Usefulness of Cytological grading in predicting tumor behavior in Breast carcinoma-An institutional experience
Keywords:
Fine needle aspiration cytology, Cytological grading, Histological grading
Abstract
Background:Breast carcinoma is a frequently encountered malignancyand several modifications are under-way in the management of breast malignancies including Neo-adjuvant chemotherapy.In this context to give an idea to the oncologist about the behavior of the tumor through FNAC is becoming increasingly expected.So,in this study an attempt has been made to compare cytological grading with histological grading and the usefulness of cytology alone in predicting tumor behavior has been evaluated.Methods: 40 cases of breast carcinoma for which both cytological samples andhistological specimens are available are included in the study.Robinson’s method is used for cytological grading.Elstonand Ellis modification of Bloom-Richardson grading method is used for histological grading.The exactness of cytological grading is compared by its concordance with histological grading.Result:83.6% of overall concordance of cytological grading was obtained.Conclusion:Based on the fairly good level of concordance between cytological and histological findings in the study,it can be concluded that Robinson’s method of cytological grading is a fairly dependable method that can be used to give an exact idea to the oncologist about the tumor behaviorReferences
1. Rosai J. Ackerman's Surgical Pathology. 9 th ed. Edinburgh: Mosby; 2004. p. 1787-839
2. Kaufman Z, Shpitz B, Shapiro M, Rona R, Lew S, Dinbar A. Triple approach in the diagnosis of dominant breast masses: Combined physical examination, mammography, and fine-needle aspiration. J SurgOncol 1994;56:254-7.
3. Steinberg JL, Trudeau ME, Ryder DE, Fishell E, Chapman JA, McCready DR, et al. Combined fine-needle aspiration, physical examination and mammography in the diagnosis of palpable breast masses: Their relation to outcome for women with primary breast cancer. Can J Surg 1996;39:302-11.
4. Silverman JF, Elsheikh TM, Singh HK. The role of fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast in the core biopsy era. Pathol Case Rev 2007;12:44-8
5. Berner A, Davidson B, Sigstad E, Risberg B. Fine-needle aspiration cytology vs. core biopsy in the diagnosis of breast lesions. DiagnCytopathol 2003;29:344-8.
6. Silverman JF. Diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and triage role of fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of palpable breast lesions. Breast J 1995;1:3-8.
7. Hatada T, Ishii H, Ichii S, Okada K, Fujiwara Y, Yamamura T. Diagnostic value of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy, core-needle biopsy, and evaluation of combined use in the diagnosis of breast lesions. J Am CollSurg 2000;190:299-303.
8. Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Mamounas EP, Cameron D, Carey LA, Cristofanilli M, et al. Recommendations from an international consensus conference on the current status and future of neo adjuvant systemic therapy in primary breast cancer. Ann SurgOncol 2012;19:1508-16
9. Robinson IA, McKee G, Nicholson A, D′Arcy J, Jackson PA, Cook MG, et al. Prognostic value of cytological grading of fine-needle aspirates from breast carcinomas. Lancet 1994;343:947-93.
10. Tavassoli FA, Devilee P. World Health Organizationclassification of tumors. Pathology and Genetics.Tumors of the breast and female genital organs. IARCPress: Lyon. 2003
11. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors inbreast cancer. The value of histological grade in breastcancer – Experience from a large study with long termfollows up. Histopathology 1991; 19(5): 403-410
12. Rao DN, Ganesh B. Estimate of cancer incidence in India in 1991. Indian J Cancer 1998;35:10-8.
13. The uniform approach to breast fine needle aspiration biopsy. A synopsis .ActaCytol 1996;40:1120-69.
14. Das AK, Kapila K, Dinda AK, Verma K. Comparative evaluation of grading of breast carcinomas in fine needle aspirates by two methods. Indian J Med Res 2003;118:247-50.
15. Wani FA, Bhardwaj S, Kumar D, Katoch P. Cytological grading of breast cancers and comparative evaluation of two grading systems. J Cytol 2010;27:55-814.
16. Rekha TS, Nandini NM, Dhar M. Validity of different cytological grading systems of breast carcinoma - a hospital-based study in South India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2011;12:3013-6.
17. Saha K, Raychaudhuri G, Chattopadhyay BK, Das I. Comparative evaluation of six cytological grading systems in breast carcinoma. J Cytol 2013;30:87-93.16.
18. Pandya AN, Shah NP. Comparative evaluation of Robinson′s cytological grading with Elston and Ellis′ Nottingham Modification of Bloom Richardson histopathology grading for breast carcinoma.Natl J Community Med 2012;3:491-58.
19. Pandit AA, Parekh HJ. Cytologic grading of breast carcinoma; comparison of four grading systems. J Cytol 2000;17:39-4417
20. Sinha S, Sinha N, Bandyopadhyay R, Mondal SK. Robinson′s cytological grading on aspirates of breast carcinoma: Correlation with Bloom Richardson′s histological grading. J Cytol 2009;26:140-3.
21. Lingegowda JB, MuddeGowda PH, Ramakantha CK, Chandrasekar HR. Cytohistological correlation of grading in breast carcinoma. DiagnCytopathol 2011;39:251-79.
22. Sood N, Nigam JS, Yadav P, Rewri S, Sharma A, Omhare A, et al. Comparative Study of Cytomorphological Robinson′s Grading for Breast Carcinoma with Modified Bloom-Richardson Histopathological Grading. Pathology Res Int 2013;2013:146542
23. Dabbs DJ, Silverman JF. Prognostic factors from the fine-needle aspirate: Breast carcinoma nuclear grade. DiagnCytopathol 1994;10:203-8.
24. Howell LP, Gandour-Edwards R, O′Sullivan D. Application of the Scarff-Bloom-Richardson tumor grading system to fine-needle aspirates of the breast. Am J ClinPathol 1994;101:262-5.
25. Masood S. Prognostic factors in breast cancer: Use of cytologic preparations. DiagnCytopathol 1995;13:388-9
26. Pathology reporting of breast disease:A joint document incorporating the third edition of the NHS breast screening programme guidelines for pathology reporting in breast cancer screening and the second edition of the Royal college of pathologist’s minimum dataset for breast cancer histopathology. 2005, Sheffield; NHS cancer screening programmes and the Royal college of Pathologists
2. Kaufman Z, Shpitz B, Shapiro M, Rona R, Lew S, Dinbar A. Triple approach in the diagnosis of dominant breast masses: Combined physical examination, mammography, and fine-needle aspiration. J SurgOncol 1994;56:254-7.
3. Steinberg JL, Trudeau ME, Ryder DE, Fishell E, Chapman JA, McCready DR, et al. Combined fine-needle aspiration, physical examination and mammography in the diagnosis of palpable breast masses: Their relation to outcome for women with primary breast cancer. Can J Surg 1996;39:302-11.
4. Silverman JF, Elsheikh TM, Singh HK. The role of fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast in the core biopsy era. Pathol Case Rev 2007;12:44-8
5. Berner A, Davidson B, Sigstad E, Risberg B. Fine-needle aspiration cytology vs. core biopsy in the diagnosis of breast lesions. DiagnCytopathol 2003;29:344-8.
6. Silverman JF. Diagnostic accuracy, cost-effectiveness, and triage role of fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of palpable breast lesions. Breast J 1995;1:3-8.
7. Hatada T, Ishii H, Ichii S, Okada K, Fujiwara Y, Yamamura T. Diagnostic value of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy, core-needle biopsy, and evaluation of combined use in the diagnosis of breast lesions. J Am CollSurg 2000;190:299-303.
8. Kaufmann M, von Minckwitz G, Mamounas EP, Cameron D, Carey LA, Cristofanilli M, et al. Recommendations from an international consensus conference on the current status and future of neo adjuvant systemic therapy in primary breast cancer. Ann SurgOncol 2012;19:1508-16
9. Robinson IA, McKee G, Nicholson A, D′Arcy J, Jackson PA, Cook MG, et al. Prognostic value of cytological grading of fine-needle aspirates from breast carcinomas. Lancet 1994;343:947-93.
10. Tavassoli FA, Devilee P. World Health Organizationclassification of tumors. Pathology and Genetics.Tumors of the breast and female genital organs. IARCPress: Lyon. 2003
11. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors inbreast cancer. The value of histological grade in breastcancer – Experience from a large study with long termfollows up. Histopathology 1991; 19(5): 403-410
12. Rao DN, Ganesh B. Estimate of cancer incidence in India in 1991. Indian J Cancer 1998;35:10-8.
13. The uniform approach to breast fine needle aspiration biopsy. A synopsis .ActaCytol 1996;40:1120-69.
14. Das AK, Kapila K, Dinda AK, Verma K. Comparative evaluation of grading of breast carcinomas in fine needle aspirates by two methods. Indian J Med Res 2003;118:247-50.
15. Wani FA, Bhardwaj S, Kumar D, Katoch P. Cytological grading of breast cancers and comparative evaluation of two grading systems. J Cytol 2010;27:55-814.
16. Rekha TS, Nandini NM, Dhar M. Validity of different cytological grading systems of breast carcinoma - a hospital-based study in South India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2011;12:3013-6.
17. Saha K, Raychaudhuri G, Chattopadhyay BK, Das I. Comparative evaluation of six cytological grading systems in breast carcinoma. J Cytol 2013;30:87-93.16.
18. Pandya AN, Shah NP. Comparative evaluation of Robinson′s cytological grading with Elston and Ellis′ Nottingham Modification of Bloom Richardson histopathology grading for breast carcinoma.Natl J Community Med 2012;3:491-58.
19. Pandit AA, Parekh HJ. Cytologic grading of breast carcinoma; comparison of four grading systems. J Cytol 2000;17:39-4417
20. Sinha S, Sinha N, Bandyopadhyay R, Mondal SK. Robinson′s cytological grading on aspirates of breast carcinoma: Correlation with Bloom Richardson′s histological grading. J Cytol 2009;26:140-3.
21. Lingegowda JB, MuddeGowda PH, Ramakantha CK, Chandrasekar HR. Cytohistological correlation of grading in breast carcinoma. DiagnCytopathol 2011;39:251-79.
22. Sood N, Nigam JS, Yadav P, Rewri S, Sharma A, Omhare A, et al. Comparative Study of Cytomorphological Robinson′s Grading for Breast Carcinoma with Modified Bloom-Richardson Histopathological Grading. Pathology Res Int 2013;2013:146542
23. Dabbs DJ, Silverman JF. Prognostic factors from the fine-needle aspirate: Breast carcinoma nuclear grade. DiagnCytopathol 1994;10:203-8.
24. Howell LP, Gandour-Edwards R, O′Sullivan D. Application of the Scarff-Bloom-Richardson tumor grading system to fine-needle aspirates of the breast. Am J ClinPathol 1994;101:262-5.
25. Masood S. Prognostic factors in breast cancer: Use of cytologic preparations. DiagnCytopathol 1995;13:388-9
26. Pathology reporting of breast disease:A joint document incorporating the third edition of the NHS breast screening programme guidelines for pathology reporting in breast cancer screening and the second edition of the Royal college of pathologist’s minimum dataset for breast cancer histopathology. 2005, Sheffield; NHS cancer screening programmes and the Royal college of Pathologists
Published
2016-08-17
Issue
Section
Original Article
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access at http://opcit.eprints.org/oacitation-biblio.html).
