Controversies in the Treatment of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ

Literature Cited

1. Swallow CJ, Van Zee KJ, Sacchini V. 1.  et al. 1996. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: progress and controversy. Curr. Probl. Surg. 33:553–600 [Google Scholar]
2. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. 2.  2016. Cancer statistics. CA Cancer J. Clin. 66:7–30 [Google Scholar]
3. Cuzick J, Sestak I, Pinder SE. 3.  et al. 2011. Effect of tamoxifen and radiotherapy in women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ: long-term results from the UK/ANZ DCIS trial. Lancet Oncol. 12:21–29 [Google Scholar]
4. Donker M, Litiere S, Werutsky G. 4.  et al. 2013. Breast-conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ: 15-year recurrence rates and outcome after a recurrence, from the EORTC 10853 randomized phase III trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 31:4054–59 [Google Scholar]
5. Wapnir IL, Dignam JJ, Fisher B. 5.  et al. 2011. Long-term outcomes of invasive ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences after lumpectomy in NSABP B-17 and B-24 randomized clinical trials for DCIS. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 103:478–88 [Google Scholar]
6. Warnberg F, Garmo H, Emdin S. 6.  et al. 2014. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ: 20 years follow-up in the randomized SweDCIS Trial. J. Clin. Oncol. 32:3613–18 [Google Scholar]
7. Correa C, McGale P. 7.  Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative Group et al. 2010. Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 2010:162–77 [Google Scholar]
8. Subhedar P, Olcese C, Patil S. 8.  et al. 2015. Decreasing recurrence rates for ductal carcinoma in situ: analysis of 2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery over 30 years. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 22:3273–81 [Google Scholar]
9. Wong JS, Chen YH, Gadd MA. 9.  et al. 2014. Eight-year update of a prospective study of wide excision alone for small low- or intermediate-grade ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 143:343–50 [Google Scholar]
10. Solin LJ, Gray R, Hughes LL. 10.  et al. 2015. Surgical excision without radiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: 12-year results from the ECOG-ACRIN E5194 Study. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:3938–44 [Google Scholar]
11. McCormick B, Winter K, Hudis C. 11.  et al. 2015. RTOG 9804: a prospective randomized trial for good-risk ductal carcinoma in situ comparing radiotherapy with observation. J. Clin. Oncol. 33:709–15 [Google Scholar]
12. Narod SA, Iqbal J, Giannakeas V. 12.  et al. 2015. Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. JAMA Oncol. 1:888–96 [Google Scholar]
13. Hoda SA, Brogi E, Koerner FC. 13.  et al. 2014. Rosen's Breast Pathology Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 4th ed..
14. Hernandez L, Wilkerson PM, Lambros MB. 14.  et al. 2012. Genomic and mutational profiling of ductal carcinomas in situ and matched adjacent invasive breast cancers reveals intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity and clonal selection. J. Pathol. 227:142–52 [Google Scholar]
15. Lopez-Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Lacroix-Triki M, Marchió C, Reis-Filho JS. 15.  2010. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathways. Histopathology 57:2171–92 [Google Scholar]
16. Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Marotti J. 16.  et al. 2008. Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 10:4R67 [Google Scholar]
17. Hernandez L, Wilkerson PM, Lambros MB. 17.  et al. 2012. Genomic and mutational profiling of ductal carcinomas in situ and matched adjacent invasive breast cancers reveals intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity and clonal selection. J. Pathol. 227:42–52 [Google Scholar]
18. Vincent-Salomon A, Lucchesi C, Gruel N. 18.  et al. 2008. Integrated genomic and transcriptomic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin. Cancer Res. 14:1956–65 [Google Scholar]
19. Welch HG, Black WC. 19.  1997. Using autopsy series to estimate the disease “reservoir” for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: How much more breast cancer can we find?. Ann. Intern. Med. 127:1023–28 [Google Scholar]
20. Betsill WL Jr., Rosen PP, Lieberman PH. 20.  et al. 1978. Intraductal carcinoma. Long-term follow-up after treatment by biopsy alone. JAMA 239:1863–67 [Google Scholar]
