1992Diagnostic CytopathologyRequires access

Comparative features of comedo and noncomedo ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast on fine‐needle aspiration biopsy

Yasmin R. Malamud, Barbara S. Ducatman, Helen Wang

Open publisher page 28 citations

Abstract

To determine whether fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) can differentiate between comedo (C-DCIS) and noncomedo ductal carcinoma in situ (NC-DCIS), we reviewed retrospectively the preoperative FNAB and surgical biopsy slides of 13 cases of DCIS with adequate cytologic material. Eight were NC-DCIS and 5 were C-DCIS. Three (60 percent) of the C-DCIS and 7 (88%) of the NC-DCIS were nonpalpable lesions biopsied under conventional mammographic guidance. Three (60%) of the C-DCIS but only 2 (25%) of the NC-DCIS were considered either suspicious or positive for malignancy on FNAB, the remainder in both groups being atypical. A statistically significant difference in marked nuclear pleomorphism (60% of C-DCIS vs. 0% of NC-DCIS, P = 0.04) and large nucleoli (60% of C-DCIS vs. 0% of NC-DCIS, P = 0.04) was observed between these 2 groups. DCIS is morphologically diverse, and it appears that the cytologic features of individual cells on FNAB may distinguish C-DCIS from NC-DCIS.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

To determine whether fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) can differentiate between comedo (C-DCIS) and noncomedo ductal carcinoma in situ (NC-DCIS), we reviewed retrospectively the preoperative FNAB and surgical biopsy slides of 13 cases of DCIS with adequate cytologic material. Eight were NC-DCIS and 5 were C-DCIS. Three (60 percent) of the C-DCIS and 7 (88%) of the NC-DCIS were nonpalpable lesions biopsied under conventional mammographic guidance. Three (60%) of the C-DCIS but only 2 (25%) of the NC-DCIS were considered either suspicious or positive for malignancy on FNAB, the remainder in both groups being atypical. A statistically significant difference in marked nuclear pleomorphism (60% of C-DCIS vs. 0% of NC-DCIS, P = 0.04) and large nucleoli (60% of C-DCIS vs. 0% of NC-DCIS, P = 0.04) was observed between these 2 groups. DCIS is morphologically diverse, and it appears that the cytologic features of individual cells on FNAB may distinguish C-DCIS from NC-DCIS.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 28 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

To determine whether fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) can differentiate between comedo (C-DCIS) and noncomedo ductal carcinoma in situ (NC-DCIS), we reviewed retrospectively the preoperative FNAB and surgical biopsy slides of 13 cases of DCIS with adequate cytologic material. Eight were NC-DCIS and 5 were C-DCIS. Three (60 percent) of the C-DCIS and 7 (88%) of the NC-DCIS were nonpalpable lesions biopsied under conventional mammographic guidance. Three (60%) of the C-DCIS but only 2 (25%) of the NC-DCIS were considered either suspicious or positive for malignancy on FNAB, the remainder in both groups being atypical. A statistically significant difference in marked nuclear pleomorphism (60% of C-DCIS vs. 0% of NC-DCIS, P = 0.04) and large nucleoli (60% of C-DCIS vs. 0% of NC-DCIS, P = 0.04) was observed between these 2 groups. DCIS is morphologically diverse, and it appears that the cytologic features of individual cells on FNAB may distinguish C-DCIS from NC-DCIS.

Key concepts: Comedo, Medicine, Ductal carcinoma, Biopsy, In situ, Carcinoma in situ, Fine-needle aspiration, Carcinoma

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparative features of comedo and noncomedo ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast on fine‐needle aspiration biopsy — Research Paper | ScholarLens