Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2004 Feb;57(2):193-5.
doi: 10.1136/jcp.2003.12914.

Agreement between preoperative core needle biopsy and postoperative invasive breast cancer histopathology is not dependent on the amount of clinical material obtained

Affiliations

Agreement between preoperative core needle biopsy and postoperative invasive breast cancer histopathology is not dependent on the amount of clinical material obtained

R O'Leary et al. J Clin Pathol. 2004 Feb.

Abstract

Aims: To establish the relation between the amount of breast core needle biopsy (CNB) material examined and agreement between preoperative and postoperative histopathology parameters in invasive breast cancer.

Methods: The CNB and surgical specimen histopathology reports of 113 patients with invasive breast carcinoma were reviewed and the total amount of CNB material examined for each case was determined. Agreement was calculated for tumour type, grade, mitoses, nuclear pleomorphism, and tubule formation. Associations between the amount of CNB material and histopathology agreement before and after surgery were explored using binary logistic regression.

Results: Tumour type and grade agreed in 65.4% and 61.6% of cases, respectively. The components used to calculate grade--nuclear pleomorphism (57.4%), mitoses (59.4%), and tubule formation (55.6%)--agreed slightly less frequently. The proportion of cases with preoperative and postoperative assessments that agreed did not depend on the number of cores collected or the total amount of material examined.

Conclusion: Neither tumour type and grade, nor the individual components used to calculate grade agreed consistently between the CNB and surgical specimen. The number of cores collected and the total amount of material reviewed by the pathologist does not influence the likelihood of agreement between preoperative and postoperative histopathology reports.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Box plots of core indexes for cases where there was agreement or disagreement between preoperative and postoperative histopathology. In a dataset of 113 patients, the core index was calculated (as described in Patients and methods) to describe the total amount of material examined by the pathologist during reporting of the needle core biopsy. The core index is shown for cases where there was agreement or disagreement between preoperative and postoperative histology for (A) grade and (B) tumour type. Boxes show median values and the interquartile ranges, the whiskers show the ranges and the outliers are indicated by the asterisks; the means (solid circles) are shown for comparison.

References

    1. Pinder SE, Elston CW, Ellis IO. The role of pre-operative diagnosis in breast cancer. Histopathology 1996;28:563–6. - PubMed
    1. Verkooijen HM, Peeters PHM, Buskens E, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of large-core needle biopsy for nonpalpable breast disease: a meta-analysis. Br J Cancer 2000;82:1017–21. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Denley H, Pinder SE, Elston CW, et al. Preoperative assessment of prognostic factors in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2001;54:20–4. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Non-operative Diagnosis Subgroup of the National Coordinating Group for Breast Screening Pathology. Guidelines for non-operative diagnostic procedures and reporting in breast cancer screening. Sheffield: NHS Cancer Screening Programmes 2001 (NHS Publication No. 50, ISBN 1 871997 44 5).
    1. Elston CW, Ellis IO. 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;19:403–10. - PubMed