21. Rosen PP. 21.  1980. The clinical significance of pre-invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer 46:919–25 [Google Scholar]
22. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW. 22.  et al. 1982. Intraductal carcinoma of the breast: follow-up after biopsy only. Cancer 49:751–58 [Google Scholar]
23. Sanders ME, Schuyler PA, Dupont WD. 23.  et al. 2005. The natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast in women treated by biopsy only revealed over 30 years of long-term follow-up. Cancer 103:2481–84 [Google Scholar]
24. Collins LC, Tamimi RM, Baer HJ. 24.  et al. 2005. Outcome of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ untreated after diagnostic biopsy: results from the Nurses' Health Study. Cancer 103:1778–84 [Google Scholar]
25. Stuart KE, Houssami N, Taylor R. 25.  et al. 2015. Long-term outcomes of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a systematic review, meta-analysis and meta-regression analysis. BMC Cancer 15:890 [Google Scholar]
26. Pyfer B, Chatterjee A, Chen L. 26.  et al. 2016. Early postoperative outcomes in breast conservation surgery versus simple mastectomy with implant reconstruction: a NSQIP analysis of 11,645 patients. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 23:92–98 [Google Scholar]
27. Montazeri A, Vahdaninia M, Harirchi I. 27.  et al. 2008. Quality of life in patients with breast cancer before and after diagnosis: an eighteen months follow-up study. BMC Cancer 8:330 [Google Scholar]
28. Arriagada R, Le MG, Rochard F. 28.  et al. 1996. Conservative treatment versus mastectomy in early breast cancer: patterns of failure with 15 years of follow-up data. Institut Gustave-Roussy Breast Cancer Group. J. Clin. Oncol. 14:1558–64 [Google Scholar]
29. Blichert-Toft M, Rose C, Andersen JA. 29.  et al. 1992. Danish randomized trial comparing breast conservation therapy with mastectomy: six years of life-table analysis. Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 11:19–25 [Google Scholar]
30. Fisher B, Anderson S, Bryant J. 30.  et al. 2002. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing total mastectomy, lumpectomy, and lumpectomy plus irradiation for the treatment of invasive breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 347:1233–41 [Google Scholar]
31. Poggi MM, Danforth DN, Sciuto LC. 31.  et al. 2003. Eighteen-year results in the treatment of early breast carcinoma with mastectomy versus breast conservation therapy: The National Cancer Institute Randomized Trial. Cancer 98:697–702 [Google Scholar]
32. van Dongen JA, Voogd AC, Fentiman IS. 32.  et al. 2000. Long-term results of a randomized trial comparing breast-conserving therapy with mastectomy: European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10801 trial. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 92:1143–50 [Google Scholar]
33. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Mariani L. 33.  et al. 2002. Twenty-year follow-up of a randomized study comparing breast-conserving surgery with radical mastectomy for early breast cancer. N. Engl. J. Med. 347:1227–32 [Google Scholar]
34. Silverstein MJ, Cohlan BF, Gierson ED. 34.  et al. 1992. Duct carcinoma in situ: 227 cases without microinvasion. Eur. J. Cancer 28:630–34 [Google Scholar]
35. Henson KE, McGale P, Taylor C. 35.  et al. 2013. Radiation-related mortality from heart disease and lung cancer more than 20 years after radiotherapy for breast cancer. Br. J. Cancer 108:179–82 [Google Scholar]
36. Grantzau T, Mellemkjaer L, Overgaard J. 36.  2013. Second primary cancers after adjuvant radiotherapy in early breast cancer patients: a national population based study under the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group (DBCG). Radiother. Oncol. 106:42–49 [Google Scholar]
37. Allred DC, Anderson SJ, Paik S. 37.  et al. 2012. Adjuvant tamoxifen reduces subsequent breast cancer in women with estrogen receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ: a study based on NSABP protocol B-24. J. Clin. Oncol. 30:1268–73 [Google Scholar]
38. Forbes JF, Sestak I, Howell A. 38.  et al. 2016. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen for the prevention of locoregional and contralateral breast cancer in postmenopausal women with locally excised ductal carcinoma in situ (IBIS-II DCIS): a double-blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet 387:866–73 [Google Scholar]
