Elsevier

Pathology

Volume 34, Issue 5, 2002, Pages 410-416
Pathology

Atypical ductal hyperplasia and atypia of uncertain significance in core biopsies from mammographically detected lesions: correlation with excision diagnosis

https://doi.org/10.1080/0031302021000009315Get rights and content

Summary

Aims

To assess: (1) the prevalence of reporting of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) and intraductal atypia of uncertain significance (AUS) in a series of core biopsies from mammo-graphically detected lesions, (2) the proportion of cases where excision revealed breast carcinoma, and (3) whether any diagnoses should be revised on review.

Methods

Breast core biopsy reports from the Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital Breast Assessment Centre for the years 1999–2000 were retrieved. Slides from cases reported as ADH or AUS were reviewed as well as slides from the excision biopsies.

Results

There were 1048 core biopsies from 911 women. Breast carcinoma was diagnosed in 197 samples (18.8%) including 88 with invasive carcinoma (8.4%), 109 with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) (10.4%). Three biopsies (0.3%) ‘suspicious’ of invasive carcinoma proved to be so. Of 52 samples (5.0%) with a diagnosis of ADH or AUS, 46 were excised, showing seven invasive carcinomas, 15 DCIS, 11 ADH, two lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), nine fibrocystic change (FCC), one mucocoele-like lesion and one fibroadenoma. The 22 malignancies represented 47.8% of the excised lesions. On review, seven of the 52 original core diagnoses were downgraded to benign hyperplasia. Five underwent excision, revealing two FCC, one complex sclerosing lesion, and two incidental lesions unrelated to the mammographic abnormality, including a microscopic tubular carcinoma and a focus of LCIS. In one case reviewed as unsatisfactory, excision showed invasive carcinoma. Lesions of particular interest included a case of high-grade DCIS with local regression in the core biopsy (so-called ‘burnt out DCIS’), and one case diagnosed on excision as micropapillary ADH, where the review diagnosis was micropapillary DCIS.

Conclusions

ADH and AUS were reported in 5.0% of biopsies. There was a high rate of carcinoma (47.8%) in subsequent excisions. Very few diagnoses were revised on review. Current protocols for excision of lesions with a 14-gauge core biopsy diagnosis of ADH/AUS appear justified. Literature review suggests that vacuum-assisted core sampling with 11-gauge needles will not remove the need for excision. Further study of local regression of DCIS and micropapillary lesions will be worthwhile.

References (40)

  • J.E. Meyer et al.

    Evaluation of nonpalpable solid breast masses with stereotaxic large-needle core biopsy using a dedicated unit

    AJR

    (1996)
  • J.J. Gisvold et al.

    Breast biopsy: a comparative study of stereotaxically guided core and excisional techniques

    AJR

    (1994)
  • R.J. Jackman et al.

    Stereotaxic large-core needle biopsy of 450 nonpalpable breast lesions with surgical correlation in lesions with cancer or atypical hyperplasia

    Radiology

    (1994)
  • L. Liberman et al.

    Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotaxic core biopsy of breast lesions: an indication for surgical biopsy

    AJR

    (1995)
  • J.E. Dahlstrom et al.

    Diagnostic accuracy of stereotactic core biopsy in a mammographic breast cancer screening programme

    Histopathology

    (1996)
  • I. Tocino et al.

    Surgical biopsy findings in patients with atypical hyperplasia diagnosed by stereotaxic core needle biopsy

    Ann Surg Oncol

    (1996)
  • D.D. Dershaw et al.

    Nondiagnostic stereotaxic core breast biopsy: results of rebiopsy

    Radiology

    (1996)
  • F. Burbank

    Stereotactic breast biopsy of atypical ductal hyperplasia and ductal carcinoma in-situ lesions: improved accuracy with directional, vacuum-assisted biopsy

    Radiology

    (1997)
  • D.E. Gadzala et al.

    Appropriate management of atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed by stereotactic core needle breast biopsy

    Ann Surg Oncol

    (1997)
  • M.M. Moore et al.

    Association of breast cancer with the finding of atypical ductal hyperplasia at core breast biopsy

    Ann Surg

    (1997)
  • Cited by (42)

    • Underestimation of cancer in case of diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) by vacuum assisted core needle biopsy

      2012, Reports of Practical Oncology and Radiotherapy
      Citation Excerpt :

      Mammotome biopsy of mammographically suspicious nonpalpable breast changes is associated with less morbidity and shorter hospital stay, lower cost compared with open surgical biopsy, which used to be a standard practice in the past. The frequency of detection of ADH by core needle biopsy is, according to different authors, from 2 to 11%.13,14 In our study, ADH was diagnosed in 134 patients, representing 3.1% of the diagnoses made on the basis of Mammotome® biopsy.

    • Screen-detected breast lesions with an indeterminate (B3) core needle biopsy should be excised

      2008, European Journal of Surgical Oncology
      Citation Excerpt :

      If a lesion of concern is noted on the mammogram, patients are recalled for assessment that may include a clinical examination, further mammograms with special views, ultrasound (US), and collection of tissue for pathological examination by core biopsy (CB), fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) or both. A CB of the breast lesion usually provides a definitive diagnosis, but can at times be indeterminate.2 There are a number of histopathological changes that, if present, would result in the CB being reported as indeterminate (lesions that are “benign but of uncertain malignant potential” – coded “B3” in the NHSBSP).3

    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text