Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Atypical

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
The International Academy of Cytology Yokohama System for Reporting Breast Fine Needle Aspiration Biopsy Cytopathology

  • 1137 Accesses

Abstract

The term ‘atypical’ shows marked variation among reporting pathologists and in terms of the subsequent management. A definition and recommended management are provided in this chapter. The causes of atypical cytology are discussed including the training and expertise of the reporting pathologist, limitations in the technical quality of the smears and the inherent nature of proliferative lesions of the breast. These include fibroadenomas, intraductal papillomas, epithelial hyperplasia, lobular neoplasia, low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ and low-grade invasive carcinomas. Distinguishing fibroadenomas with hypercellular stroma and low-grade phyllodes tumours is also discussed. The cytological findings of the uncommon adenomyoepithelioma are presented.

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
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
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

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Yu S-N, Li J, Wong S-I, et al. Atypical aspirates of the breast: a dilemma in current cytology practice. J Clin Pathol. 2017;70:1024–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Field AS. Breast FNAB cytology: current problems and the IAC Yokohama standardized reporting system. Cancer Cytopath. 2017;125:229–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ayata G, Abu-Jawdeh GM, Fraser JL, et al. Accuracy and consistency in application of a probabilistic approach to reporting breast FNA. Acta Cytol. 2003;47:973–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Chaiwun B, Sukhamwang N, Lekawanvijit S, et al. Atypical and suspicious categories in fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast: histological and mammographical correlation and clinical significance. Singap Med J. 2005;46:706–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Yu Y-H, Wei W, Liu J-L. Diagnostic value of fine needle aspiration biopsy for breast mass: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Cancer. 2012;12:41–60.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Goyal P, Sehgal S, Ghosh S, et al. Histopathological correlation of atypical (C3) and suspicious (C4) categories in FNA cytology of the breast. Int J Breast Cancer. 2013;2013:1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Weigner J, Zardawi I, Braye S, et al. The microscopic complexities of C3 in breast cytology. Acta Cytol. 2014;58:335–46.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Arul P, Masilamani S, Akshatha C. FNA cytology of atypical (C3) and suspicious (C4) categories in the breast and its histopathologic correlation. J Cytol. 2016;33:76–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Hoda R, Brachtel E. IAC Yokohama System for reporting Breast FNAB cytology: a review of predictive values and risks of malignancy. Acta Cytol. 2019;63:292–301.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Montezuma D, Malheiros D, Schmitt F. Breast FNAB cytology using the newly proposed IAC Yokohama System for reporting breast cytopathology: the experience of a single institution. Acta Cytol. 2019;63:274–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Wong S, Rickard M, Earls P, Arnold L, Bako B, Field AS. The IAC Yokohama System for reporting breast FNAB cytology: a single institutional retrospective study of the application of the system and the impact of ROSE. Acta Cytol. 2019;63:280–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ducatman BS, Wang HH. Breast. In: Cibas E, Ducataman B, editors. Ch 9 in Cytology: Principles and Clinical Correlates. 4th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier/Saunders; 2014.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Field AS. Chapter 5: Breast. In: Field AS, Zarka MR, editors. Practical cytopathology: a diagnostic approach to FNAB. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2017.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Lee KR, Foster RS, Papillo JL. Fine needle aspiration of the breast. Importance of the aspirator. Acta Cytol. 1987;31:281–4.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Ljung BM, Drejet A, Chiampi N, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of FNAB is determined by physician training in sampling technique. Cancer Cytopathol. 2001;93:263–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vivjer MJ, editors. WHO classification of tumours of the breast. 4th ed. Lyon: International Agency for Research of Cancer; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bofin AM, Lydersen S, Hagmar BM. Cytological criteria for the diagnosis of intraductal hyperplasia, ductal carcinoma in situ, and invasive carcinoma of the breast. Diagn Cytopathol. 2004;31:207–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Simsir A, Waisman J, Cangiarella J. Fibroadenomas with atypia: causes of under and overdiagnois by aspiration biopsy. Diagn Cytopathol. 2001;25:278–84.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Deb RA, Matthews P, Elston CW, et al. An audit of ‘equivocal’(C3) and suspicious (C4) categories in FNA cytology of breast. Cytopathology. 2001;1:219–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Orell S. Radial scar/complex sclerosing lesion—a problem in the diagnostic work-up of screen detected breast lesions. Cytopathology. 1999;10:250–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Field A, Mak A. The fine needle aspiration biopsy diagnostic criteria of proliferative breast lesions: a retrospective statistical analysis of criteria for papillomas and radial scar lesions. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35(7):386–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Field AS, Mak A. A prospective study of the diagnostic accuracy of cytological criteria in the FNAB diagnosis of breast papillomas. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35:465–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Silverman JF, Masood S, Ducatman BS, et al. Can FNA biopsy separate atypical hyperplasia, carcinoma in-situ, and invasive carcinoma of the breast? Cytomorphologic criteria and limitations in diagnosis. Diagn Cytopathol. 1993;24:630–5.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Bonzanini M, Gilioli E, Brancato B, et al. The cytopathology of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. A detailed analysis of fine needle aspiration cytology of 58 cases compared with 101 invasive ductal carcinomas. Cyopathology. 2001;12(2):107–19.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Cangiarella J, Waisman J, Simsir A. Cytologic findings with histologic correlation in 43 cases of mammary intraductal adenocarcinoma diagnosed by aspiration biopsy. Acta Cytol. 2003;47:965–72.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lee A. Recent developments in the histological diagnosis of spindle cell carcinoma, fibromatosis and phyllodes tumour of the breast. Histopathology. 2008;52:45–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Simsir A, Finkelstein A. Fibroepithelial lesions. In: Cangiarella J, Simsir A, Tabbara S, editors. Breast cytohistology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press; 2013. p. 137–49.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Tay T, Tan P. Spindle cell lesions of the breast- an approach to diagnosis. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2017;34:400–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Bhattari S, Kapila K, Verma K. Phyllodes tumour of the breast. A cytopathologic study of 820 cases. Acta Cytol. 2000;44:790–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Scolyer RA, McKenzie PR, Achmed D, Lee CS. Can phyllodes tumours of the breast be distinguished from fibrodenomas using fine needle aspiration cytology? Pathology. 2001;33:437–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Jayaram G, Sthaneshwar P. Fine needle aspiration cytology of phyllodes tumours. Diagn Cytopathol. 2002;26:222.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Maritz RM, Michelow PM. Cytological criteria to distinguish phyllodes tumour of the breast from fibroadenoma. Acta Cytol. 2017;61(6):418–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Vielh P, Thiery JP, Validire P, de Maublanc MA, Woto G. Adenomyoepithelioma of the breast: fine-needle sampling with histologic, immunohistologic, and electron microscopic analysis. Diagn Cytopathol. 1993;9(2):188–93.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ng WK. Adenomyoepithlioma of the breast. A review of three cases with reappraisal of the fine needle aspiration biopsy findings. Acta Cytol. 2002;46(317):324.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Iyengar P, Ali S, Brogi E. Fine-needle aspiration cytology of mammary adenomyoepithelioma. A study of 12 patients. Cancer Cytopathol. 2006;106(4):250–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Mercado CL, Toth HK, Axelrod D, Cangiarella J. Fine-needle aspiration biopsy of benign adenomyoepithelioma of the breast: radiologic and pathologic correlation in four cases. Diagn Cytopathol. 2007;35(11):690–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Saad RS, Richmond L, Nofech-Mozes S, et al. FNAB of breast adenomyoepithelioma: a potential false positive pitfall and presence of intranuclear cytoplasmic inclusions. Diagn Cytopathol. 2012;40:1005–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Ahmadi NNS, Aledvood A, Daneshbod K, Daneshbod Y. Malignant adenomyoepithelioma of the breast: a review. Breast J. 2015;21(3):291–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Tan P, Ellis I. Myoepithelial and epithelial-myoepithelial, mesenchymal and fibroepithelial breast lesions: updates from the WHO Classification of Tumours of the Breast 2012. J Clin Pathol. 2013;66:465–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Chhieng D, Cangiarella J, Waisman J, et al. Fine needle aspiration cytology of spindle cell lesions of the breast. Cancer Cytopathol. 1999;87:359–71.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Michelow P, Field AS. Spindle cell lesions of the breast on FNAB: a miscellany of masses. Acta Cytol. 2019;63:328–39.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Malberger E, Edoute Y, Toledano O, Sapir D. Fine-needle aspiration and cytologic findings of surgical scar lesions in women with breast cancer. Cancer. 1992;69:148–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Oliveira R, Schmitt F. Stromal cellular fragments in breast fine needle aspirates: think outside the box. Acta Cytol. 2018;62:450–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Krings G, McIntire P, Shin S. Myofibroblastic, fibroblastic and myoid lesions of the breast. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2017;34:427–37.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Tay LP, Nimeh D, Guth A, Cangiarella J. Aspiration biopsy of nodular pseudoangiomatous stromal hyperplasia of the breast: clinicopathologic correlates in 10 cases. Diagn Cytopathol. 2005;32:345–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Bhargava R, Dabbs D. Immunohistology of the breast. In: Dabbs D, editor. Diagnostic immunohistochemistry. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Elsevier; 2019. p. 718–71.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Paker I, Kokenek T, Kacar A, et al. Fine needle aspiration cytology of nodular fasciitis presenting as a mass in the male breast: report of an unusual case. Cytopathology. 2013;24:201–3.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Zarka MA. Chapter 10: Fine needle aspiration biopsy cytology of soft tissue: a diagnostic approach based on pattern recognition. In: Practical cytopathology: a diagnostic approach to FNAB. Philladelphia: Elsevier; 2017. p. 456–7.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of NSW and University of Notre Dame Medical Schools, St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, Australia

