Top

World Journal of Surgical Oncology

Published in:

Open Access 01-12-2016 | Research

Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast had poor clinical characteristics but showed no difference in prognosis compared with invasive ductal carcinoma

Authors: Guanqiao Li, Shiping Yang, Jia Yao, Zhenping Wang, Guangyu Yao, Mingfeng Liu, Changsheng Ye

Published in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology | Issue 1/2016

Abstract

Background

It is controversial for prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) compared with invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the breast. To better understand the difference between IMPC and IDC prognoses, we conducted this retrospective study.

Methods

Data from 33 patients with IMPC were retrospectively reviewed, and the clinicopathologic characteristics and survival status were compared with those of 347 patients with IDC who were treated during the same period.

Results

The IMPC cases were of larger tumor size, greater proportion of nodal involvement, and an increased incidence of lymphovascular invasion compared with IDC cases. The overall survival (OS), local relapse-free survival (LRFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and failure-free survival (FFS) rates were not significantly different between IMPC and IDC. The 3-year OS rate was 97 vs 94.2 % for the IMPC and IDC patients, respectively. The 3-year FFS rate was 87.9 vs 86.2 % for the IMPC and IDC patients, respectively. For IMPC patients, the 3-year LRFS rate was 93.9 % and in IDC patients was 89.0 %. The 3-year DMFS rates of IMPC patients was 90.9 % and IDC patients was 89 %.

Conclusions

IMPC had poor clinical characteristics, but it showed no difference in OS, FFS, LRFS, and DMFS compare with IDC.

Benson JR, Jatoi I. The global breast cancer burden. Future Oncol. 2012;8(6):697–702.CrossRefPubMed

Siriaunkgul S, Tavassoli FA. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. Mod Pathol. 1993;6:660e2.

Luna-More S, delosSantos F, Breton JJ, Candas MA. Estrogen and progesterone receptors, c-erbB-2, p53, and Bcl-2 in thirty-three invasive micropapillary breast carcinomas. Pathol ResPract. 1996;192:27–32.

Chen L, Fan Y, Lang RG, Guo XJ, Sun YL, Cui LF, Liu FF, Wei J, Zhang XM, Fu L. Breast carcinoma with micropapillary features: clinicopathologic study and long-term follow-up of 100 cases. Int J Surg Pathol. 2008;16:155–63.CrossRefPubMed

De la Cruz C1, Moriya T, Endoh M, Watanabe M, Takeyama J, Yang M, Oguma M, Sakamoto K, Suzuki T, Hirakawa H, Orita Y, Ohuchi N, Sasano H. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: clinicopathological and immunohistochemical study. Pathol Int. 2004;54(2):90–6.CrossRefPubMed

Kuroda H, Sakamoto G, Ohnisi K, Itoyama S. Clinical and pathologic features of invasive micropapillary carcinoma. Breast Cancer. 2004;11(2):169–74.CrossRefPubMed

Shi WB, Yang LJ, Hu X, Zhou J, Zhang Q, Shao ZM. Clinico-pathological featuresand prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma compared to invasive ductal carcinoma: a population-based study from China. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):e101390.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Yu JI, Choi DH, Park W, Huh SJ, Cho EY, Lim YH, Ahn JS, Yang JH, Nam SJ. Differences in prognostic factors and patterns of failure between invasive micropapillary carcinoma and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: matched case-control study. Breast. 2010;19:231–7.CrossRefPubMed

Liu Y, Huang X, Bi R, Yang W, Shao Z. Similar prognoses for invasive micropapillary breast carcinoma and pure invasive ductal carcinoma: a retrospectively matched cohort study in China. PLoS One. 2014;9(9):e106564.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

10.

Chen AC, Paulino AC, Schwartz MR, Rodriguez AA, Bass BL, Chang JC, Teh BS. Population-based comparison of prognostic factors in invasive micropapillary and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Br J Cancer. 2014;111(3):619–22.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Böcker W. WHO classification of breast tumors and tumors of the female genital organs: pathology and genetics. Verh Dtsch Ges Pathol. 2002;86:116–9.PubMed

12.

Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, Bassett LW, Berry D, Bland KI, Borgen PI, Clark GM, Edge SB, Hayes DF, Hughes LL, Hutter RV, Morrow M, Page DL, Recht A, Theriault RL, Thor A, Weaver DL, Wieand HS, Greene FL. Staging system for breast cancer: revisions for the 6th edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. Surg Clin North Am. 2003;83:803–19.CrossRefPubMed

13.

Gokce H, Durak MG, Akin MM, Canda T, Balci P, Ellidokuz H, Demirkan B, Gorken IB, Sevinc AI, Kocdor MA, Saydam S, Harmancioglu O. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathologic study of 103 cases of an unusual and highly aggressive variant of breast carcinoma. Breast J. 2013;19(4):374–81.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Vingiani A, Maisonneuve P, Dell’orto P, Farante G, Rotmensz N, Lissidini G, Del Castillo A, Renne G, Luini A, Colleoni M, Viale G, Pruneri G. The clinical relevance of micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a case-control study. Histopathology. 2013;63:217–24.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Chen AC, Paulino AC, Schwartz MR, Rodriguez AA, Bass BL, Chang JC, Teh BS. Prognostic markers for invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a population-based analysis. Clin Breast Cancer. 2013;13(2):133–9.CrossRefPubMed

16.

Rodrigues MA, Gamba CO, Faria JA, Ferreira Ê, Goes AM, Gomes DA, Cassali GD. Inner nuclear membrane localization of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) in spontaneous canine model of invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the mammary gland. Pathol Res Pract. 2016;212(4):340–4.CrossRefPubMed

17.

Yu JI, Choi DH, Huh SJ, Cho EY, Kim K, Chie EK, Ha SW, Park IA, Ahn SJ, Lee JS, Shin KH, Kwon Y, Kim YB, Suh CO, Koo JS, Kim JH, Jeong BG, Kim IA, Lee JH, Park W. Differences in prognostic factors and failure patterns between invasive micropapillary carcinoma and carcinoma with micropapillary component versus invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: retrospective multicenter case-control study (KROG 13-06). Clin Breast Cancer. 2015;15(5):353–61. e2.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Graham LJ, Shupe MP, Schneble EJ, Flynt FL, Clemenshaw MN, Kirkpatrick AD, Gallagher C, Nissan A, Henry L, Stojadinovic A, Peoples GE, Shumway NM. Current approaches and challenges in monitoring treatment responses in breast cancer. J Cancer. 2014;5(1):58–68.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

Title: Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast had poor clinical characteristics but showed no difference in prognosis compared with invasive ductal carcinoma
Authors: Guanqiao Li
Shiping Yang
Jia Yao
Zhenping Wang
Guangyu Yao
Mingfeng Liu
Changsheng Ye
Publication date: 01-12-2016
Publisher: BioMed Central
Published in: World Journal of Surgical Oncology / Issue 1/2016
Electronic ISSN: 1477-7819
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-016-0960-z

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast had poor clinical characteristics but showed no difference in prognosis compared with invasive ductal carcinoma

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 1/2016

Mucosa-associated lymphoid tissue (MALT) lymphoma as an unusual cause of malignant hilar biliary stricture: a case report with literature review

Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation with contrast-enhanced ultrasonography for solitary and sporadic renal cell carcinoma in patients with autosomal dominant polycystic kidney disease

Postoperative chemoradiotherapy versus chemotherapy for R0 resected gastric cancer with D2 lymph node dissection: an up-to-date meta-analysis

Primary alveolar soft part sarcoma of uterine corpus: a case report with immunohistochemical, ultrastructural study and review of literature

A scoring system is an effective tool for predicting central lymph node metastasis in papillary thyroid microcarcinoma: a case-control study

Association between alcohol dehydrogenase-2 gene polymorphism and esophageal cancer risk: a meta-analysis