medigraphic.com
ISSN 1870-2821 (Print)
Organo Oficial de la Asociación Mexicana de Mastología

2015, Number 1

<< Back

Rev Mex Mastol 2015; 5 (1)

Lobular carcinoma of the breast: Is it a different clinical entity from ductal carcinoma?

Flores DDF, Arce SC, Matus SJA, Villarreal GCM, Lasa F, Reynoso NN, Lara MF, Alvarado MA, Mohar BA

Language: Spanish
References: 24
Page: 23-27
PDF size: 226.13 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Breast cancer is a heterogeneous disease, it is associated with separate histological subtypes, the most frequent, ductal and lobular carcinoma differ between them in terms of risk factors and clinical course, these differences are overlooked by researches, and clinicians tend to treat breast cancer as a single homogeneous entity, and these differences are explored only retrospectively. We analyzed the clinical and pathological behavior among this histological subtypes.


REFERENCES

  1. Li CI, Anderson BO, Daling JR, Moe RE. Trends in incidence rates of invasive lobular and ductal breast carcinoma. JAMA. 2003; 289 (11): 1421-1424.

  2. Li CI, Uribe DJ, Daling JR. Clinical characteristics of dif­ferent histologic types of breast cancer. British Journal of Cancer. 2005; 93 (9): 1046-1052.

  3. Kurian AW, McClure LA, John E et al. Second primary breast cancer occurrence according to hormone receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009; 101 (15): 1058-1065.

  4. Li CI, Daling JR. Changes in breast cancer incident rates in the United States by histologic subtype and race/ethnicity, 1995 to 2004. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2007; 16: 2773-2780.

  5. Eheman CR, Shaw KM, Ryerson AB, Miller JW, Ajani UA, White MC. The changing incident of in situ and invasive ductal and lobular breast carcinomas: United States, 1999-2004. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2009; 18: 1763-1769.

  6. Rossouw JE, Anderson GL, Prentice RL, Lacroix AX, Kooperberg C, Stefanick ML et al. Risks and benefits of estrogen plus progestin in the healthy postmenopausal women: principal results from the Women’s Health Initiative randomized controlled trial. JAMA. 2002; 288: 321-333.

  7. Reeves GK, Beral V, Green J et al. Hormonal therapy for menopause and breast-cancer risk by histological type: cohort study and meta-analysis. Lancet Oncol. 2006; 7 (11): 910-918.

  8. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Menarche, menopause and breast cancer risk: individual participant meta-analysis, including 118,964 women with breast cancer from 117 epidemiological studies. Lancet Oncol. 2012; 13: 1141-1151.

  9. Rakha EA, Patel A, Powe DG, Benhasouna A, Green AR, Lambros MB et al. Clinical and biological significance of E-cadherin protein expression in invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol. 2010; 34: 1472-1479.

  10. Rakha EA, Teoh TK, Lee AH, Nolan CC, Ellis IO, Green AR. Further evidence that E-cadherin is not a tumour supresor gene in invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: an immunohistochemical study. Histopathology. 2013; 62: 695-701.

  11. Becker KF, Atkinson MJ, Reich U, Becker I, Nekarda H, Siewert JR et al. E-cadherin gene mutations provide clues to diffuse type gastric carcinomas. Cancer Res. 1994; 54: 3845-3852.

  12. Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ. WHO Classification of tumours of the breast. 4th ed. Lyon: IARC; 2012.

  13. Sneige N, Wang J, Baker BA, Krishnamurthy S, Middleton LP. Clinical, histopathologic, and biologic features of pleomorphic lobular (ductal-lobular) carcinoma in situ of the breast; a report of 24 cases. Mod Pathol. 2002; 15: 1044-1050.

  14. Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Powe DG, Green AR, Habashy J, Grainge MJ et al. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: response to hormonal therapy and outcomes. Eur J Cancer. 2008; 44: 73-83.

  15. Rakha EA, Ellis IO. Lobular breast carcinoma and its variants. Semin Diagn Pathol. 2010; 27: 49-61.

  16. Arpino G, Bardou VJ, Clark GM, Elledge RM. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast; tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res. 2004; 6: R149-R156.

  17. Simpson PT, Reis-Filho JS, Lambros MB, Jones C, Steele D, Mackay A et al. Molecular profiling pleomorphic lobular carcinomas of the breast: evidence for a common molecular genetic pathway with classic lobular carcinomas. J Pathol. 2008; 215: 231-244.

  18. Hilleren DJ, Andersson IT, Lindholm K, Linneli FS. Invasive lobular carcinoma: mammographic findings in a 10-year experience. Radiology. 1991; 178 (1): 149-154.

  19. Jung NY, Kim SH, Choi BB et al. Associations between the standardized uptake value of 18 F-FDG PET/CT and the prognostic factors of invasive lobular carcinoma: in comparison with invasive ductal carcinoma. World J Surg Oncol. 2015; 13: 113.

  20. Koolen BB, Vrancken-Peeters MJ, Wesseling J et al. Association of primary tumour FDG uptake with clinical histopathological and molecular characteristics in breast cancer patients scheduled for neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2012; 39: 1830-1838.

  21. Sastre-Garau X, Jouve M, Asselain B, Vincent-Salomon A, Beuzeboc P, Dorval T et al. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Clinicopathologic analysis of 975 cases with referent to data on conservative therapy and metastatic patterns. Cancer. 1996; 77: 113-120.

  22. Korhonen T, Kuukasjärvi T, Huhtala H, Alarmo EL, Holli K, Kallioniemi A. The impact of lobular and ductal breast cancer histology on the metastatic behavior and long term survival of breast cancer patients. The Breast. 2013; 22: 1119-1124.

  23. Ferlicot S, Vincent-Salomon A, Medioni J, Genin P, Rosty C, Sigal-Zafrani B et al. Wide metastatic spreading in infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Eur J Cancer. 2004; 40: 336-341.

  24. Cristofanilli M, González-Angulo A, Sneige N, Kau SW, Broglio K, Theriault RL et al. Invasive lobular carcinoma classic type: response to primary chemotherapy and survival outcomes. J Clin Oncol. 2005; 23: 41-48.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com