    Andrew S. Field

  2. Department of Pathology, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, USA

    Britt-Marie Ljung

  3. St. George Hospital, BreastScreen, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Mary T. Rickard

  4. Prince of Wales Hospital, Department of Anatomical and Cellular Pathology, Kowloon, Hong Kong SAR

    Gary M. Tse

  5. Akershus University Hospital, Department of Pathology, Lørenskog, Viken, Norway

    Torill Sauer

  6. Department of Histopathology, Nottingham University Hospitals, Nottingham, UK

    Andrew H. S. Lee

  7. Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology of Porto University (IPATIMUP), Medical Faculty of Porto University, Porto, Portugal

    Fernando Schmitt

  8. Toronto, ON, Canada

    William R. Geddie

  9. Flinders Medical Centre, Flinders University of South Australia and Clinpath Laboratories, Adelaide, Australia

    Wendy A. Raymond

Authors
  1. Andrew S. Field
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Britt-Marie Ljung
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary T. Rickard
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gary M. Tse
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Torill Sauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Andrew H. S. Lee
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Fernando Schmitt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. William R. Geddie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Wendy A. Raymond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Andrew S. Field .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. University of NSW and University of Notre Dame Medical Schools, St Vincent’s Hospital, Sydney, Australia

    Andrew S. Field

  2. Flinders Medical Centre, Flinders University of South Australia and Clinpath Laboratories, Adelaide, Australia

    Wendy A. Raymond

  3. Institute of Molecular Pathology and Immunology of Porto University (IPATIMUP), Medical Faculty of Porto University, Porto, Portugal

    Fernando Schmitt

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Field, A.S. et al. (2020). Atypical. In: Field, A.S., Raymond, W.A., Schmitt, F. (eds) The International Academy of Cytology Yokohama System for Reporting Breast Fine Needle Aspiration Biopsy Cytopathology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26883-1_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-26883-1_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-26882-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-26883-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation