Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Presence of Lobular Carcinoma In Situ Does Not Increase Local Recurrence in Patients Treated with Breast-Conserving Therapy

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) is known to be a risk factor for the development of invasive breast cancer. Debate continues as to whether LCIS is also a precursor lesion. We hypothesized that, if LCIS were a precursor, its presence in the lumpectomy specimen, particularly at the margin, could increase local recurrence (LR) after breast-conserving therapy (BCT).

Methods

2894 patients treated with BCT for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), stage I or II breast cancer between 1/80 and 5/07 were identified. Patients with DCIS or invasive cancer at the margins or those receiving neoadjuvant therapy were excluded. Group A had 290 patients with LCIS in the lumpectomy; 84 had LCIS at the final margin. Group B included 2604 patients with no evidence of LCIS.

Results

Median patient age in group A and B was 57 and 58 years, respectively (P = 0.05); 12% and 13%, respectively, of patients in group A and B had margins <2 mm (P = NS). The histologic distribution of tumor types in group A was lobular in 47.2%, ductal in 34.5%, DCIS in 11.4%, and other invasive histologies in 6.9%, compared with 4.1%, 76.3%,13.6%, and 6.0% for group B, respectively (P < 0.0001). There was no significant difference between the groups in tumor–node–metastasis (TNM) stage. The crude rate of LR was 4.5% in group A and 3.8% in group B (P = NS). Five- and 10-year actuarial LR rates for LCIS at the margin were 6% and 6%, 1% and 15% for LCIS present but not at the margin, and 2% and 6% for no LCIS (P = NS), for group A and B, respectively. In multivariate analysis, menopausal status and adjuvant therapy use were significant predictors of LR. LCIS, either in the specimen or at the margin, was not significantly associated with LR.

Conclusion

Presence of LCIS, even at the margin, in BCT specimens does not have an impact on LR. Re-excision is not indicated if LCIS is present or close to margin surfaces. These findings do not support consideration of LCIS as a precursor to the development of invasive lesions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

FIG. 1
FIG. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Foote F, Stewart F. Lobular carcinoma in situ: a rare form of mammary carcinoma. Am J Pathol 1941; 17:491–6

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Haagensen CD, Lane N, Lattes R, et al. Lobular neoplasia (so-called lobular carcinoma in situ) of the breast. Cancer 1978; 42:737–69

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Rosen PP, Kosloff C, Lieberman PH, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Detailed analysis of 99 patients with average follow-up of 24 years. Am J Surg Pathol 1978; 2:225–51

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Shelley Hwang E, Nyante SJ, Yi Chen Y, et al. Clonality of lobular carcinoma in situ and synchronous invasive lobular carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 100:2562–72

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Berx G, Cleton-Jansen AM, Strumane K, et al. E-cadherin is inactivated in a majority of invasive human lobular breast cancers by truncation mutations throughout its extracellular domain. Oncogene 1996; 13:1919–25

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Lakhani SR, Collins N, Sloane JP, et al. Loss of heterozygosity in lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin Mol Pathol 1995; 48:M74–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Abner AL, Connolly JL, Recht A, et al. The relation between the presence and extent of lobular carcinoma in situ and the risk of local recurrence for patients with infiltrating carcinoma of the breast treated with conservative surgery and radiation therapy. Cancer 2000; 88:1072–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Ben-David MA, Kleer CG, Paramagul C, et al. Is lobular carcinoma in situ as a component of breast carcinoma a risk factor for local failure after breast-conserving therapy? Results of a matched pair analysis. Cancer 2006; 106:28–34

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jolly S, Kestin LL, Goldstein NS, et al. The impact of lobular carcinoma in situ in association with invasive breast cancer on the rate of local recurrence in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2006; 66:365–71

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Moran M, Haffty BG. Lobular carcinoma in situ as a component of breast cancer: the long-term outcome in patients treated with breast-conservation therapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1998; 40:353–8

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Sasson AR, Fowble B, Hanlon AL, et al. Lobular carcinoma in situ increases the risk of local recurrence in selected patients with stages I and II breast carcinoma treated with conservative surgery and radiation. Cancer 2001; 91:1862–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. American Society of Breast Disease. ASBD Advisor 2008; Feb 17

  13. American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC cancer staging manual. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002

  14. Fowble B, Freedman G. (2000) Cancer of the Breast. In: Wang C (ed) Clinical radiation oncology: Indications, techniques and results. New York: Wiley-Liss, pp 243–51

  15. Recht A, Silver B, Schnitt S, et al. Breast relapse following primary radiation therapy for early breast cancer. I. Classification, frequency and salvage. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1985; 11:1271–6

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Lakhani SR, Audretsch W, Cleton-Jensen AM, et al. The management of lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS). Is LCIS the same as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)? Eur J Cancer 2006; 42:2205–11

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Fisher ER, Land SR, Fisher B, et al. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project: twelve-year observations concerning lobular carcinoma in situ. Cancer 2004; 100:238–44

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bratthauer GL, Moinfar F, Stamatakos MD, et al. Combined E-cadherin and high molecular weight cytokeratin immunoprofile differentiates lobular, ductal, and hybrid mammary intraepithelial neoplasias. Hum Pathol 2002; 33:620–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Cabioglu N, Hunt KK, Buchholz TA, et al. Improving local control with breast-conserving therapy: a 27-year single-institution experience. Cancer 2005; 104:20–9

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Pass H, Vicini FA, Kestin LL, et al. Changes in management techniques and patterns of disease recurrence over time in patients with breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy at a single institution. Cancer 2004; 101:713–20

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Page DL, Kidd TE Jr, Dupont WD, et al. Lobular neoplasia of the breast: higher risk for subsequent invasive cancer predicted by more extensive disease. Hum Pathol 1991; 22:1232–9

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

The authors thank Cindy Rosser for her collection and management of the data for the study population.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Monica Morrow MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ciocca, R.M., Li, T., Freedman, G.M. et al. Presence of Lobular Carcinoma In Situ Does Not Increase Local Recurrence in Patients Treated with Breast-Conserving Therapy. Ann Surg Oncol 15, 2263–2271 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-9960-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-9960-8

Keywords

Navigation