Lawton, Thomas J.

PURPOSE: Recent studies have suggested that the sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is an accurate alternative staging procedure for women with breast cancer. The goal of this study was to identify a subset of breast cancer patients in whom metastatic disease was confined only to the SLN. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From two institutions, we recruited 222 women with breast cancer for SLN biopsy. A SLN biopsy was performed in each patient, followed by an axillary dissection in 182 patients. Histologic and immunohistochemical cytokeratin stains were used on all SLNs. RESULTS: The SLN was identified in 220 (97.8%) of the 225 biopsies. Evidence of metastatic breast cancer in the SLN was found in 60 (27.0%) of the 222 patients. Of these patients, 32 (53.3%) had evidence of tumor in the SLN only. By multivariate analysis, two factors were found to be significantly associated with a higher likelihood of tumor involvement in the non-SLNs: primary tumor size larger than 2.0 cm (P = .0004) and macrometastasis (> 2.0 mm) in the SLN (P = .002). Additional analysis revealed that none (0%; 95% confidence interval, 0% to 18.5%) of the 18 patients with primary tumors ≤ 2.0 cm and micrometastasis to the SLN had remaining axillary lymph node involvement. CONCLUSION: The primary tumor size and metastasis size in the SLN are independent factors in predicting the incidence of tumor in the non-SLNs. Therefore, the SLN biopsy alone may be adequate for staging and/or therapy decision making in patients with primary breast tumors ≤ 2.0 cm and micrometastasis in the SLN.

Fibroepithelial lesions with cellular stroma are frequently termed cellular fibroadenomas although criteria for distinguishing them from a phyllodes tumor are vague and subjective. However, the clinical implications and surgical management for these 2 lesions may be different. We randomly selected 21 cases of fibroepithelial lesions sent in consultation to the senior author that were challenging to classify as cellular fibroadenoma or phyllodes tumor. One to 2 representative slides of each case along with patient age were sent to 10 pathologists who specialize in breast pathology. The World Health Organization criteria for phyllodes tumors and a diagnosis form were included with the study set. For the purposes of data reporting, fibroadenoma and cellular fibroadenoma are considered together. In only 2 cases was there uniform agreement as to whether the tumor represented a fibroadenoma or phyllodes tumor. Of the remaining 19 cases, if the diagnoses of fibroadenoma and benign phyllodes tumor were combined and separated from borderline and malignant phyllodes tumors, there was 100% agreement in 53% of cases and 90% agreement in 79% of cases. This study highlights the difficulty that exists in distinguishing some cellular fibroadenomas from phyllodes tumors even for pathologists who specialize in breast pathology. However, there appears to be considerable agreement when cellular fibroadenomas and benign phyllodes tumors are distinguished from borderline and malignant phyllodes tumors. Further studies are needed to determine if there is a clinically significant difference between cellular fibroadenomas and benign phyllodes tumors and how to better distinguish them from borderline and malignant phyllodes tumors.

Abstract Purpose. The Oncotype DX assay predicts likelihood of distant recurrence and improves patient selection for adjuvant chemotherapy in estrogen receptor–positive (ER-positive) early stage breast cancer. This study has two primary endpoints: to evaluate the impact of Oncotype DX recurrence scores (RS) on chemotherapy recommendations and to compare the estimated recurrence risk predicted by breast oncology specialists to RS. Methods. One hundred fifty-four patients with ER-positive early stage breast cancer and available RS results were selected. Clinicopathologic data were provided to four surgeons, four medical oncologists, and four pathologists. Participants were asked to estimate recurrence risk category and offer their chemotherapy recommendations initially without and later with knowledge of RS results. The three most important clinicopathologic features guiding their recommendations were requested. Results. Ninety-five (61.7%), 45 (29.2%), and 14 (9.1%) tumors were low, intermediate, and high risk by RS, respectively. RS significantly correlated with tumor grade, mitotic activity, lymphovascular invasion, hormone receptor, and HER2/neu status. Estimated recurrence risk by participants agreed with RS in 54.2% ± 2.3% of cases. Without and with knowledge of RS, 82.3% ± 1.3% and 69.0% ± 6.9% of patients may be overtreated, respectively (p = 0.0322). Inclusion of RS data resulted in a 24.9% change in treatment recommendations. There was no significant difference in recommendations between groups of participants. Conclusions. Breast oncology specialists tended to overestimate the risk of tumor recurrence compared with RS. RS provides useful information that improves patient selection for chemotherapy and changes treatment recommendations in approximately 25% of cases.