↓ Skip to main content

Optimizing Breast Cancer Management

Overview of attention for book
Attention for Chapter 5: Is DCIS Overrated?
Altmetric Badge

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
47 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Chapter title
Is DCIS Overrated?
Chapter number 5
Book title
Optimizing Breast Cancer Management
Published in
Cancer treatment and research, January 2018
DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-70197-4_5
Pubmed ID
Book ISBNs
978-3-31-970195-0, 978-3-31-970197-4
Authors

Joshua Feinberg, Rachel Wetstone, Dana Greenstein, Patrick Borgen

Abstract

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), the noninvasive form of breast cancer (BC), comprises just over 20% of breast cancer cases diagnosed each year in the USA. Most patients are treated with local excision of the disease followed by whole breast radiation therapy. Total mastectomy is not an uncommon approach, and total mastectomy with a contralateral risk-reducing mastectomy has been on the rise in the past decade. In estrogen receptor-positive disease, patients are often offered endocrine ablative therapy with a selective estrogen receptor modulator or an aromatase inhibitor as both treatment and prevention. Local regional treatment options have no impact upon ultimate overall survival. Long-term survival rates are higher in patients with DCIS than with any other form of the disease. Are these strikingly high success rates a testament to effective treatment strategies or is there a significant subset of DCIS that was unlikely to ever progress to invasive ductal carcinoma? DCIS was not seen in the US prior to the advent of screening mammography. When compared to other countries, the USA has the highest utilization of screening mammography and the incidence rate of DCIS. Other lines of evidence include autopsy series examining the breast tissue of women who died of other causes, missed-diagnosis series and current retrospective reviews of DCIS, all align in support of the concept of DCIS as indolent in the majority of cases [3-14]. The evidence suggests that both patient and physician misconceptions about DCIS have led to overdiagnosis and over-treatment of DCIS. Recently, a gene expression profiling tool (12 gene assay, Oncotype DCIS) has emerged that shows considerable promise in predicting class in DCIS patients.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 47 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 47 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 5 11%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Researcher 4 9%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 9%
Other 12 26%
Unknown 13 28%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 17 36%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 6%
Engineering 3 6%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Unspecified 2 4%
Other 3 6%
Unknown 17 36%