Literature DB >> 8735720

Comparison of cytomorphological and architectural heterogeneity in mammographically-detected ductal carcinoma in situ.

M Harrison1, J D Coyne, T Gorey, P A Dervan.   

Abstract

Many classification schemes have been proposed for ductal carcinoma in situ. Architectural heterogeneity is widely recognized. Cytonuclear grade appears to have greater prognostic significance than architectural pattern. This study assesses heterogeneity using a classification based on cytological grade and compares this to architectural heterogeneity in mammographically detected ductal carcinoma in situ. One hundred and twelve cases were classified according to architectural subtypes and the carcinoma nuclei were graded. Necrosis and microcalcification were assessed. Eighty-four percent of ductal carcinomas in situ had a single nuclear grade, whereas only 39% showed a single architectural pattern. High grade nuclei were present in 87% of cases. Necrosis was associated with high nuclear grade. In contrast to architectural heterogeneity, this study shows little ductal carcinoma in situ heterogeneity when classification is based on nuclear grade. Thus, a cytomorphological classification should have the advantage of consistency and reproducibility in comparison to architecture-based classification systems.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8735720     DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-2559.1996.322365.x

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Histopathology        ISSN: 0309-0167            Impact factor:   5.087


  5 in total

1.  Consistency in the observation of features used to classify duct carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast.

Authors:  A G Douglas-Jones; J M Morgan; M A Appleton; R L Attanoos; A Caslin; C S Champ; M Cotter; N S Dallimore; A Dawson; R W Fortt; A P Griffiths; M Hughes; P A Kitching; C O'Brien; A M Rashid; D Stock; A Verghese; D W Williams; N W Williams; S Williams
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.411

Review 2.  Advances in breast cancer: clinical and biological lessons from screening.

Authors:  T F Gorey
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  1996 Jul-Sep       Impact factor: 1.568

3.  Cytological and architectural heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Authors:  C M Quinn; J L Ostrowski
Journal:  J Clin Pathol       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 3.411

4.  Morphological intratumor heterogeneity in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Authors:  Claudia Stanciu-Pop; Marie-Cécile Nollevaux; Martine Berlière; Francois P Duhoux; Latifa Fellah; Christine Galant; Mieke R Van Bockstal
Journal:  Virchows Arch       Date:  2021-01-27       Impact factor: 4.064

5.  Molecular grading of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.

Authors:  Rosemary L Balleine; Lucy R Webster; Sean Davis; Elizabeth L Salisbury; Juan P Palazzo; Gordon F Schwartz; Dennis B Cornfield; Robert L Walker; Karen Byth; Christine L Clarke; Paul S Meltzer
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2008-12-15       Impact factor: 13.801

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.