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
. 2024 Jan;129(1):38-47.
doi: 10.1007/s11547-023-01740-4. Epub 2023 Oct 24.

Atypical ductal hyperplasia on vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a scoring system to predict the risk of upgrade to malignancy

Rossella Rella  1 , Marco Conti  2 , Alberto Borghetti  3 , Paolo Belli  4   5 , Francesca Morciano  5 , Claudia Rossati  6 , Andrea Caneva  7 , Alba Di Leone  8 , Gianluca Franceschini  8 , Elisabetta Gori  5 , Francesca Fornasa  6 , Oscar Tommasini  1 , Giovanna Romanucci  6
Affiliations

Atypical ductal hyperplasia on vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: a scoring system to predict the risk of upgrade to malignancy

Rossella Rella et al. Radiol Med. 2024 Jan.

Abstract

Rationale and objectives: Our multicentric study analysed clinical, radiologic and pathologic features in patients with atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) diagnosed with vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB), to identify factors associated with the risk of upgrade, to develop a scoring system to support decision making.

Materials and methods: Patients with ADH on VAB under stereotactic/tomosynthesis guidance (2012-2022) were eligible. Inclusion criteria were availability of surgical histopathological examination of the entire lesion or radiologic follow-up (FUP) ≥ 24 months. VAB results were compared with surgical pathological results or with imaging FUP evolution to assess upgrade. A backward stepwise linear regression was used to identify predictors of upgrade. The discriminatory power of the model was calculated through the area under the receiver operating curve (ROC-AUC); the Hosmer-Lemeshow test was used to assess model calibration. The points system was developed based on the selected risk factors, and the probability of upgrade associated with each point total was determined.

Results: 112 ADH lesions were included: 91 (91/112, 81.3%) underwent surgical excision with 20 diagnosis of malignancy, while 21 (21/112, 18.7%) underwent imaging FUP with one interval change (mean FUP time 48 months). Overall upgrade rate was 18.7% (21/112). Age, menopausal status, concurrent breast cancer, BIRADS classification and number of foci of ADH were identified as risk factors for upgrade. Our model showed an AUC = 0.85 (95% CI 0.76-0.94). The points system showed that the risk of upgrade is < 2% when the total score is ≤ 1.

Conclusion: Our scoring system seemed a promising easy-to-use decision support tool for management of ADH, decreasing unnecessary surgeries, reducing patients' overtreatment and healthcare costs.

Keywords: Atypical ductal hyperplasia; Scoring system; Underestimation; Upgrade; Vacuum-assisted biopsy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow chart diagram of patient selection
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
The receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve for the scoring system. Area under the ROC curve = 0.85 (95% confidence interval 0.76–0.94)
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Line graph showing the relationship between the point total (x-axis) and the risk of upgrade (y-axis)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Nomogram for predicting the risk of ADH upgrade
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
An example of the use of the model. Mediolateral oblique a, craniocaudal b and magnification c views of the right breast in a 46 years woman (1 point) in post-menopausal status (-4 points), without concurrent breast cancer (0 points), with microcalcifications classified as BIRADS 4B (4 points), with flat epithelial atypia with a single focus of ADH at VAB histopathological analysis (0 points) d. Using the developed points system, a final score of 1 was assigned with a corresponding risk < 2%. This lesion underwent surgical excision with only benign findings
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Tavassoli FA (1999) Pathology of the Breast. Stamford, CT: Appleton & Lange
    1. Georgian-Smith D, Lawton TJ. Controversies on the management of high risk lesions at core biopsy from a radiology/pathology perspective. Radiol Clin North Am. 2010;48(5):999–1012. doi: 10.1016/j.rcl.2010.06.004. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Sutton T, Farinola M, Johnson N, Garreau JR. Atypical ductal hyperplasia: clinicopathologic factors are not predictive of upgrade after excisional biopsy. Am J Surg. 2019;217(5):848–850. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.12.020. - DOI - PubMed
    1. McGhan LJ, Pockaj BA, Wasif N, Giurescu ME, McCullough AE, Gray RJ. Atypical ductal hyperplasia on core biopsy: an automatic trigger for excisional biopsy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(10):3264–3269. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2575-0. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Rageth CJ, O'Flynn EAM, Pinker K, et al. Second international consensus conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions) Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;174(2):279–296. doi: 10.1007/s10549-018-05071-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

MeSH terms