Andacoglu O, Polat AV, Johnson R, Bonaventura M, Soran A. Atypical hyperplasia on core biopsy: is further surgery needed? Am J Med Sci. 2012;344(1):28–31.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Jain RK, Mehta R, Dimitrov R, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: interobserver and intraobserver variability. Mod Pathol. 2011;24(7):917–23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. 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(3):270–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Kohr JR, Eby PR, Allison KH, DeMartini WB, Gutierrez RL, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Risk of upgrade of atypical ductal hyperplasia after stereotactic breast biopsy: effects of number of foci and complete removal of calcifications. Radiology. 2010;255(3):723–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ingegnoli A, d’Aloia C, Frattaruolo A, Pallavera L, Martella E, Crisi G, Zompatori M. Flat epithelial atypia and atypical ductal hyperplasia: carcinoma underestimation rate. Breast J. 2010;16(1):55–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Ely KA, Carter BA, Jensen RA, Simpson JF, Page DL. Core biopsy of the breast with atypical ductal hyperplasia: a probabilistic approach to reporting. Am J Surg Pathol. 2001;25(8):1017–21.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bendifallah S, Defert S, Chabbert-Buffet N, et al. Scoring to predict the possibility of upgrades to malignancy in atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by an 11-gauge vacuum-assisted biopsy device: an external validation study. Eur J Cancer. 2012;48(1):30–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. 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.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Page DL, Rogers LW. Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical ductal hyperplasia. Hum Pathol. 1992;23(10):1095–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Eby PR, Ochsner JE, DeMartini WB, Allison KH, Peacock S, Lehman CD. Is surgical excision necessary for focal atypical ductal hyperplasia found at stereotactic vacuum-assisted breast biopsy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(11):3232–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Chae BJ, Lee A, Song BJ, Jung SS. Predictive factors for breast cancer in patients diagnosed atypical ductal hyperplasia at core needle biopsy. World J Surg Oncol. 2009;7:77.

    Google Scholar 

  14. 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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Londero V, Zuiani C, Linda A, Battigelli L, Brondani G, Bazzocchi M. Borderline breast lesions: comparison of malignancy underestimation rates with 14-gauge core needle biopsy versus 11-gauge vacuum-assisted device. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(6):1200–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Arora S, Moezzi M, Kim U, Menes TS. Is surgical excision necessary for atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed with 8-gauge stereotactic biopsy? Breast J. 2009;15(6):673–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Forgeard C, Benchaib M, Guerin N, et al. Is surgical biopsy mandatory in case of atypical ductal hyperplasia on 11-gauge core needle biopsy? A retrospective study of 300 patients. Am J Surg. 2008;196(3):339–45.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Villa A, Tagliafico A, Chiesa F, Chiaramondia M, Friedman D, Calabrese M. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at 11-gauge vacuum-assisted breast biopsy performed on suspicious clustered microcalcifications: could patients without residual microcalcifications be managed conservatively? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2011;197(4):1012–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sneige N, Lim SC, Whitman GJ, Krishnamurthy S, Sahin AA, Smith TL, Stelling CB. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosis by directional vacuum-assisted stereotactic biopsy of breast microcalcifications. Considerations for surgical excision. Am J Clin Pathol. 2003;119(2):248–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Wagoner MJ, Laronga C, Acs G. Extent and histologic pattern of atypical ductal hyperplasia present on core needle biopsy specimens of the breast can predict ductal carcinoma in situ in subsequent excision. Am J Clin Pathol. 2009;131(1):112–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Allison KH, Eby PR, Kohr J, DeMartini WB, Lehman CD. Atypical ductal hyperplasia on vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: suspicion for ductal carcinoma in situ can stratify patients at high risk for upgrade. Hum Pathol. 2011;42(1):41–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Section of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA

    Lee J. McGhan MB, Barbara A. Pockaj MD, Nabil Wasif MD & Richard J. Gray MD

  2. Department of Radiology, Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA

    Marina E. Giurescu MD

  3. Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Mayo Clinic Hospital, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA

    Ann E. McCullough

Authors
  1. Lee J. McGhan MB
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Barbara A. Pockaj MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Nabil Wasif MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Marina E. Giurescu MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ann E. McCullough
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Richard J. Gray MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Richard J. Gray MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

McGhan, L.J., Pockaj, B.A., Wasif, N. et al. Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia on Core Biopsy: An Automatic Trigger for Excisional Biopsy?. Ann Surg Oncol 19, 3264–3269 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2575-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2575-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation