Details
Category: Volume 07 Issue 11 November 2019
Hits: 1286

Title: Histomorphological Analysis of Invasive Breast Carcinoma in a Tertiary Care Center

Authors: Dr Lavanya N, Dr Geetha Devadas

 DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v7i11.133

Abstract

Background: Breast carcinoma is the most common malignant tumor and also one of the leading cause of the carcinoma deaths in women. There are many prognostic factors established for breast carcinoma. The most important prognostic factors of breast cancer are tumor size, histological grade and lymph nodal stage.

Objectives: To study the relative frequency, distribution and histomorphological features of breast carcinoma in the study group.

Materials and Methods: A total of 165 breast carcinoma specimens (Mastectomy) were enrolled between the period of September 2014 to August 2016. Age, tumor size, tumor grade, necrosis, associated breast lesions, lymph node involvement, lymphovascular invasion, lymphocytic response, skin infiltration, margin status were analyzed.

Results: Median age of the study group was 49 years. Invasive Carcinoma - Not Otherwise Specified was the commonest type, 38 cases (23%) had tumor less than 2 cm, 99 cases (60%) were of 2 to 5 cm in size and 28 cases (17 %) were more than 5 cm in size, 56.4% were grade 2 tumors. Node positive cases were 58.25 % (n=96), Skin infiltration was seen in 6.1% (n= 10), necrosis was seen in 47.3% (n=78), Lymphovascular invasion was seen in 74.5% (n=123), Positive margins were noted in 7.9% (n=13). Lymphocytic infiltration response was seen in 74.5% (n= 123).

Conclusion: Invasive carcinoma was the most common type. Incidence was more common at younger age group as compared to western population. More than half of the patients presented with lesser tumor size, lymph nodal metastasis, lesser grade and more lymphocytic response.  This study population had better prognostic factors.

References

  1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J, Pisani P: Estimating the world cancer burden. Globocan 2000.  Int J Cancer 2001; 94:153-156.
  2. Balkrishna B Yeole, A P Kurkure. An Epidemiological Assessment of Increasing Incidence and Trends in Breast Cancer in Mumbai and Other Sites in India, during the Last Two Decades. Asian Pacific J Cancer Prev2003; 4:51-56.
  3. Micello D, Marando A, Sahnane N et al. Androgen receptor is frequently expressed in HER2 positive, ER/PR negative breast cancers. Virchows Arch. 2010;457(4):467-476.
  4. Carreno G, Del Caser JM et al. Local recurrence after mastectomy for breast cancer: analysis of clinicopathological, biological and prognostic characteristics. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2007;102(1):61-73.
  5. Hu R, Dawood S, Holmes MD et al. Androgen receptor expression and breast cancer survival in postmenopausal women. Clin Cancer Res.2011;17(7):1867-1874.
  6. Honma N, Horii R, Iwase T et al. Clinical importance of androgen receptor in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen monotherapy. Breast cancer.2012 Feb.
  7. Khokhar A. Breast cancer in India: Where do we stand and where do we go? Asian Pac J Cancer Prev2012;13:4861-6.
  8. Chopra B, Kaur V, Singh K, Verma M, Singh S, Singh A. Age shift: breast cancer is occurring in younger age groups—is it true? Clin Cancer Investig J2014; 3: 526–29.
  9. Thangjam S, Laishram RS, Debnath K. Breast carcinoma in young females below the age of 40 years: a histopathological perspective. South Asian J Cancer2014; 3: 97–100.
  10. Sandhu D, Sandhu S, Karwasra R, Marwah S. Profile of breast cancer patients at a tertiary care hospital in north India. Indian J Cancer 2010; 47: 16–22.
  11. Kakarala M, Rozek L, Cote M, Liyanage S, Brenner DE. Breast cancer histology and receptor status characterization in Asian Indian and Pakistani women in the U.S.: a SEER analysis. BMC Cancer 2010; 10: 191.
  12. Rajesh Singh Laishram, Gegong Jongkey, Sharmila Laishram, Clinico - Morphological Patterns of Breast Cancer in Manipur, India. International Journal of Pathology 2011; 9 (1): 40-43.
  13. Albrektsen et al, Histological type and grade of breast cancer tumors by parity, age at birth, and time since birth: a register-based study in Norway. BMC Cancer 2010; 10: 226.
  14. Shirley S E, Sinclair P A, Stennett M A et al, The pathology of breast cancer in Jamaica: The National Public Health Laboratory study. West Indian Med J. 2010;59 (2):177-81.
  15. AM Dauda, M A Misauno and E O Ojo, Histopathological Types of Breast Cancer in Gombe, North Eastern Nigeria: A Seven-Year Review. Afr J Reprod Health 2011; 15(1):107-109
  16. Shet T et al, Time to change the way we diagnose mucinous carcinomas of the breast. Hum Pathol2014;45:434-5.
  17. Lakmini K B Mudduwa et al, Quick score of hormone receptor status of breast carcinoma: Correlation with the other clinicopathological prognostic parameters, Indian Journal of pathology and microbiology 2009; 52(2): 159-162.
  18. Christine L.Carter, Carol Allen, Donald E. Henson, Relation of Tumor Size, Lymph Node Status, and Survivalin 24,740 Breast Cancer Cases.Cancer1989;63:181-187.
  19. QiuJ, Yang R, RaoY, DuY, Kalembo FW, Risk Factors for Breast Cancer and Expression of Insulin-Like Growth Factor-2 (IGF-2) in Women with Breast Cancer in Wuhan City,  PLoSONE2012; 7(5): e36497.
  20. Carey LA, Perou C M, Livasy C A et al, Race, Breast cancer Subtypes, and survival in the Carolina breast cancer study, JAMA 2006; 295(21): 2492–2502.
  21. GG Vanden Eynden, I Vander Auwera, SJ VanLaere, Distinguishing blood and lymph vessel invasion in breast cancer: prospective immunohistochemical study. Br J Cancer 200694 (11):1643-1649.
  22. Chanda Bewtra et al, Clinicopathologic features of female breast cancer in Kumasi, Ghana, International Journal of Cancer Research. 2010; 6(3): 154-160
  23. Glorioperio et al, Prognostic Implications of HER-2 Status in Steroid Receptor–Positive, Lymph Node–Negative Breast Carcinoma, Am J Clin Pathol 2007; 127: 780-786.

Corresponding Author

Dr Geetha Devadas

Professor, Institute of Pathology, Madras Medical College