Literature DB >> 16528376

Correlation of cytologic findings and chromosomal instability detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization in breast fine-needle aspiration specimens from women at high risk for breast cancer.

Nour Sneige1, Baoshun Liu, Guosheng Yin, Yun Gong, Banu K Arun.   

Abstract

Cytologic evaluation of ductal lavage or random periareolar fine-needle aspiration (FNA) specimens has been proposed to improve risk stratification of women at high risk for breast cancer. However, cytologic assessment of morphologic changes is subjective. To assess the utility of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) in the categorization of breast lesions, we prospectively evaluated 32 random periareolar FNA specimens from 27 women at high risk for breast cancer. Cytologic specimens were prepared using the thin preparation technique, and diagnoses were made on the basis of previously published criteria. Specimens were also evaluated by FISH for chromosomes 1, 8, 11, and 17. Monosomy was defined as the loss of one signal or both signals in >20% of cells, and polysomy was defined as the presence of > or = 3 signals in >6% of cells. Cytologic smears from seven invasive ductal carcinomas and nine benign breast specimens from women at low risk for breast cancer were included for comparison. In the high-risk group, cytologic findings were nonproliferative epithelium (NPE) in 16 cases and hyperplasia in 16 cases. Chromosomal aberrations were detected in 11 (69%) of 16 NPE cases, 14 (89%) of 16 hyperplasia cases, seven (100%) of seven carcinoma cases, and none of the low-risk cases. High-risk cases had significantly more monosomy of chromosomes 1, 11, and 17 and polysomy of chromosome 8 compared to low-risk cases and significantly less polysomy of chromosomes 1, 8, 11, and 17 compared to patients with cancer. There were no significant differences in monosomy or polysomy of individual chromosomes or a combination of chromosomes between the NPE and hyperplasia groups. This study shows that aberrations of chromosome number are common in high-risk women irrespective of cytologic findings. Studies evaluating the association between specific patterns of chromosomal polysomy and progression to malignancy may be warranted.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16528376     DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.3800571

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mod Pathol        ISSN: 0893-3952            Impact factor:   7.842


  7 in total

1.  Impact of polysomy 17 on HER2 testing of invasive breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Yang Liu; Li Ma; Dequan Liu; Zhibing Yang; Chengang Yang; Zaoxiu Hu; Wenlin Chen; Zhuangqing Yang; Sijun Chen; Zhuoni Zhang
Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Pathol       Date:  2013-12-15

Review 2.  Genome-based versus gene-based theory of cancer: possible implications for clinical practice.

Authors:  Natasa Todorovic-Rakovic
Journal:  J Biosci       Date:  2011-09       Impact factor: 1.826

Review 3.  Genomic Changes in Normal Breast Tissue in Women at Normal Risk or at High Risk for Breast Cancer.

Authors:  David N Danforth
Journal:  Breast Cancer (Auckl)       Date:  2016-08-17

Review 4.  Breast cancer and aneusomy 17: implications for carcinogenesis and therapeutic response.

Authors:  Monica M Reinholz; Amy K Bruzek; Daniel W Visscher; Wilma L Lingle; Matthew J Schroeder; Edith A Perez; Robert B Jenkins
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 41.316

5.  The Clinicopathologic and Prognostic Value of Altered Chromosome 17 Centromere Copy Number in HER2 Fish Equivocal Breast Carcinomas.

Authors:  Hongfei Ji; Qijia Xuan; Abiyasi Nanding; Haiyu Zhang; Qingyuan Zhang
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-07-10       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Associations between estrogen receptor-beta polymorphisms and endometriosis risk: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Renyong Guo; Nengneng Zheng; Shiping Ding; Ying Zheng; Limin Feng
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2014-09-26       Impact factor: 2.644

7.  Inherent variability of cancer-specific aneuploidy generates metastases.

Authors:  Mathew Bloomfield; Peter Duesberg
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2016-12-16       Impact factor: 2.009

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.