Jimenez R E, Bongers S, Bouwman D, Segel M, Visscher D W
Department of Pathology, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, and Wayne State University, Detroit MI, USA.
Am J Surg Pathol. 2000 Jan;24(1):123-8. doi: 10.1097/00000478-200001000-00015.
To assess whether the presence and amount of intraductal component (IC) in diagnostic needle core biopsies (NCB) is predictive of an extensive IC (EIC), the authors evaluated 50 invasive ductal carcinomas diagnosed with NCB, and then excised via lumpectomy, with regard to the extent of IC in both the NCB and subsequent lumpectomy specimen. These parameters were compared with each other and with the lumpectomy margin status. Extent of IC in the NCB was evaluated by dividing the number of ducts that contained IC by the total number of tissue cores. A ratio of more than 0.5 was considered EIC (EICc). IC extent in the lumpectomy was established by estimating the percentage of the tumor corresponding to IC and was considered extensive (EIC(L)) if more than 25% and if there was presence of IC away from the invasive tumor. The mean size of resected tumors was 1.6 +/- 0.7 cm. In 29 cases (58%) there was no IC in the NCB (NegICc), 11 cases (22%) exhibited nonextensive IC (NEICc), and 10 cases (20%) demonstrated EICc. A total of 7%, 36%, and 70% of the NegICc, NEICc, and EICc cases respectively had EIC(L)(p < 0.0001). The presence of EIC(L) correlated significantly with close or positive margin status for in situ disease (EIC(L) positive, 12 of 13 [92%] vs EIC(L) negative, 11 of 37 [30%]; p = 0.004). None of the NegICc, 27% of NEICc, and 40% of EICc had a positive margin for in situ neoplasm in the lumpectomy specimen (p = 0.004), and 24%, 18%, and 50% had positive margins for invasive neoplasm (p = not significant). The authors conclude that EICc predicts EIC(L) and constitutes a risk factor for positive lumpectomy margin status-particularly for in situ tumor. EICc may thus be of clinical value in identifying a subset of patients that requires a wider local excision.
为了评估诊断性针芯活检(NCB)中导管内成分(IC)的存在与否及数量是否可预测广泛导管内成分(EIC),作者对50例经NCB诊断为浸润性导管癌且随后接受肿块切除术的患者进行了评估,观察NCB及后续肿块切除标本中IC的范围。将这些参数相互比较,并与肿块切除边缘状态进行比较。通过将含有IC的导管数量除以组织芯总数来评估NCB中IC的范围。比率大于0.5被认为是EIC(EICc)。通过估计肿瘤中对应IC的百分比来确定肿块切除术中IC的范围,如果超过25%且IC存在于远离浸润性肿瘤处,则认为是广泛的(EIC(L))。切除肿瘤的平均大小为1.6±0.7厘米。在29例(58%)NCB中无IC(NegICc),11例(22%)表现为非广泛IC(NEICc),10例(20%)表现为EICc。NegICc、NEICc和EICc病例分别有7%、36%和70%存在EIC(L)(p<0.0001)。EIC(L)的存在与原位疾病的切缘接近或阳性状态显著相关(EIC(L)阳性,13例中的12例[92%] vs EIC(L)阴性,37例中的11例[30%];p = 0.004)。NegICc、27%的NEICc和40%的EICc在肿块切除标本中原位肿瘤切缘均为阳性(p = 0.004),而24%、18%和50%浸润性肿瘤切缘为阳性(p无显著性差异)。作者得出结论,EICc可预测EIC(L),并构成肿块切除切缘阳性状态的危险因素——尤其是对于原位肿瘤。因此,EICc在识别需要更广泛局部切除的患者亚组中可能具有临床价值。