Microinvasive Carcinoma versus Ductal CarcinomaIn Situ: A Comparison of Clinicopathological Features and Clinical Outcomes

• DOI: 10.4048/jbc.2018.21.2.197
• Publication Date: 2018-06-22T02:10:34Z
• Authors: Milim Kim; Hyun Jeong Kim; Yul Ri Chung; Eunyoung Kang; Eun-Kyu Kim; Se Hyun Kim; Yu Jung Kim; Jee Hyun Kim; In Ah Kim; So Yeon Park
• Keywords: Carcinoma in situ

Although microinvasive carcinoma is distinct from ductal in situ (DCIS), the clinical significance of microinvasion DCIS remains elusive. The purpose this study to evaluate clinicopathological features and outcomes compared with pure DCIS. We assessed 613 cases that were consecutively resected 2003 2014 analyzed variables, expression standard biomarkers such as estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone (PR), human epidermal growth factor 2 (HER2), p53, Ki-67, tumor recurrence. Among cases, 136 (22.2%) classified carcinoma. Microinvasive was significantly associated a large extent, high nuclear grade, necrosis, comedotype architectural pattern. ER PR expressions dominantly observed DCIS, whereas positive HER2 status, p53 overexpression, Ki-67 proliferation indices more frequently Lymph node metastasis found only four multifocal microinvasion. In multivariate analysis, comedo-type pattern, negative status be independent predictors During follow-up, 12 patients had ipsilateral breast recurrence, no differences recurrence rates between those triple-negative subtype carcinomas are terms biomarker but similar outcomes. Our results suggest can treated followed up