© 2003 by Oxford University Press
© 2003 Oxford University Press
ARTICLE |
Characteristics Associated With Recurrence Among Women With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ Treated by Lumpectomy
Affiliations of authors: Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics (KK, VLE, DHM), General Internal Medicine Section, Department of Veterans Affairs (KK), Department of Pathology (IC, BML), Department of Medicine (KK, KS), Department of Laboratory Medicine (FW), University of California, San Francisco, CA; Department of Biostatistics, University of California, Berkeley (AM); University of California, San Francisco Cancer Center (KC).
Correspondence to: Karla Kerlikowske, MD, San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, General Internal Medicine Section, 111A1, 4150 Clement St., San Francisco, CA 94121 (e-mail: kerliko{at}itsa.ucsf.edu)
Background: Clinical and histopathologic characteristics that may predict risks of recurrence in women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) have not been consistently identified. We identified factors associated with recurrence as DCIS versus invasive breast cancer and determined the 5-year absolute risks of recurrence as a function of these factors. Methods: We conducted a population-based cohort study among 1036 women in the San Francisco Bay Area who were aged 40 years or older when diagnosed with DCIS and treated by lumpectomy alone from January 1983 through December 1994. Standardized pathology reviews were conducted to determine disease recurrence, defined as DCIS or invasive breast cancer diagnosed in the ipsilateral breast containing the initial DCIS lesion or at a distant site more than 6 months after the initial diagnosis and treatment of DCIS. Conditional logistic regression models were used to determine factors associated with recurrence. All statistical significance tests were two-sided. Results: During a median follow-up of 77.9 months, 209 women (20.2%) experienced a recurrence. Overall, the 5-year risks of recurrence as invasive cancer and as DCIS were 8.2% (95% confidence interval [CI] = 6.6% to 9.8%) and 11.7% (95% CI = 9.9% to 13.3%), respectively. The 5-year risks of recurrence as invasive cancer and as DCIS were 4.8% (95% CI = 3.7% to 6.8%) and 4.8% (95% CI = 3.8% to 5.8%), respectively, for women with low-nuclear-grade DCIS; 11.8% (95% CI = 9.9% to 14.1%) and 17.1% (95% CI = 15.5% to 18.7%), respectively, for women with high-nuclear-grade DCIS; 11.6% (95% CI = 11.3% to 12.0%) and 8.6% (95% CI = 7.1% to 10.2%), respectively, for women whose initial DCIS lesion was detected by palpation; and 6.6% (95% CI = 6.2% to 7.1%) and 14.1% (95% CI = 11.4% to 17.8%), respectively, for women with DCIS detected by mammography alone. High- (versus low-) nuclear-grade DCIS lesions and detection of the initial DCIS lesion by palpation (versus mammography) were associated with recurrence as invasive cancer. High- (versus low-) nuclear-grade lesions; resection margins that were positive, uncertain, or less than 10 mm disease-free (versus 
10 mm disease-free); and age 40–49 years at diagnosis (versus 50 years) were associated with recurrence as DCIS. Conclusions: Nuclear grade is strongly associated with recurrence but not with the type of recurrence. Women with high-nuclear-grade DCIS or DCIS detected by palpation who are treated by lumpectomy alone are at relatively high risk of having an invasive breast cancer recurrence, compared with women with low-nuclear-grade or mammographically detected DCIS, and may be appropriate candidates for additional treatment.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. S. Mandelblatt and R. Silliman Hanging in the Balance: Making Decisions About the Benefits and Harms of Breast Cancer Screening Among the Oldest Old Without a Safety Net of Scientific Evidence J. Clin. Oncol., February 1, 2009; 27(4): 487 - 490. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. S. Pepe, Z. Feng, H. Janes, P. M. Bossuyt, and J. D. Potter Pivotal Evaluation of the Accuracy of a Biomarker Used for Classification or Prediction: Standards for Study Design J Natl Cancer Inst, October 15, 2008; 100(20): 1432 - 1438. