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
Review
. 2025 Jan 18;15(1):36.
doi: 10.3390/jpm15010036.

Navigating the Uncertainty of B3 Breast Lesions: Diagnostic Challenges and Evolving Management Strategies

Affiliations
Review

Navigating the Uncertainty of B3 Breast Lesions: Diagnostic Challenges and Evolving Management Strategies

Sabatino D'Archi et al. J Pers Med. .

Abstract

B3 breast lesions, classified as lesions of uncertain malignant potential, present a significant diagnostic and therapeutic challenge due to their heterogeneous nature and variable risk of progression to malignancy. These lesions, which include atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), papillary lesions (PLs), flat epithelial atypia (FEA), radial scars (RSs), lobular neoplasia (LN), and phyllodes tumors (PTs), occupy a "grey zone" between benign and malignant pathologies, making their management complex and often controversial. This article explores the diagnostic difficulties associated with B3 lesions, focusing on the limitations of current imaging techniques, including mammography, ultrasound, and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), as well as the challenges in histopathological interpretation. Core needle biopsy (CNB) and vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) are widely used for diagnosis, but both methods have inherent limitations, including sampling errors and the inability to determine malignancy in some cases definitively. The therapeutic approach to B3 lesions is nuanced, with treatment decisions strongly influenced by factors such as the lesion size, radiological findings, histopathological characteristics, and patient factors. While some lesions can be safely monitored with watchful waiting, others may require vacuum-assisted excision (VAE) or surgical excision to rule out malignancy. The decision-making process is further complicated by the discordance between the BI-RADS score and biopsy results, as well as the presence of additional risk factors, such as microcalcifications. This review provides an in-depth analysis of the current diagnostic challenges and treatment strategies for B3 lesions, emphasizing the importance of a multidisciplinary approach to management. By synthesizing the most recent research, this article aims to provide clinicians with a clearer understanding of the complexities involved in diagnosing and treating B3 breast lesions while highlighting areas for future research, such as artificial intelligence and genomics, to improve the diagnostic accuracy and patient outcomes.

Keywords: AI in breast tumor screening; B3 breast lesions; biopsy methods; breast surgery; diagnosis; genomic analysis in breast tumor diagnosis; imaging techniques.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
ADH radiological features.
Figure 2
Figure 2
PL radiological features.
Figure 3
Figure 3
RS radiological features.
Figure 4
Figure 4
FEA radiological features.
Figure 5
Figure 5
LN radiological features.
Figure 6
Figure 6
PT radiological features.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Vacuum-assisted excision (VAE): (A) Pre-procedural imaging. The red symbol highlight the position of the target lesion (B) VAE (C) Radiological assessment after bioptic procedure.

References

    1. American Cancer Society . Cancer Facts and Figures 2024. American Cancer Society; Atlanta, GA, USA: 2024.
    1. Magny S.J., Shikhman R., Keppke A.L. StatPearls [Internet] StatPearls Publishing; Treasure Island, FL, USA: 2024. Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System. - PubMed
    1. Ellis I.O., Humphreys S., Michell M., Pinder S.E., Wells C.A., Zakhour H.D., UK National Coordinating Commmittee for Breast Screening Pathology. European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology Best Practice No 179. Guidelines for breast needle core biopsy handling and reporting in breast screening assessment. J. Clin. Pathol. 2004;57:897–902. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2003.010983. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Perry N., Broeders M., de Wolf C., Törnberg S., Holland R., von Karsa L. European guidelines for quality assurance in breast cancer screening and diagnosis—Fourth Edition—Summary Document. Ann. Oncol. 2008;19:614–622. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdm481. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bellini C., Nori Cucchiari J., Di Naro F., De Benedetto D., Bicchierai G., Franconeri A., Renda I., Bianchi S., Susini T. Breast Lesions of Uncertain Malignant Potential (B3) and the Risk of Breast Cancer Development: A Long-Term Follow-Up Study. Cancers. 2023;15:3521. doi: 10.3390/cancers15133521. - DOI - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources