Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 13/2021

01-12-2021 | Ultrasound | Breast Oncology

Chronological Trends of Breast Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Clinical, Radiologic, and Pathologic Perspectives

Authors: Si Eun Lee, MD, PhD, Ha Yan Kim, MS, Jung Hyun Yoon, MD, PhD, Eun-Kyung Kim, MD, PhD, Jee Ye Kim, MD, Min Jung Kim, MD, PhD, Ga Ram Kim, MD, PhD, Youngjean Vivian Park, MD, PhD, Hee Jung Moon, MD, PhD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 13/2021

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Because no prior studies have evaluated the chronological trends of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) despite the increasing number of surgeries performed for DCIS, this study analyzed how the clinical, radiologic, and pathologic characteristics of DCIS changed during a 10-year period.

Methods

Of 7123 patients who underwent primary breast cancer surgery at a single institution from 2006 to 2015, 792 patients with pure DCIS were included in this study. The chronological trends of age, symptoms, method for detecting either mammography or ultrasonography, tumor size, nuclear grade, comedonecrosis, and molecular markers were calculated using Poisson regression for all patients and asymptomatic patients.

Results

During 10 years, DCIS surgery rates significantly increased (p < 0.001). Despite the high percentage of DCIS detected on mammography, the detection rate for DCIS by mammography significantly decreased (97.3% in 2006 to 67.6% in 2015; p = 0.025), whereas the detection rate by ultrasound significantly increased (2.7% to 31.0%; p < 0.001). Conservation surgery rates (odds ratio [OR], 1.058), low-to-intermediate nuclear grade rates (OR, 1.069), and the absence of comedonecrosis (OR, 1.104) significantly increased over time (all p < 0.05). Estrogen receptor (ER) negativity (OR, 0.935) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) positivity rates (OR, 0.953) significantly decreased (all p < 0.05). The same trends were observed for the 613 asymptomatic patients.

Conclusion

The rate of DCIS detected on ultrasound only significantly increased during 10 years. Low-to-intermediate nuclear grade rates significantly increased, whereas ER negativity and HER2 positivity rates significantly decreased during the same period. These findings suggest that DCIS detected on screening ultrasound is less aggressive than DCIS detected on mammography.
Literature
1.
go back to reference Benson JR, Jatoi I, Toi M. Treatment of low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: is nothing better than something? Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:e442–51.PubMed Benson JR, Jatoi I, Toi M. Treatment of low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: is nothing better than something? Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:e442–51.PubMed
2.
go back to reference Esserman L, Yau C. Rethinking the standard for ductal carcinoma in situ treatment. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:881–3.PubMed Esserman L, Yau C. Rethinking the standard for ductal carcinoma in situ treatment. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:881–3.PubMed
3.
go back to reference Francis A, Thomas J, Fallowfield L, et al. Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS: the LORIS trial. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:2296–303.PubMed Francis A, Thomas J, Fallowfield L, et al. Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS: the LORIS trial. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:2296–303.PubMed
4.
go back to reference Ozanne EM, Shieh Y, Barnes J, Bouzan C, Hwang ES, Esserman LJ. Characterizing the impact of 25 years of DCIS treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;129:165–73.PubMed Ozanne EM, Shieh Y, Barnes J, Bouzan C, Hwang ES, Esserman LJ. Characterizing the impact of 25 years of DCIS treatment. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;129:165–73.PubMed
5.
go back to reference Lee LA, Silverstein MJ, Chung CT, et al. Breast cancer-specific mortality after invasive local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg. 2006;192:416–9.PubMed Lee LA, Silverstein MJ, Chung CT, et al. Breast cancer-specific mortality after invasive local recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg. 2006;192:416–9.PubMed
6.
go back to reference Romero L, Klein L, Ye W, et al. Outcome after invasive recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg. 2004;188:371–6.PubMed Romero L, Klein L, Ye W, et al. Outcome after invasive recurrence in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Am J Surg. 2004;188:371–6.PubMed
7.
go back to reference Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B, et al. Long-term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:478–88.PubMedPubMedCentral Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B, et al. Long-term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:478–88.PubMedPubMedCentral
8.
go back to reference Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V, Sopik V, Sun P. Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:888–96.PubMed Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V, Sopik V, Sun P. Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. JAMA Oncol. 2015;1:888–96.PubMed
9.
go back to reference van Seijen M, Lips EH, Thompson AM, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: to treat or not to treat, that is the question. Br J Cancer. 2019;121:285–92.PubMedPubMedCentral van Seijen M, Lips EH, Thompson AM, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: to treat or not to treat, that is the question. Br J Cancer. 2019;121:285–92.PubMedPubMedCentral
10.
go back to reference Parikh U, Chhor CM, Mercado CL. Ductal carcinoma in situ: the whole truth. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210:246–55.PubMed Parikh U, Chhor CM, Mercado CL. Ductal carcinoma in situ: the whole truth. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210:246–55.PubMed
11.
go back to reference Worni M, Akushevich I, Greenup R, et al. Trends in treatment patterns and outcomes for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107:djv263.PubMedPubMedCentral Worni M, Akushevich I, Greenup R, et al. Trends in treatment patterns and outcomes for ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2015;107:djv263.PubMedPubMedCentral
12.
go back to reference Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Abraham J, et al. Breast cancer, version 3.2020, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2020;18:452–78. Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Abraham J, et al. Breast cancer, version 3.2020, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw. 2020;18:452–78.
13.
go back to reference World Health Organization. WHO classification of tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC; 2012. World Health Organization. WHO classification of tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC; 2012.
14.
go back to reference Weigel S, Khil L, Hense HW, et al. Detection rates of ductal carcinoma in situ with biennial digital mammography screening: radiologic findings support pathologic model of tumor progression. Radiology. 2018;286:424–32.PubMed Weigel S, Khil L, Hense HW, et al. Detection rates of ductal carcinoma in situ with biennial digital mammography screening: radiologic findings support pathologic model of tumor progression. Radiology. 2018;286:424–32.PubMed
15.
go back to reference Lopez-Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Lacroix-Triki M, Marchió C, Reis-Filho JS. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathways. Histopathology. 2010;57:171–92.PubMed Lopez-Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Lacroix-Triki M, Marchió C, Reis-Filho JS. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathways. Histopathology. 2010;57:171–92.PubMed
16.
go back to reference Park TS, Hwang ES. Current trends in the management of ductal carcinoma in situ. Oncol Williston Park. 2016;30:823–31. Park TS, Hwang ES. Current trends in the management of ductal carcinoma in situ. Oncol Williston Park. 2016;30:823–31.
17.
go back to reference Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98:10869–74.PubMedPubMedCentral Sorlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, et al. Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2001;98:10869–74.PubMedPubMedCentral
18.
go back to reference Soliman NA, Yussif SM. Ki-67 as a prognostic marker according to breast cancer molecular subtype. Cancer Biol Med. 2016;13:496–504.PubMedPubMedCentral Soliman NA, Yussif SM. Ki-67 as a prognostic marker according to breast cancer molecular subtype. Cancer Biol Med. 2016;13:496–504.PubMedPubMedCentral
19.
go back to reference Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L, et al. Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: The LORD study. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:1497–510.PubMed Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L, et al. Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ: The LORD study. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51:1497–510.PubMed
20.
go back to reference Ernster VL, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE, et al. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1546–54.PubMed Ernster VL, Ballard-Barbash R, Barlow WE, et al. Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002;94:1546–54.PubMed
21.
go back to reference DeSantis CE, Ma J, Gaudet MM, et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:438–51.PubMed DeSantis CE, Ma J, Gaudet MM, et al. Breast cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:438–51.PubMed
22.
go back to reference Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat database: North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) Incidence Data-Cancer in North America (CiNA) Analytic File. 1995–2015. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat database: North American Association of Central Cancer Registries (NAACCR) Incidence Data-Cancer in North America (CiNA) Analytic File. 1995–2015.
23.
go back to reference Oseni TO, Zhang B, Coopey SB, Gadd MA, Hughes KS, Chang DC. Twenty-five year trends in the incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ in US women. J Am Coll Surg. 2019;228:932–9.PubMed Oseni TO, Zhang B, Coopey SB, Gadd MA, Hughes KS, Chang DC. Twenty-five year trends in the incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ in US women. J Am Coll Surg. 2019;228:932–9.PubMed
24.
go back to reference Weigel S, Heindel W, Heidinger O, Berkemeyer S, Hense HW. Digital mammography screening: association between detection rate and nuclear grade of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology. 2014;271:38–44.PubMed Weigel S, Heindel W, Heidinger O, Berkemeyer S, Hense HW. Digital mammography screening: association between detection rate and nuclear grade of ductal carcinoma in situ. Radiology. 2014;271:38–44.PubMed
25.
go back to reference Weigel S, Hense HW, Heidrich J, Berkemeyer S, Heindel W, Heidinger O. Digital mammography screening: does age influence the detection rates of low-, intermediate-, and high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ?. Radiology. 2016;278:707–13.PubMed Weigel S, Hense HW, Heidrich J, Berkemeyer S, Heindel W, Heidinger O. Digital mammography screening: does age influence the detection rates of low-, intermediate-, and high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ?. Radiology. 2016;278:707–13.PubMed
27.
go back to reference Weigert J, Steenbergen S. The connecticut experiment: the role of ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J. 2012;18:517–22.PubMed Weigert J, Steenbergen S. The connecticut experiment: the role of ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J. 2012;18:517–22.PubMed
28.
go back to reference Weigert J, Steenbergen S. The connecticut experiments second year: ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J. 2015;21:175–80.PubMed Weigert J, Steenbergen S. The connecticut experiments second year: ultrasound in the screening of women with dense breasts. Breast J. 2015;21:175–80.PubMed
29.
go back to reference Jung I, Han K, Kim MJ, et al. Annual trends in ultrasonography-guided 14-gauge core needle biopsy for breast lesions. Korean J Radiol. 2020;21:259–67.PubMedPubMedCentral Jung I, Han K, Kim MJ, et al. Annual trends in ultrasonography-guided 14-gauge core needle biopsy for breast lesions. Korean J Radiol. 2020;21:259–67.PubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299:2151–63.PubMedPubMedCentral Berg WA, Blume JD, Cormack JB, et al. Combined screening with ultrasound and mammography vs mammography alone in women at elevated risk of breast cancer. JAMA. 2008;299:2151–63.PubMedPubMedCentral
31.
go back to reference Chang JM, Koo HR, Moon WK. Radiologist-performed hand-held ultrasound screening at average risk of breast cancer: results from a single health screening center. Acta Radiol. 2015;56:652–8.PubMed Chang JM, Koo HR, Moon WK. Radiologist-performed hand-held ultrasound screening at average risk of breast cancer: results from a single health screening center. Acta Radiol. 2015;56:652–8.PubMed
32.
go back to reference Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09–41. Radiology. 2012;265:59–69.PubMed Hooley RJ, Greenberg KL, Stackhouse RM, Geisel JL, Butler RS, Philpotts LE. Screening US in patients with mammographically dense breasts: initial experience with Connecticut Public Act 09–41. Radiology. 2012;265:59–69.PubMed
33.
go back to reference Moon HJ, Jung I, Park SJ, Kim MJ, Youk JH, Kim EK. Comparison of cancer yields and diagnostic performance of screening mammography vs supplemental screening ultrasound in 4394 women with average risk for breast cancer. Ultraschall Med. 2015;36:255–63.PubMed Moon HJ, Jung I, Park SJ, Kim MJ, Youk JH, Kim EK. Comparison of cancer yields and diagnostic performance of screening mammography vs supplemental screening ultrasound in 4394 women with average risk for breast cancer. Ultraschall Med. 2015;36:255–63.PubMed
