Literature DB >> 22564990

Impact of routine pathology review on treatment for node-negative breast cancer.

Hagen F Kennecke1, Caroline H Speers, Catherine A Ennis, Karen Gelmon, Ivo A Olivotto, Malcolm Hayes.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: Routine secondary pathology review influences diagnosis and treatment among patients diagnosed with breast cancer. The impact of review on patients with node-negative breast cancer and the nature of the pathology elements leading to management changes are not well described.
METHODS: Patients with node-negative, invasive, or in situ breast cancer and evaluable nodes referred to the British Columbia Cancer Agency during two time periods between 2004 and 2007 were included. Pathologists with expertise in breast cancer reviewed the original reports and slides. Biomarker testing was not routinely repeated. Medical record review was conducted to determine whether original pathology was changed and whether recommended therapy was affected.
RESULTS: Among 906 eligible patients, 405 (45%) received a pathology review. Univariate comparisons revealed that reviewed patients were younger (P < .001) and more likely to have close margins (P < .001), whereas other characteristics were similar. A total of 102 pathology changes were documented among 81 patients (20%). The most frequently changed elements were grade (40%) and lymphovascular (26%), nodal (15%), and margin (12%) status. These changes resulted in 27 treatment modifications among 25 patients (6%). Treatment changes were primarily related to nodal and margin status, and only two of 27 were related to measurement of tumor biology in women with estrogen receptor-positive, node-negative breast cancer.
CONCLUSION: Reported rates of change are significant and warrant routine secondary pathology review among patients with node-negative breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ before final treatment is recommended. Review remains relevant in the era of gene expression signatures to determine margin and nodal status.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22564990     DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2011.38.9247

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  8 in total

1.  AGO Recommendations for Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2013.

Authors:  Anton Scharl; Christoph Thomssen; Nadia Harbeck; Volkmar Müller
Journal:  Breast Care (Basel)       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 2.860

2.  High resolution MRI for non-invasive mouse lymph node mapping.

Authors:  Zhuoli Zhang; Daniel Procissi; Weiguo Li; Dong-Hyun Kim; Kangan Li; Guohong Han; Yi Huan; Andrew C Larson
Journal:  J Immunol Methods       Date:  2013-07-12       Impact factor: 2.303

Review 3.  The Interdisciplinary Management of Brain Metastases.

Authors:  Kirsten Schmieder; Ulrich Keilholz; Stephanie Combs
Journal:  Dtsch Arztebl Int       Date:  2016-06-17       Impact factor: 5.594

4.  The cost-saving effect of centralized histological reviews with soft tissue and visceral sarcomas, GIST, and desmoid tumors: The experiences of the pathologists of the French Sarcoma Group.

Authors:  Lionel Perrier; Pauline Rascle; Magali Morelle; Maud Toulmonde; Dominique Ranchere Vince; Axel Le Cesne; Philippe Terrier; Agnès Neuville; Pierre Meeus; Fadila Farsi; Françoise Ducimetière; Jean-Yves Blay; Isabelle Ray Coquard; Jean-Michel Coindre
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2018-04-05       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  Lymphovascular invasion, race, and the 21-gene recurrence score in early estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer.

Authors:  Della Makower; Juan Lin; Xiaonan Xue; Joseph A Sparano
Journal:  NPJ Breast Cancer       Date:  2021-03-01

6.  Evaluation of 12 strategies for obtaining second opinions to improve interpretation of breast histopathology: simulation study.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Anna Na Tosteson; Margaret S Pepe; Gary M Longton; Heidi D Nelson; Berta Geller; Patricia A Carney; Tracy Onega; Kimberly H Allison; Sara L Jackson; Donald L Weaver
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2016-06-22

Review 7.  Improving Pathological Assessment of Breast Cancer by Employing Array-Based Transcriptome Analysis.

Authors:  Zsuzsanna Mihály; Balázs Győrffy
Journal:  Microarrays (Basel)       Date:  2013-08-29

8.  A Randomized Study Comparing Digital Imaging to Traditional Glass Slide Microscopy for Breast Biopsy and Cancer Diagnosis.

Authors:  Joann G Elmore; Gary M Longton; Margaret S Pepe; Patricia A Carney; Heidi D Nelson; Kimberly H Allison; Berta M Geller; Tracy Onega; Anna N A Tosteson; Ezgi Mercan; Linda G Shapiro; Tad T Brunyé; Thomas R Morgan; Donald L Weaver
Journal:  J Pathol Inform       Date:  2017-03-10
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.