39. Margolese RG, Cecchini RS, Julian TB. 39.  et al. 2016. Anastrozole versus tamoxifen in postmenopausal women with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing lumpectomy plus radiotherapy (NSABP B-35): a randomised, double-blind, phase 3 clinical trial. Lancet 387:849–56 [Google Scholar]
40. Van Zee KJ, Liberman L, Samli B. 40.  et al. 1999. Long term follow-up of women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with breast-conserving surgery: the effect of age. Cancer 86:1757–67 [Google Scholar]
41. Vicini FA, Kestin LL, Goldstein NS. 41.  et al. 2000. Impact of young age on outcome in patients with ductal carcinoma-in-situ treated with breast-conserving therapy. J. Clin. Oncol. 18:296–306 [Google Scholar]
42. Cronin P, Olcese C, Patil S. 42.  et al. 2016. Impact of age on risk of recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ: outcomes of 2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery over 30 years. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 232816–24 [Google Scholar]
43. Van Zee KJ, Subhedar P, Olcese C. 43.  et al. 2015. Relationship between margin width and recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ: analysis of 2996 women treated with breast-conserving surgery for 30 years. Ann. Surg. 262:623–31 [Google Scholar]
44. Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Solin LJ. 44.  et al. 2016. Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology–American Society of Clinical Oncology consensus guideline on margins for breast-conserving surgery with whole breast irradiation in ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Clin. Oncol. 23:2816–24 [Google Scholar]
45. Rudloff U, Jacks LM, Goldberg JI. 45.  et al. 2010. Nomogram for predicting the risk of local recurrence after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ. J. Clin. Oncol. 28:3762–69 [Google Scholar]
46. Collins LC, Achacoso N, Haque R. 46.  et al. 2015. Risk prediction for local breast cancer recurrence among women with DCIS treated in a community practice: a nested, case-control study. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 22:Suppl. 3S502–8 [Google Scholar]
47. Sweldens C, Peeters S, van Limbergen E. 47.  et al. 2014. Local relapse after breast-conserving therapy for ductal carcinoma in situ: a European single-center experience and external validation of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center DCIS nomogram. Cancer J. 20:1–7 [Google Scholar]
48. Wang F, Li H, Tan PH. 48.  et al. 2014. Validation of a nomogram in the prediction of local recurrence risks after conserving surgery for Asian women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Clin. Oncol. (R. Coll. Radiol.) 26:684–91 [Google Scholar]
49. Yi M, Meric-Bernstam F, Kuerer HM. 49.  et al. 2012. Evaluation of a breast cancer nomogram for predicting risk of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrences in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ after local excision. J. Clin. Oncol. 30:600–7 [Google Scholar]
50. Solin LJ, Gray R, Baehner FL. 50.  et al. 2013. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 105:701–10 [Google Scholar]
51. Rakovitch E, Nofech-Mozes S, Hanna W. 51.  et al. 2015. A population-based validation study of the DCIS score predicting recurrence risk in individuals treated by breast-conserving surgery alone. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 152:389–98 [Google Scholar]
52. Rakovitch EL. 52.  2015. Predicting recurrence risk in individuals with DCIS treated by breast-conserving surgery. In Risk Assessment and Prevention in DCIS: Oncotype DCIS Score and Nomograms, Panel No. 09. Presented at Am. Soc. Radiat. Oncol. Annu. Meet., 57th, Oct. 18–21, San Antonio, TX. http://conference-cast.com/ASTRO/common/presentations.aspx/13/80/657
53. Francis A, Thomas J, Fallowfield L. 53.  et al. 2015. Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS; the LORIS trial. Eur. J. Cancer 51:2296–303 [Google Scholar]
54. Elshof LE, Tryfonidis K, Slaets L. 54.  et al. 2015. Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ—the LORD study. Eur. J. Cancer 51:1497–510 [Google Scholar]
55. Pilewskie M, Stempel M, Rosenfeld H. 55.  et al. 2016. Do LORIS trial eligibility criteria identify a ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) patient population at low risk of upgrade to invasive carcinoma?. Ann. Surg. Oncol. 233487–93 [Google Scholar]
56. Pilewskie M, Olcese C, Patil S. 56.  et al. 2016. Long-term rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) meeting LORIS trial eligibility criteria undergoing standard therapy. Ann. Surg. Oncol. In press [Google Scholar]