BC Cancer Pathology Reviews

​Updated March 2018

BC Cancer breast pathologists can be asked to review slides in the following situations:

  1. It is the suggestion of the BC Cancer Breast Tumour Group to consider a formal pathology review for node negative invasive breast cancers in which  a change in pathology could significantly change the prognosis of the  breast cancer and initiate a change in clinical management. 
  2. Cases in which clarification of specific aspects of the tumour would impact treatment decisions, e.g. margin size, can be reviewed prior to a final decision regarding treatment.  These reviews are typically requested as needed by a treating oncologist - radiation, medical, or surgical.
References

  1. Processing, Reporting and Special Histological Types including Prognostic Factors

  2. Schnitt S.J., et al. Processing and evaluation of breast excision specimens. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 1992;98:125-137.
  3. Henson D.E., et al. Practice protocol for the examination of specimens removed from patients with cancer of the breast (Cancer Committee; College of American Pathologists) Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 1997;121:27-33.
  4. Nakhleh R.E., et al. Mammographically directed breast biopsies: A College of American Pathologists Q-probe study of clinical physician expectations and of specimen handling and reporting characteristics in 434 institutions. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 1997;121:11-18.
  5. Recommendations for the reporting of breast carcinoma. Human Pathology 1996;27:220-224 and Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1993;17:850-851.
  6. Tavassoli F.A. Pathology of the breast. Elsevier, New York, 1992.
  7. Rosen P.P., Oberman H.A. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Fascicle 3rd series No 7. Washington, DC. 1993.
  8. Elston C.W. In Page D.L., Anderson T.J. Diagnostic histopathology of the breast. New York, Churchill Livingstone, 1987. Grading of invasive carcinoma of the breast. pp 300-311.
  9. de Mascarel I., et al. Histological examination of 2859 breast biopsies: analysis of adequate sampling. Pathol. Annual Pt. 1; 1993;28:1-13.
  10. Owings D.V., et al. How thoroughly should needle localisation breast biopsies be sampled for microscopic examination? A prospective mammographic/pathologic correlative study. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1990;14:578-588.
  11. Ellis I.O., et al. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. II. Histological type. Relationship with survival in a large study with long term follow-up. Histopathology 1992;20:479-489.
  12. Bloom H.J.G., Richardson W.W. Histologic grading and prognosis in breast cancer: A study of 1709 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br. J. Cancer 1957;2:353-377.
  13. Elston C.W., Ellis I.O. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology 1991;19:403-410.
  14. Contesso G., et al. The importance of histological grade in long-term prognosis of breast cancer. A study of 1010 patients, uniformly treated at the Gustave-Roussy. J. Clin. Oncol. 1987;5:1378-1386.
  15. Helpap B. Nuclear grading of breast cancer. Virchows Arch. Path. Anat. 1989;415:501-508.
  16. Schnitt S.J., et al. Pathologic predictors of early local recurrence in stage I and stage II breast cancer treated by primary radiation therapy. Cancer 1984;53:1049-1057.
  17. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Care and Treatment of Breast Cancer. A Canadian Consensus Document. Canad. Med. Assoc. J. 1998;158 ​(3 Suppl.):S1-83.
  18. Davis B.W., et al. Prognostic significance of tumour grade in clinical trials of adjuvant therapy for breast cancer with axillary lymph node metastasis. Cancer 1986;58:2662-2670.
  19. Dalton L.W., et al. Histological grading of breast cancer; a reproducibility study. Cancer 1994;73:2765-2770.
  20. Robbins P., et al. Histological grading of breast carcinomas. A study of inter-observer agreement. Hum. Pathol. 1995;8:873-879.
  21. Frierson H.F., et al. Inter-observer reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of Bloom and Richardson histologic grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Am. J. Clin. Pathol. 1995;103:195-199.
  22. Galea M.H., et al. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1992;3:207-219.
  23. Galea M.H., Blamey R.W., Elston C.W., Ellis I.O. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1992;3:207-219.
  24. Sundquist M., et al. Applying the Nottingham Prognostic Index to a Swedish breast cancer population. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1999;53:1-8.
  25. Stal O., et al. Significance of S-phase fraction and hormone receptor content in the management of young breast cancer patients. Br. J. Cancer 1992;66:706-711.
  26. Clark G.M. Do we really need prognostic factors for breast cancer? Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1994;30:117-126.
  27. Robertson J.F.R., et al. Biological factors of prognostic significance in locally advanced breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1994;29:259-264.
  28. Cobleigh M.A., et al. Efficacy and safety of Herceptin as a single agent in 22 women with Her2 overexpression who relapsed following chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer. Proc. Am. Soc. Clin. Oncol. 1998;17:97A (abstr.​ 376).
  29. Remvikos Y., et al. Correlation of proliferative activity of breast cancer with response to cytotoxic therapy. J. Nat. Cancer Inst. 1989;81:1383-1387.
  30. Resnick J.M., et al. P53 and c-erbB-2 expression and response to preoperative chemotherapy in locally advanced breast carcinoma. Breast Dis. 1995;8:149-158.
  31. Muss H.B., et al. C-erbB-2 expression and response to adjuvant therapy in women with node positive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 1994;330:1309-1310.
  32. Press M.F., et al. HER-2/neu gene amplification characterised by fluorescence in-situ hybridization: Poor prognosis in node-negative breast carcinoma. J. Clin. Oncol. 1997;15:2894-2904.
  33. Sjogren S., et al. Prognostic and predictive value of c-erbB-2 overexpression in primary breast cancer, alone and in combination with other prognostic markers. J. Clin. Oncol. 1998;16:462-469.
  34. Baselga J., et al. Recombinant humanized anti-HER2 antibody (Herceptin) enhances the antitumor activity of paclitaxel and doxorubicin against HER2/neu overexpressing breast cancer xenografts. Cancer Res. 1998;58:2825-2831.
  35. Pegram M.D., et al. Phase II study of receptor-enhanced chemosensitivity using recombinant humanized anti-p185HER2/neu monoclonal antibody plus cisplatin in patients with HER2/neu-overexpressing metastatic breast cancer refractory to chemotherapy treatment. J. Clin. Oncol. 1998;16:2659.
  36. Ross J.S., Fletcher J.A. The HER-2/neu oncogene: prognostic factor, predictive factor and target for therapy. Cancer Biology 19999;9:125-138.
  37. Pinder S.E., et al. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. III. Vascular invasion. Relationship with recurrence and survival in a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathol. 1994;24:41-47.
  38. Pereira H., et al. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. IV. Should you be a typer or a grader? A comparative study of two histological prognostic features in operable breast carcinoma. Histopathol. 1995;27:219-226.
  39. Diab S.G., et al. Tumour characteristics and clinical outcome of tubular and mucinous breast carcinomas. J. Clin. Oncol. 1999;17:1442-1448.
  40. Gasparini G., et al. Cell kinetics in human breast cancer: comparison between the prognostic value of cytofluorimetric S-phase fraction and that of the antibodies to Ki-67 and PCNA antigens detected by immunocytochemistry. Int. J. Cancer 1994;57:822-829.
  41. MacGrogan R.P., et al. Prognostic significance of Ki-67 and topoisomerase II alpha expression in infiltrating ductal carcinoma of the breast. A multivariate analysis of 863 cases. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1999;55:61-71.
  42. Brown R.W., et al. Prognostic value of Ki-67 compared to S-phase fraction in axillary node-negative breast cancer. Clin. Cancer Res. 1996;2:585-592.
  43. Gonzalez-Vela M.C., et al. Predictors of axillary lymph node metastases in patients with invasive breast carcinoma by a combination of classical and biological prognostic factors. Pathol. Res. Pract. 1999;195:611-618.
  44. Rudolph P., et al. Correlation between p53, c-erbB-2, and Topoisomerase II alpha expression, DNA ploidy, hormonal receptor status and proliferation in 356 node-negative breast carcinomas: prognostic implications. J. Pathol. 1999;187:207-216.
  45. Bozzetti C., et al. Bcl-2 expression on fine needle aspirates from primary breast carcinoma: correlation with other biologic factors. Cancer 1999;87:224-230.
  46. Holmqvist P., et al. Apoptosis and Bcl-2 expression in relation to age, tumour characteristics and prognosis in breast cancer. South-East Sweden Breast Cancer Group. Int. J. Biol. Markers. 1999;14:84-91.
  47. Carey L.A., et al. Telomerase activity and prognosis in primary breast cancers. J. Clin. Oncol. 1999;17:3075-3081.
  48. Harbeck N., et al. Risk-group discrimination in node-negative breast cancer using invasion and proliferation markers: 6-year median follow-up. Brit. J. Cancer 1998;80:419-426 and Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 1999;54:147-157.
  49. Jahkola T., et al. Cathepsin D, urokinase plasminogen activator and type-1 plasminogen activator inhibitor in early breast cancer: an immunohistochemical study of prognostic value and relations to tenascin-C and other factors. Brit. J. Cancer 1999;80:167-174.
  50. Soler A.P., et al. P-cadherin expression in breast carcinoma indicates poor survival. Cancer 19999;86:1263-1272.
  51. Tan D.S.P., et al. The biological and prognostic significance of cell polarity and E-cadherin in Grade I infiltrating ductal carcinoma of the breast. J. Pathol. 1999;189:20-27.
  52. Gonzalez M.A., et al. An immunohistochemical examination of the expression of E-cadherin, alpha- and beta/gamma- catenins and alpha2- and beta1- integrins in invasive breast cancer. J. Pathol. 1999;187:523-529.
  53. Allred D.C., et al. Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Mod. Pathol. 1998;11:155-168.
  54. Jager J.J., et al. Loco-regional recurrences after mastectomy in breast cancer: prognostic factors and implications for postoperative irradiation. Radiotherapy and Oncology 1999;50:267-275.
Lobular carcinoma

