Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2010

01-10-2010 | American Society of Breast Surgeons

Pure Tubular Carcinoma and Axillary Nodal Metastases

Authors: Martin G. Fedko, MD, MHA, Jeffrey S. Scow, MD, Sejal S. Shah, MD, Carol Reynolds, MD, Amy C. Degnim, MD, James W. Jakub, MD, Judy C. Boughey, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Special Issue 3/2010

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Pure tubular carcinoma of the breast is a rare subtype with a low incidence of axillary lymph node metastases. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of axillary lymph node metastasis in patients with pure tubular carcinoma.

Methods

We identified patients diagnosed with tubular carcinoma from 1987 to 2009 from our institution’s tumor registry. Pathology slides were reviewed, and pure tubular carcinoma was defined as ≥90% tubule formation, low nuclear grade, and rare to no mitoses. Medical records were reviewed for clinicopathologic data including tumor size, number of positive and negative axillary lymph nodes, treatment, and recurrence.

Results

We identified 105 cases of pure tubular carcinoma of the breast in 103 patients. Median tumor size was 0.8 (range 0.1–1.8) cm. Nodal staging was performed in 93 cases (89%). Five patients (5.4%) had positive lymph nodes, and two patients (2.2%) had isolated tumor cells. All patients with lymph node metastases had tumors >0.8 cm in size. At 5.2 years’ follow-up, no patients have developed recurrence or metastases, or have died from breast cancer.

Conclusions

Axillary lymph node metastases are not common in small pure tubular carcinomas. Nodal staging may be omitted in small pure tubular carcinomas.
Literature
1.
Tavassoli F, Devilee P. Pathology and genetics tumours of breast and female genital organs. Lyon: IARC Press; 2003.
2.
Diab SG, Clark GM, Osborne CK. Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome of tubular and mucinous breast carcinomas. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1442–8.PubMed
3.
McBoyle MF, Razek HA, Carter JL, et al. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: an institutional review. Am Surg. 1997;63:639–44.PubMed
4.
Leibman AJ, Lewis M, Kruse B. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: mammographic appearance. Am J Roentgenol. 1993;160:263–5.
5.
McDivitt RW, Boyce W, Gersell D. Tubular carcinoma of the breast. Clinical pathological observations concerning 135 cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 1982;6:401–11.CrossRefPubMed
6.
Bradford WZ, Christensen WN, Fraser H, Cloninger TE. Treatment of pure tubular carcinoma of the breast. Breast J. 1998;4:437–40.CrossRef
7.
Winchester DJ, Sahin AA, Tucker SL, Singletary SE. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: predicting axillary nodal metastases and recurrence. Ann Surg. 1996;223:342–7.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Rakha EA, Lee AHS, Evans AJ, et al. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: further evidence to support its excellent prognosis. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:99–104.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Deos PH, Norris HJ. Well-differentiated (tubular) carcinoma of the breast. A clinicopathological study of 145 pure and mixed cases. Am J Clin Pathol. 1982;78:1–7.PubMed
10.
Berger AC, Miller SM, Harris MN, Roses DF. Axillary dissection for tubular carcinoma of the breast. Breast J. 1996;3:204–8.CrossRef
11.
Fisher ER, Gregorio RM, Fisher B. The pathology of invasive breast cancer: a syllabus derived from findings of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project. Cancer. 1975;36:1–85.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Javid SH, Smith BL, Mayer E, et al. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: results of a large contemporary series. Am J Surg. 2009;197:674–7.CrossRefPubMed
13.
Papadatos G, Rangan AM, Psarianos T, et al. Probability of axillary node involvement in patients with tubular carcinoma of the breast. Br J Surg. 2001;88:860–4.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Degnim AC, Reynolds C, Pantvaidya G, et al. Nonsentinel node metastasis in breast cancer patients: assessment of an existing and a new predictive nomogram. Am J Surg. 2005;190:543–50.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Scow JS, Degnim AC, Hoskins MS, et al. Assessment of the performance of the Stanford online calculator for the prediction of nonsentinel lymph node metastasis in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients. Cancer. 2009;115:4064–70.
16.
Van Zee KJ, Manasseh DM, Bevilacqua JL, et al. A nomogram for predicting the likelihood of additional nodal metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:1140–51.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Alkhatib W, Connor C, Fang F. Solitary positive sentinel lymph node accompanied by negative sentinel lymph node(s) is predictive of a negative completion axillary lymph node dissection. Am J Surg. 2007;194:856–8.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Chagpar AB, Scoggins CR, Martin RC II, et al. Prediction of sentinel lymph node-only disease in women with invasive breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2006;192:882–7.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Bevilacqua JLB, Kattan MW, Fey JV, et al. Doctor, what are my chances of having a positive sentinel lymph node? A validated nomogram for risk estimation. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3670–9.CrossRefPubMed
20.
Jakub JW, Ebert MD, Diaz NM, et al. Effect of lymphatic mapping on diagnosis and treatment of patients with T1a, T1b favorable breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2003;237:838–41.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Cabral AH, Recine M, Paramo JC, et al. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: an institutional experience and review of literature. Breast J. 2003;9:298–301.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Kader HA, Jackson J, Mates D, et al. Tubular carcinoma of the breast: a population-based study of nodal metastases at presentation and of patterns of relapse. Breast J. 2001;7:8–13.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, et al, editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed. New York: Springer; 2010.
24.
Goyal A, Newcombe RG, Chhabra A, Mansel RE. Factors affecting failed localisation and false-negative rates of sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer—results of the ALMANAC validation phase. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;99:203–8.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Kim T, Giuliano AE, Lyman GH. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast carcinoma: a metaanalysis. Cancer. 2006;106:4–16.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:881–8.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Veronesi U, Viale G, Paganelli G, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: ten-year results of a randomized controlled study. Ann Surg. 2010;251:595–600.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Fisher B, Jeong JH, Anderson S, et al. Twenty-five-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing radical mastectomy, total mastectomy, and total mastectomy followed by irradiation. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:567–75.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Wilke LG, McCall LM, Posther KE, et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node biopsy: results from a prospective international cooperative group trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:491–500.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Lucci A, McCall LM, Beitsch PD, et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) plus axillary lymph node dissection compared with SLND alone in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0011. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3657–63.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98:599–609.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P, et al. Local and regional control in breast cancer after sentinel node biopsy without axillary lymph node dissection: results from a randomized trial. Presented at 130th Annual Meeting of the American Surgical Association, Chicago, IL, April 8–10, 2010.
Metadata
Title
Pure Tubular Carcinoma and Axillary Nodal Metastases
Authors
Martin G. Fedko, MD, MHA
Jeffrey S. Scow, MD
Sejal S. Shah, MD
Carol Reynolds, MD
Amy C. Degnim, MD
James W. Jakub, MD
Judy C. Boughey, MD
Publication date
01-10-2010
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue Special Issue 3/2010
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-1254-2

Other articles of this Special Issue 3/2010

Annals of Surgical Oncology 3/2010 Go to the issue

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Trends in and Outcomes from Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) Alone vs. SLNB with Axillary Lymph Node Dissection for Node-Positive Breast Cancer Patients: Experience from the SEER Database

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Increase in Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy: Echoes of a Bygone Era?

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Factors Associated with Variance in Compliance with a Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection Quality Measure in Early-Stage Breast Cancer

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Impact of Breast Density on the Presenting Features of Malignancy

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Complication Rates of Radiation on Tissue Expander and Autologous Tissue Breast Reconstruction

American Society of Breast Surgeons

Nipple-Areolar Complex-Sparing Mastectomy: Feasibility, Patient Selection, and Technique