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. S. Hwang, D. L. Miglioretti, R. Ballard-Barbash, D. L. Weaver, K. Kerlikowske, and for the National Cancer Institute Breast Cancer Su Association between Breast Density and Subsequent Breast Cancer Following Treatment for Ductal Carcinoma In situ Cancer Epidemiol. Biomarkers Prev., December 1, 2007; 16(12): 2587 - 2593. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Mazouni, F. Peintinger, S. Wan-Kau, F. Andre, A. M. Gonzalez-Angulo, W. F. Symmans, F. Meric-Bernstam, V. Valero, G. N. Hortobagyi, and L. Pusztai Residual Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in Patients With Complete Eradication of Invasive Breast Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Does Not Adversely Affect Patient Outcome J. Clin. Oncol., July 1, 2007; 25(19): 2650 - 2655. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. A. de Roos, B. van der Vegt, J. de Vries, J. Wesseling, and G. H. de Bock Pathological and Biological Differences Between Screen-Detected and Interval Ductal Carcinoma in situ of the Breast Ann. Surg. Oncol., July 1, 2007; 14(7): 2097 - 2104. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 K. Armstrong, E. Moye, S. Williams, J. A. Berlin, and E. E. Reynolds Screening Mammography in Women 40 to 49 Years of Age: A Systematic Review for the American College of Physicians Ann Intern Med, April 3, 2007; 146(7): 516 - 526. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. S. Hwang, J. L. McLennan, D. H. Moore, B. B. Crawford, L. J. Esserman, and J. L. Ziegler Ductal Carcinoma In Situ in BRCA Mutation Carriers J. Clin. Oncol., February 20, 2007; 25(6): 642 - 647. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
P.-L. Giacalone, P. Roger, O. Dubon, N. El Gareh, S. Rihaoui, P. Taourel, and J. P. Daures Comparative Study of the Accuracy of Breast Resection in Oncoplastic Surgery and Quadrantectomy in Breast Cancer Ann. Surg. Oncol., February 1, 2007; 14(2): 605 - 614. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
E. B. Claus, S. Petruzella, D. Carter, and S. Kasl Quality of Life for Women Diagnosed With Breast Carcinoma in Situ J. Clin. Oncol., October 20, 2006; 24(30): 4875 - 4881. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. J. Esserman, A. S. Kumar, A. F. Herrera, J. Leung, A. Au, Y.-Y. Chen, D. H. Moore, D. F. Chen, J. Hellawell, D. Wolverton, et al. Magnetic Resonance Imaging Captures the Biology of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ J. Clin. Oncol., October 1, 2006; 24(28): 4603 - 4610. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 S. K. Plevritis, B. M. Sigal, P. Salzman, J. Rosenberg, and P. Glynn Chapter 12: A Stochastic Simulation Model of U.S. Breast Cancer Mortality Trends From 1975 to 2000 J Natl Cancer Inst Monographs, October 1, 2006; 2006(36): 86 - 95. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. D. Smith, B. G. Haffty, T. A. Buchholz, G. L. Smith, D. H. Galusha, J. E. Bekelman, and C. P. Gross Effectiveness of radiation therapy in older women with ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst, September 20, 2006; 98(18): 1302 - 1310. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. J. Katz, P. M. Lantz, N. K. Janz, A. Fagerlin, K. Schwartz, L. Liu, D. Deapen, B. Salem, I. Lakhani, and M. Morrow Patterns and Correlates of Local Therapy for Women With Ductal Carcinoma-In-Situ J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2005; 23(13): 3001 - 3007. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 E. S. Hwang, S. DeVries, K. L. Chew, D. H. Moore II, K. Kerlikowske, A. Thor, B.-M. Ljung, and F. M. Waldman Patterns of Chromosomal Alterations in Breast Ductal Carcinoma In situ Clin. Cancer Res., August 1, 2004; 10(15): 5160 - 5167. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. J. Burstein, K. Polyak, J. S. Wong, S. C. Lester, and C. M. Kaelin Ductal Carcinoma in Situ of the Breast N. Engl. J. Med., April 1, 2004; 350(14): 1430 - 1441. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|