Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Axillary Lymph Node Status in Unifocal, Multifocal, and Diffuse Breast Carcinomas: Differences Are Related to Macrometastatic Disease

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

Abstract

Background

Multifocality in breast carcinoma is associated with an increased propensity to metastasis. However, it is not clear whether this propensity manifests in the form of macrometastases or as presumably less-significant low-volume metastatic disease.

Methods

A total of 948 cases of invasive breast carcinoma documented in large-format histology sections and assessed with detailed radiologic–pathologic correlation were categorized as unifocal, multifocal, or diffuse on the basis of the subgross distribution of the invasive component. Rates of macrometastases (>2 mm), micrometastases (0.2–2 mm), and isolated tumor cells (<0.2 mm) in these categories were compared. The influence of tumor size and histology grade on lymph node positivity rates was also tested.

Results

Macrometastases were present in 20.4 % (112 of 550) of unifocal, 48.3 % (172 of 356) of multifocal, and 61.9 % (26 of 42) of diffuse cases (P < 0.0001). Among the macrometastatic cases, more than three nodes were involved in 18.9 % (21 of 112) of unifocal, 35.5 % (61 of 172) of multifocal, and 50.0 % (13 of 26) of diffuse cases. The rates of micrometastases (5.1, 5.1, and 2.4 % unifocal, multifocal, and diffuse, respectively) and isolated tumor cells (4.5, 3.7, and 2.4 % unifocal, multifocal, and diffuse, respectively) were low and similar in all examined categories. The relative risk (RR) of having macrometastatic disease was approximately doubled (RR 2.3726, P < 0.0001) in multifocal and tripled (RR 3.0562, P < 0.0001) in diffuse compared to unifocal cases. The findings were similar for all size categories, tumor grade categories, and sentinel lymph nodes, as well as all examined lymph nodes.

Conclusions

The significantly increased lymph node positivity rates in multifocal and diffuse invasive breast carcinomas results from large-volume macrometastatic disease.

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. Gallager HS, Martin JE. The study of mammary carcinoma by mammography and whole organ sectioning. Cancer. 1969;23:855–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Egan RI. Multicentric breast carcinomas: clinical–radiographic–pathologic whole organ studies and 10-year survival. Cancer. 1982;49:1123–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Holland R, Veling SH, Mravunac M, et al. Histologic multifocality of Tis, T1–2 breast carcinomas. Implications for clinical trials of breast-conserving surgery. Cancer. 1985;56:979–90.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Connolly JL, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ. Understanding the distribution of cancer within the breast is important for optimizing breast-conserving treatment (editorial). Cancer. 1995;76:1–3.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Cabioglu N, Ozmen V, Kaya H, et al. Increased lymph node positivity in multifocal and multicentric breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:67–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Yerushalmi R, Kennecke H, Woods E, et al. Does multicentric/multifocal breast cancer differ from unifocal breast cancer? An analysis of survival and contralateral breast cancer incidence. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;117:365–70.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Jackson PA, Merchant W, McCormick CJ, et al. A comparison of large block macrosectioning and conventional techniques in breast pathology. Virchows Arch. 1994;425:243–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Biesemier KW, Alexander CM. Enhancement of mammographic–pathologic correlation utilizing large format histology for malignant breast diseases. Semin Breast Dis. 2005;8:152–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Tot T, Tabár L. The role of radiologic–pathologic correlation in diagnosing early breast cancer: the pathologist’s perspective. Virchows Arch. 2011;458:125–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Tot T. Clinical relevance of the distribution of the lesions in 500 consecutive breast cancer cases documented in large-format histological sections. Cancer. 2007;110:2551–60.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Tot T. The metastastic capacity of multifocal breast carcinomas: extensive tumors versus tumors of limited extent. Hum Pathol. 2009;40:199–205.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Tot T, Pekár Gy, Hofmeyer S, et al. The distribution of the lesions in 1–14-mm invasive breast carcinomas and its relation to metastatic potential. Virchows Arch. 2009;445:109–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Tot T, Gere M, Pekár Gy, et al. Breast cancer multifocality, disease extent and survival. Hum Pathol. 2011: 42:1761–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Tot T. The diffuse type of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: morphology and prognosis. Virchows Arch. 2003;443:718–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tavassoli FA, Devilee P, eds. Tumors of the breast and female genital organs. In: World Health Organization classification of tumours: pathology and genetics. Lyon: IARC Press; 2003. p. 49.

  16. Weissenbacher TM, Zschage M, Janni W, et al. Multicentric and multifocal versus unifocal breast cancer: is the tumor–node–metastasis classification justified? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;122:27–34.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Andea AA, Wallis T, Newman LA, et al. Pathologic analysis of tumor size and lymph node status in multifocal/multicentric breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2002;94:1383–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Andea AA, Bouwman D, Wallis T, et al. Correlation of tumor volume and surface area with lymph node status in patients with multifocal/multicentric breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2004;100:20–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Coombs NJ, Boyages J. Multifocal and multicentric breast cancer: does each focus matter? J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7497–502.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pedersen L, Gunnarsdottir KA, Rasmussen BB, et al. The prognostic influence of multifocality in breast cancer patients. Breast. 2004;13:188–93.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Patani N, Mokbel K. Clinical significance of sentinel lymph node isolated tumor cells in breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;127:325–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Tot T, Tabár L, Dean PB. Practical breast pathology. Stuttgart, New York: Thieme; 2002. pp. 116–23.

    Google Scholar 

  23. AJCC staging handbook. 6th ed. New York: Springer; 2002.

  24. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large series with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991;19:403–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Luttges J, Kalbfleisch H, Prinz P. Nipple involvement and multicentricity in breast cancer. A study of whole organ sections. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol. 1987;113:481–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Saha S, Sirop S, Korant A, et al. Nodal positivity in breast cancer correlated with the number of lesions detected by magnetic resonance imaging versus mammogram. Am J Surg. 2011;201:290–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Haussami N, Ciatto S, Macaskill P, et al. Accuracy and surgical impact of magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer staging: systemic review and meta-analysis in detection of multifocal and multicentric cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3248–68.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Boyages J, Jajashinghe UW, Coombs N. Multifocal breast cancer and survival: each focus does matter particularly for larger tumours. Eur J Cancer. 2010;46:1990–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Spillane AJ, Brennan ME. Accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy in large and multifocal/multicentric breast carcinoma—a systematic review. EJCO. 2011;37:371–85.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Giuliani AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs. no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis. JAMA. 2011;305:569–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Pathology and Clinical Cytology, Central Hospital Falun, Falun, Sweden

    Tibor Tot MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Tibor Tot MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tibor Tot MD, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tot, T. Axillary Lymph Node Status in Unifocal, Multifocal, and Diffuse Breast Carcinomas: Differences Are Related to Macrometastatic Disease. Ann Surg Oncol 19, 3395–3401 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2346-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-012-2346-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation