Rowe, J. Jordi

Aims . To identify the most common reasons for consultation to a large specialty breast pathology service at a major institution. To provide insight into the overall challenges in practicing breast pathology. Methods . The anatomic pathology database at one institution was searched for all breast consultations received in 2021, excluding in-house patients and patients who were transferring care. Results . A total of 553 patients met the criteria ( n = 553) from a variety of academic and private practices. For each patient, the paperwork from the submitting institution was reviewed to identify the specific question, and subsequently classified into 14 categories. The reason for the consultation request was not provided for 78 (14%) patients, and a review of the outside diagnoses, where applicable, was performed. In summary, the top 5 reasons for consultation were: (1) assistance with classification of atypical intraductal epithelial proliferations (32%); (2) evaluation for the presence of (micro-)invasive carcinoma (14%); (3) evaluation of fibroepithelial (12%), (4) papillary (11%), and (5) spindle cell lesions (7%). Conclusion . We show an ongoing educational and practice gap for pathologists who most commonly struggle with classifying atypical precursor lesions, specifically when these are small and focal, or bordering on intraductal carcinoma (32%, 177/553). The second most common reason for consultation was classifying invasive carcinomas as microinvasive and subtypes (total of 20.4%, 113/553). As such, our data supports the continued need for rigid and clear criteria for diagnosing threshold lesions (namely atypical hyperplasias) and intraductal carcinoma of the breast.

Introduction: Solitary fibrous tumor (SFT) is a fibroblastic tumor with malignant potential that is underpinned by a recurrent inv12(q13q13)-derived NAB2::STAT6 fusion. Breast and axilla are uncommon locations for this entity. Methods: Records of two academic institutions were electronically searched for breast and axillary SFTs. Clinical and pathologic data were reviewed. Literature review for breast or axillary SFTs was performed. Present study and previously reported tumors were stratified using five SFT risk models: original and modified Demicco metastatic risk, Salas local recurrence risk, Salas metastatic risk, and Thompson local recurrence risk. Results: Five patients with breast or axillary SFT were identified. Median age was 49 years, and median follow-up (available for four patients) was 82 months. Three patients showed no evidence of disease, and one developed recurrence. Literature review identified 58 patients with breast or axillary SFT. Median age was 54 years, and median follow-up (available for 35 patients) was 24 months. Thirty-one patients showed no evidence of disease, three developed recurrence, and one developed metastasis. Original and modified Demicco models and Thompson model showed the highest sensitivity; original and modified Demicco models and Salas metastatic risk model demonstrated the highest specificity. Kaplan–Meier models were used to assess recurrence-free probability (RFP). Original and modified Demicco models predicted RFP when stratified by “low risk” and “moderate/intermediate and high risk” tumor, though sample size was small. Conclusions: While many SFTs of breast and axilla remain indolent, a subset may develop recurrence and rarely metastasize. The modified Demicco risk model demonstrated optimal performance characteristics.

AimsDue to its rarity and non‐specific clinical and pathological features, low‐grade adenosquamous carcinoma (LGASC) of the breast continues to pose diagnostic challenges. Unlike other triple‐negative breast carcinomas, LGASC tends to have an indolent clinical behaviour. It is essential to recognise this lesion for accurate diagnosis and appropriate management.Methods and resultsTwenty‐five cases of LGASC were identified in our archives and collaborating institutes. Cases of LGASC with dominant coexisting other type carcinomas were excluded. We studied the clinical presentation, morphological features, patterns of the commonly used immunohistochemical stains and follow‐up. In our cohort, LGASC was commonly located at the outer aspect of the breast and associated with intraductal papilloma. The morphology of LGASC is characterised by infiltrating small glands and nests with variable squamous differentiation. We also found cuffing desmoplastic (fibrolamellar) stromal change in 75% of patients and peripheral lymphocytic aggregates in 87.5% of patients. P63 and smooth muscle myosin (SMM) were the most common myoepithelial markers used to assist in diagnosis. P63 often stained peripheral tumour cells surrounding invasive glands (circumferential staining in 80% of the cases), mimicking myoepithelial cells. It also stained the small nests with squamous differentiation. However, SMM was negative in 63% of the cases. The vast majority of our cases were triple‐negative; only a few had focal and weak expressions of ER and PR. One patient who did not have excision developed lymph node metastasis. Most patients underwent excision or mastectomy with negative margins as surgical treatment; there were no recurrences or metastases in these patients with clinical follow‐ups up to 108 months.ConclusionsLGASC has some unique, although not entirely specific, morphological features and immunohistochemical staining patterns. Fibrolamellar stromal change, peripheral lymphocytic aggregates and variable staining of p63 and SMM are valuable features to facilitate the diagnosis.

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.