BACKGROUND: Ductal lavage (DL) allows repeat sampling of breast epithelium for serial observation in a chemoprevention setting; however, the reproducibility of duct cannulation, cell yield and cytology has not been addressed. METHODS: We conducted a Phase 2 trial, wherein high risk women chose tamoxifen treatment or observation following an entry DL procedure. We present data from the non-intervention arm of our study to assess the reproducibility of cannulation, cell yield, and cytologic diagnosis from DL of the same duct at two time-points. Inter-observer variability was assessed by a blinded review of Papanicoloau-stained slides by two cytopathologists. RESULTS: Sixty-five women had a successful lavage of 187 ducts at baseline and chose observation; 63/65 (97%) had a successful lavage 6 months later. Successful recannulation of the same duct was accomplished in 63 women (97%) and162 ducts (87%). Total epithelial cell yields >or=100 were obtained from 57/65 women (88%) and 129/187 ducts (69%) at baseline, and 46/63 women (73%) and 80/162 ducts (49%) at both time-points. Cytologic diagnosis was reproducible in 27/63 (43%) women and 77/162 (48%) ducts. Inter-observer variability for cytologic diagnosis between two observers showed good agreement (kappa = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Recannulation and lavage of the same duct after a 6 month interval can be achieved with high frequency; however, reproducibility of cell yield and cytologic findings from the same duct is sub-optimal, leading to significant attrition of evaluable subjects. The utility of DL for the serial monitoring of breast epithelium is therefore limited.
BACKGROUND: Ductal lavage (DL) allows repeat sampling of breast epithelium for serial observation in a chemoprevention setting; however, the reproducibility of duct cannulation, cell yield and cytology has not been addressed. METHODS: We conducted a Phase 2 trial, wherein high risk women chose tamoxifen treatment or observation following an entry DL procedure. We present data from the non-intervention arm of our study to assess the reproducibility of cannulation, cell yield, and cytologic diagnosis from DL of the same duct at two time-points. Inter-observer variability was assessed by a blinded review of Papanicoloau-stained slides by two cytopathologists. RESULTS: Sixty-five women had a successful lavage of 187 ducts at baseline and chose observation; 63/65 (97%) had a successful lavage 6 months later. Successful recannulation of the same duct was accomplished in 63 women (97%) and162 ducts (87%). Total epithelial cell yields >or=100 were obtained from 57/65 women (88%) and 129/187 ducts (69%) at baseline, and 46/63 women (73%) and 80/162 ducts (49%) at both time-points. Cytologic diagnosis was reproducible in 27/63 (43%) women and 77/162 (48%) ducts. Inter-observer variability for cytologic diagnosis between two observers showed good agreement (kappa = 0.62). CONCLUSIONS: Recannulation and lavage of the same duct after a 6 month interval can be achieved with high frequency; however, reproducibility of cell yield and cytologic findings from the same duct is sub-optimal, leading to significant attrition of evaluable subjects. The utility of DL for the serial monitoring of breast epithelium is therefore limited.
Authors: Amy E Cyr; Julie A Margenthaler; Jill Conway; Antonella L Rastelli; Rosa M Davila; Feng Gao; Jill R Dietz Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-08-17 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Jennifer T Loud; Anne C M Thiébaut; Andrea D Abati; Armando C Filie; Kathryn Nichols; David Danforth; Ruthann Giusti; Sheila A Prindiville; Mark H Greene Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2009-03-31 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Takahiro Yoshida; Kideok Jin; Hong Song; Sunju Park; David L Huso; Zhe Zhang; Han Liangfeng; Charles Zhu; Frank Bruchertseifer; Alfred Morgenstern; George Sgouros; Saraswati Sukumar Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-05-31
Authors: Jennifer T Loud; Ellen Burke Beckjord; Kathryn Nichols; June Peters; Ruthann Giusti; Mark H Greene Journal: BMC Womens Health Date: 2009-07-14 Impact factor: 2.809
Authors: David N Danforth; Armando C Filie; Andrew C Warner; George W Wright; Zhonghe Sun; Thomas Ried; Christine T McGowan; Sheila A Prindiville Journal: Cancer Prev Res (Phila) Date: 2020-08-04
Authors: Dixie Mills; Ameer Gomberawalla; Eva J Gordon; Julie Tondre; Mitra Nejad; Tinh Nguyen; Janice M Pogoda; Jianyu Rao; Robert Chatterton; Susanne Henning; Susan M Love Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-04-13 Impact factor: 3.240