Is it Time to Retire the Term of Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma in Situ and Replace it With Ductal Neoplasia?

As the leading cause of cancer morbidity and the second leading cause of cancer mortality among women, breast cancer continues to remain a major global public health problem. Consequently, significant attention has been directed toward early breast cancer detection and prevention. As a result, the number of image-detected biopsies has increased, and minimally invasive diagnostic procedures have almost replaced open surgical biopsies. Therefore, pathologists are expected to provide more information with less tissue and diagnose increasing numbers of atypical proliferative breast lesions, in situ lesions, and small breast carcinomas. This is a difficult task, as reflected by continuous reports highlighting the challenges associated with morphologic distinction between atypical ductal hyperplasia and low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. The current interobserver variability among pathologists to accurately define these two entities often leads to silent overdiagnosis and overtreatment. Up to now, there are no reproducible morphologic features and/or any reliable biomarkers that can accurately separate the above-mentioned entities. Despite these reports, patients diagnosed with low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ are subject to cancer therapy regardless of the fact that low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ is known to be an indolent lesion. Studies have shown that low and high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ are genetically different forms of breast cancer precursors; however, the term ductal carcinoma in situ is followed by cancer therapy regardless of the grade and biology of the tumor. In contrast, patients with the diagnoses of atypical ductal hyperplasia do not undergo cancer therapy. In the current article, attempts are made to highlight the continuous dilemma in distinction between atypical ductal hyperplasia and low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. Going forward, we suggest that low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ be referred to as ductal neoplasia. This alternative terminology allows for different management and follow-up strategies by eliminating the word carcinoma. Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Citation

Shahla Masood, Melvin J Silverstein. Is it Time to Retire the Term of Low-Grade Ductal Carcinoma in Situ and Replace it With Ductal Neoplasia? Advances in anatomic pathology. 2023 Nov 01;30(6):361-367

PMID: 37746902

search → result