OBJECTIVES: The study was designed to determine which histological lesions produce cellular atypia in lavage specimens and whether ductoscopy adds useful information for the evaluation of high-risk patients with atypical lavage cytology. METHODS: We prospectively recruited women ≥35 years at high risk for developing breast cancer. All underwent ductal lavage. Women found to have atypia underwent ductoscopy-directed duct excision (group 1). Women without atypia were observed (group 2). Data included patient demographics, risk assessment, cytologic and histologic findings, and outcomes. Descriptive statistics were utilized for data summary and were compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: We enrolled 102 women; 93 (91%) were Caucasian. Their median age was 49 (range 34-73) years with a median follow-up of 80 (range 5-90) months. Overall, 27 (26%) had atypical lavage cytology (group 1), and 75 (74%) had benign cytology (group 2). Subsequent duct excision in group 1 revealed benign histology in 11 (44%), papillomas in 9 (36%), atypical hyperplasia (AH) in 4 (16%), and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in 1 (4%). At follow-up, three patients developed breast cancer, including one group 1 patient and two group 2 patients. There were no differences between groups 1 and 2 according to patient demographics, Gail scores, or risk for subsequent breast cancer (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although 20% of high-risk women with ductal lavage atypia have AH or malignancy on subsequent excision, the majority do not. Atypia identified by ductal lavage is not associated with a higher risk of developing subsequent breast cancer, even in this high-risk population.
OBJECTIVES: The study was designed to determine which histological lesions produce cellular atypia in lavage specimens and whether ductoscopy adds useful information for the evaluation of high-risk patients with atypical lavage cytology. METHODS: We prospectively recruited women ≥35 years at high risk for developing breast cancer. All underwent ductal lavage. Women found to have atypia underwent ductoscopy-directed duct excision (group 1). Women without atypia were observed (group 2). Data included patient demographics, risk assessment, cytologic and histologic findings, and outcomes. Descriptive statistics were utilized for data summary and were compared using Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: We enrolled 102 women; 93 (91%) were Caucasian. Their median age was 49 (range 34-73) years with a median follow-up of 80 (range 5-90) months. Overall, 27 (26%) had atypical lavage cytology (group 1), and 75 (74%) had benign cytology (group 2). Subsequent duct excision in group 1 revealed benign histology in 11 (44%), papillomas in 9 (36%), atypical hyperplasia (AH) in 4 (16%), and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in 1 (4%). At follow-up, three patients developed breast cancer, including one group 1 patient and two group 2 patients. There were no differences between groups 1 and 2 according to patient demographics, Gail scores, or risk for subsequent breast cancer (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although 20% of high-risk women with ductal lavage atypia have AH or malignancy on subsequent excision, the majority do not. Atypia identified by ductal lavage is not associated with a higher risk of developing subsequent breast cancer, even in this high-risk population.
Authors: J P Costantino; M H Gail; D Pee; S Anderson; C K Redmond; J Benichou; H S Wieand Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-09-15 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: April Johnson-Maddux; Raheela Ashfaq; Leslie Cler; Elizabeth Naftalis; Ann Marilyn Leitch; Susan Hoover; David M Euhus Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Allison W Kurian; Meredith A Mills; Margo Jaffee; Bronislava M Sigal; Nicolette M Chun; Kerry E Kingham; Laura C Collins; Kent W Nowels; Sylvia K Plevritis; Judy E Garber; James M Ford; Anne-Renee Hartman Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2005-05 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: M H Gail; L A Brinton; D P Byar; D K Corle; S B Green; C Schairer; J J Mulvihill Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1989-12-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: M R Wrensch; N L Petrakis; E B King; R Miike; L Mason; K L Chew; M M Lee; V L Ernster; J F Hilton; R Schweitzer Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1992-01-15 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: Laurien Waaijer; Mando D Filipe; Janine Simons; Carmen C van der Pol; Tjeerd de Boorder; Paul J van Diest; Arjen Joost Witkamp Journal: Breast Cancer Date: 2020-07-28 Impact factor: 4.239
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