34.
go back to reference Moon HJ, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Yoon JH, Park VY. Comparison of clinical and pathologic characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ detected on mammography versus ultrasound only in asymptomatic patients. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2019;45:68–77.PubMed Moon HJ, Kim EK, Kim MJ, Yoon JH, Park VY. Comparison of clinical and pathologic characteristics of ductal carcinoma in situ detected on mammography versus ultrasound only in asymptomatic patients. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2019;45:68–77.PubMed
35.
go back to reference Choi SH, Choi JS, Han BK, Ko EY, Ko ES, Park KW. Long-term surveillance of ductal carcinoma in situ detected with screening mammography versus US: factors associated with second breast cancer. Radiology. 2019;292:37–48.PubMed Choi SH, Choi JS, Han BK, Ko EY, Ko ES, Park KW. Long-term surveillance of ductal carcinoma in situ detected with screening mammography versus US: factors associated with second breast cancer. Radiology. 2019;292:37–48.PubMed
36.
go back to reference Yoon JH, Han K, Koh J, et al. Outcomes of ductal carcinoma in situ according to detection modality: a multicenter study comparing recurrence between mammography and breast US. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2019;45:2623–33.PubMed Yoon JH, Han K, Koh J, et al. Outcomes of ductal carcinoma in situ according to detection modality: a multicenter study comparing recurrence between mammography and breast US. Ultrasound Med Biol. 2019;45:2623–33.PubMed
37.
go back to reference Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2784–95.PubMedPubMedCentral Hammond ME, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:2784–95.PubMedPubMedCentral
38.
go back to reference Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:118–45.PubMed Wolff AC, Hammond ME, Schwartz JN, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:118–45.PubMed
39.
go back to reference Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:736–50.PubMedPubMedCentral Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:736–50.PubMedPubMedCentral
40.
go back to reference Verdial FC, Etzioni R, Duggan C, Anderson BO. Demographic changes in breast cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis, and age associated with population-based mammographic screening. J Surg Oncol. 2017;115:517–22.PubMedPubMedCentral Verdial FC, Etzioni R, Duggan C, Anderson BO. Demographic changes in breast cancer incidence, stage at diagnosis, and age associated with population-based mammographic screening. J Surg Oncol. 2017;115:517–22.PubMedPubMedCentral
41.
go back to reference Rakha EA, Bennett RL, Coleman D, Pinder SE, Ellis IO. Review of the national external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for breast pathology in the UK. J Clin Pathol. 2017;70:51–7.PubMed Rakha EA, Bennett RL, Coleman D, Pinder SE, Ellis IO. Review of the national external quality assessment (EQA) scheme for breast pathology in the UK. J Clin Pathol. 2017;70:51–7.PubMed
42.
go back to reference Youngwirth LM, Boughey JC, Hwang ES. Surgery versus monitoring and endocrine therapy for low-risk DCIS: the COMET trial. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2017;102:62–3.PubMed Youngwirth LM, Boughey JC, Hwang ES. Surgery versus monitoring and endocrine therapy for low-risk DCIS: the COMET trial. Bull Am Coll Surg. 2017;102:62–3.PubMed
43.
go back to reference Grimm LJ, Ryser MD, Partridge AH, et al. Surgical upstaging rates for vacuum assisted biopsy proven DCIS: implications for active surveillance trials. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:3534–40.PubMedPubMedCentral Grimm LJ, Ryser MD, Partridge AH, et al. Surgical upstaging rates for vacuum assisted biopsy proven DCIS: implications for active surveillance trials. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:3534–40.PubMedPubMedCentral
44.
go back to reference Bluekens AM, Holland R, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ. Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicenter study. Radiology. 2012;265:707–14.PubMed Bluekens AM, Holland R, Karssemeijer N, Broeders MJ, den Heeten GJ. Comparison of digital screening mammography and screen-film mammography in the early detection of clinically relevant cancers: a multicenter study. Radiology. 2012;265:707–14.PubMed
45.
go back to reference Jones JL. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: progression of ductal carcinoma in situ: the pathological perspective. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8:204.PubMedPubMedCentral Jones JL. Overdiagnosis and overtreatment of breast cancer: progression of ductal carcinoma in situ: the pathological perspective. Breast Cancer Res. 2006;8:204.PubMedPubMedCentral
47.
go back to reference Ryser MD, Worni M, Turner EL, Marks JR, Durrett R, Hwang ES. Outcomes of active surveillance for ductal carcinoma in situ: a computational risk analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108:djv372.PubMed Ryser MD, Worni M, Turner EL, Marks JR, Durrett R, Hwang ES. Outcomes of active surveillance for ductal carcinoma in situ: a computational risk analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108:djv372.PubMed
Metadata
Title
Chronological Trends of Breast Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: Clinical, Radiologic, and Pathologic Perspectives
Authors
Si Eun Lee, MD, PhD
Ha Yan Kim, MS
Jung Hyun Yoon, MD, PhD
Eun-Kyung Kim, MD, PhD
Jee Ye Kim, MD
Min Jung Kim, MD, PhD
Ga Ram Kim, MD, PhD
Youngjean Vivian Park, MD, PhD
Hee Jung Moon, MD, PhD
Publication date
01-12-2021
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 13/2021
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-021-10378-3

Other articles of this Issue 13/2021

Annals of Surgical Oncology 13/2021 Go to the issue