  1. Dixon J.M., et al. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Histopathology 1982;6:149-161.

  2. DiCostanzo D. et al. Prognosis of infiltrating lobular carcinoma. An analysis of "classical" and variant tumors. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 1990;14:12-23.
  3. Fechner R.E. Histological variants of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Hum. Pathol. 1975;6:373-378.
  4. Fisher E.R., et al. Tubulolobular invasive breast cancer: a variant of lobular invasive cancer. Hum. Pathol. 1977;8:679-683.
  5. Weidner N., Semple J.P.. Pleomorphic variant of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Hum. Pathol. 1992;23:1167-1171.
  6. Eusebi V., et al. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast: An aggressive tumour showing apocrine differentiation. Hum. Pathol. 1992;23:655-662.
  7. Frost A.R. The significance of signet-ring cells in infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 1995;119:64-68.
DCIS Grading
  1. Schnitt S.J., et al. Developing a Prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Are we there yet? Cancer 1996;77:2189-2192.
  2. Silverstein M.J., et al. A prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Cancer 1996;77:2267-2274.
  3. Silverstein M.J., et al. Prognostic classification of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 1995;345:1154-1157.
  4. Fisher E.R., et al. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) protocol B-17. Intraductal carcinoma (ductal carcinoma in situ). Cancer 1995;75:1310-1319.
  5. Holland R., et al. Microcalcification associated with ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic-pathologic correlation. Semin. Diagn. Pathol. 1994;11:181-192
  6. Holland R., et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: a proposal for a new classification. Semin. Diagn. Pathol. 1994;11:167-180.
  7. Leal C.B., et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast; histological categorization and its relationship to ploidy, and immunohistochemical expression of hormone receptors, p54, and c-erbB-2 protein. Cancer 1995;75:2123-2131.
  8. Sneige N., et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ treated with lumpectomy and irradiation: histopathological analysis of 49 specimens with emphasis on risk factors and long term results. Hum. Pathol. 1995;26:642-649.
  9. Douglas-Jones A.G., et al. A critical appraisal of six modern classifications od ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS): correlation with grade of associated invasive carcinoma. Histopathology 1996;29:397-409.
  10. Consensus conference on the classification of ductal carcinoma in situ. Human Pathology 1997;28:1221-1225.
Estrogen receptors

  1. Allred D.C., Harvey J.M., Berardo M., Clark G.M. Prognostic and predictive factors in breast cancer by immunohistochemical analysis. Modern Pathology 1998;11(2):155-168

  2. Leake R., et al. Immunohistochemical detection of steroid receptors in breast cancer: a working protocol. J. Clin. Pathol. 2000;53:634-635
  3. Pertschuk L.P., et al. Immunocytochemical estrogen and progestin receptor assays in breast cancer with monoclonal antibodies. Histopathologic, demographic and biochemical correlations and relationship to endocrine response and survival. Cancer 1990;66:1633-1670.
  4. Pertschuk L.P., et al. Estrogen receptor immunocytochemistry in paraffin embedded tissues with ER1D5 predicts breast cancer endocrine response more accurately than H222Spgamma in frozen sections or cytosol-based ligand assays. Cancer 1996;77:2514-2519.
  5. Andersen J., et al. Immunohistochemical estrogen receptor determination in paraffin-embedded tissue. Prediction of response to hormone treatment in advanced breast cancer. Cancer 1989;64:1901-1908.

  6. Goulding H., et al. A new immunohistochemical antibody for the assessment of estrogen receptor status on routine formalin-fixed tissue samples. Human. Pathol. 1995;26:291-294.