| Title |
Observation versus excision of lobular neoplasia on core needle biopsy of the breast
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, January 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10549-017-4629-2 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Hank Schmidt, Brittany Arditi, Margaux Wooster, Christina Weltz, Laurie Margolies, Ira Bleiweiss, Elisa Port, Shabnam Jaffer |
| Abstract |
Controversy surrounds management of lobular neoplasia (LN), [atypical lobular hyperplasia (ALH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS)], diagnosed on core needle biopsy (CNB). Retrospective series of pure ALH and LCIS reported "upgrade" rate to DCIS or invasive cancer in 0-40%. Few reports document radiologic/pathologic correlation to exclude cases of discordance that are the likely source of most upgrades, and there is minimal data on outcomes with follow-up imaging and clinical surveillance. Cases of LN alone on CNB (2001-2014) were reviewed. CNB yielding LN with other pathologic findings for which surgery was indicated were excluded. All patients had either surgical excision or clinical follow-up with breast imaging. All cases included were subject to radiologic-pathologic correlation after biopsy. 178 cases were identified out of 62213 (0.3%). 115 (65%) patients underwent surgery, and 54 (30%) patients had surveillance for > 12 months (mean = 55 months). Of the patients who underwent surgical excision, 13/115 (11%) were malignant. Eight of these 13 found malignancy at excision when CNB results were considered discordant (5 DCIS, and 3 invasive lobular carcinoma), with the remainder, 5/115 (4%), having a true pathologic upgrade: 3 DCIS, and 2 microinvasive lobular carcinoma. Among 54 patients not having excision, 12/54 (22%) underwent subsequent CNB with only 1 carcinoma found at the initial biopsy site. Surgical excision of LN yields a low upgrade rate when careful consideration is given to radiologic/pathologic correlation to exclude cases of discordance. Observation with interval breast imaging is a reasonable alternative for most cases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 25 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 25 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 12% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 8% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Lecturer | 1 | 4% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 5 | 20% |
| Unknown | 11 | 44% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 8 | 32% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 8% |
| Environmental Science | 1 | 4% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 1 | 4% |
| Linguistics | 1 | 4% |
| Other | 2 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 40% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 January 2018.
All research outputs
#17,925,346
of 23,015,156 outputs
Outputs from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#3,600
of 4,681 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#310,632
of 442,518 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Breast Cancer Research and Treatment
#54
of 76 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,015,156 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,681 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.2. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 442,518 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 76 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.