Abstract
Background: Atypical breast cytology is a poorly understood heterogeneous category with limited clinical utility but significant implications for patient management. Objective: To provide an insight into the true nature of atypical breast cytology in screening-detected (asymptomatic) and symptomatic settings, and find strategies for reducing the use of this diagnostic category. Materials and Methods: A total of 6,415 breast cytology samples were processed between January 2004 and December 2008. An atypical cytological diagnosis was rendered in 256 (4%) of the cases. A blind microscopic review of the atypical cases was conducted and results were correlated with subsequent histological and/or clinical outcomes. Results: Follow-up information by histology was available in 85.5%, by repeat fine-needle aspiration (FNA) in 3.5% and by imaging or clinical follow-up in 10.2% of the cases. Two patients (0.8%) were lost to follow-up. Of the 254 cases with follow-up, 62.6% were benign and 37.4% were malignant. The benign to malignant ratios were 1:1 and 2:1 in the screening and symptomatic groups, respectively. The atypical category in the screening population mostly yielded fat necrosis, complex sclerosing lesions and low- to intermediate-grade carcinoma on follow-up. The main outcomes in the symptomatic group were papilloma, fibroadenoma, ductal carcinoma in situ and lobular carcinoma. Preanalytical (suboptimal samples) factors were encountered in 34.8% and interpretative factors in 65.2% of the cases. Uncertainty about cellular morphology was attributed to such a diagnosis in 38 (14.8%) of the cases, architectural complexity in 137 (53.5%) and morphology and architecture in 70 (27.3%); 4.3% of cases were considered nondiagnostic. Conclusion: The atypical category is a necessary diagnosis but of limited use from a patient management perspective. Some preanalytical factors such as poor sample quality can be minimized by the involvement of cytopathologists in the FNA procedure. The use of the atypical category is partly dependent on the experience and confidence of the reporting pathologist. Assigning a case to this category is also likely to be unduly influenced by clinical or radiological findings. Our study indicates that the use of the atypical category can be reduced by up to 40% by appreciating these contributing factors. The practical utilization of the atypical category in breast cytology remains subjective and further study is required to identify useful objective criteria.
References
1.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare & Cancer Australia: Breast Cancer in Australia: An Overview. Canberra, AIHW, 2012.
2.
Feoli F, Paesmans M, Van Eeckhout P: Fine-needle aspiration cytology of the breast: impact of experience on accuracy, using standardized cytologic criteria. Acta Cytol 2008;52:145-151.
3.
Zardawi IM, Hearnden F, Meyer P, Trevan B: Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of impalpable breast lesions in a rural setting: comparison of cytology with imaging and final outcome. Acta Cytol 1999;43:163-168.
4.
Nagar S, Iacco A, Riggs T, Kestenberg W, Keidan R: An analysis of fine needle aspiration versus core needle biopsy in clinically palpable breast lesions: a report on the predictive values and a cost comparison. Am J Surg 2012;204:193-198.
5.
Masood S: Breast cytopathology: symposium 4. Cytopathology 2006;17(suppl 1):9.
6.
National Breast Cancer Centre: Breast Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology and Core Biospy: A Guide for Practice, ed 1. Camperdown, National Breast Cancer Centre, 2004.
7.
BreastScreen Australia: National Accreditation Standards. Newcastle, BreastScreen Australia Quality Improvement Program, 2001.
8.
Ellis IO, Humphreys S, Michell M, et al: Guidelines for Non-Operative Diagnostic Procedures and Reporting in Breast Cancer Screening. NHSBSP Publication No. 50. Sheffield, NHS Cancer Screening Programmes, 2001.
9.
National Cancer Institute: The uniform approach to breast fine-needle aspiration biopsy. Diagn Cytopathol 1997;16:295-311.
10.
Kocjan G, Bourgain C, Fassina A, Hagmar B, Herbert A, Kapila K, Kardum-Skelin I, Kloboves-Prevodnik V, Krishnamurthy S, Koutselini H, et al: The role of breast FNAC in diagnosis and clinical management: a survey of current practice. Cytopathology 2008;19:271-278.
11.
American College of Radiology: Illustrated Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System (BI-RADS) Atlas, ed 4. Reston, American College of Radiology, 2003.
12.
Sneige N, Fornage BD, Saleh G: Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of nonpalpable breast lesions: cytologic and histologic findings. Am J Clin Pathol 1994;102:98-101.
13.
Boerner S, Fornage BD, Singletary E, Sneige N: Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration (FNA) of nonpalpable breast lesions: a review of 1,885 FNA cases using the National Cancer Institute-supported recommendations on the uniform approach to breast FNA. Cancer 1999;87:19-24.
14.
Liew PL, Liu TJ, Hsieh MC, Lin HP, Lu CF, Yao MS, Chen CL: Rapid staining and immediate interpretation of fine-needle aspiration cytology for palpable breast lesions: diagnostic accuracy, mammographic, ultrasonographic and histopathologic correlations. Acta Cytol 2011;55:30-37.
15.
Hammond S, Keyhani-Rofagha S, O'Toole RV: Statistical analysis of fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast: a review of 678 cases plus 4,265 cases from the literature. Acta Cytol 1987;31:276-280.
16.
Nguansangiam S, Jesdapatarakul S, Tangjitgamol S: Accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology from breast masses in Thailand. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2009;10:623-626.
17.
Benjaporn C, Jongkolnee S, Charin Y-I, Wattanaporn W, Samreung R, Paul T: Effectiveness of fine-needle aspiration cytology of breast: analysis of 2,375 cases from northern Thailand. Diagn Cytopathol 2002;26:201-205.
18.
Rosa M, Mohammadi A, Masood S: The value of fine needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis and prognostic assessment of palpable breast lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 2012;40:26-34.
19.
Deb RA, Matthews P, Elston CW, Ellis IO, Pinder SE: An audit of ‘equivocal' (C3) and ‘suspicious' (C4) categories in fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast. Cytopathology 2001;12:219-226.
20.
Lim JC, Al-Masri H, Salhadar A, Xie HB, Gabram S, Wojcik EM: The significance of the diagnosis of atypia in breast fine-needle aspiration. Diagn Cytopathol 2004;31:285-288.
21.
Keen C, King J, Ferguson D: 17 years audit of breast lesion fine needle aspiration cytopathology (FNA) versus histopathology outcome; with a critical discussion of the NHSBSP standards. ABS 2012 Meeting Abstracts. Eur J Surg Oncol 2012;38:421-422.
22.
Tran PV, Lui PC, Yu AM, Vinh PT, Chau HH, Ma TK, Tan P, Tse GM: Atypia in fine needle aspirates of breast lesions. J Clin Pathol 2010;63:585-591.
23.
Chaiwun B, Sukhamwang N, Lekawanvijit S, Sukapan K, Rangdaeng S, Muttarak M, Thorner PS: Atypical and suspicious categories in fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast: histological and mammographical correlation and clinical significance. Singapore Med J 2005;46:706-709.
24.
Bofin AM, Lydersen S, Isaksen C, Hagmar BM: Interpretation of fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast: a comparison of cytological, frozen section, and final histological diagnoses. Cytopathology 2004;15:297-304.
25.
Kanhoush R, Jorda M, Gomez-Fernandez C, Wang H, Mirzabeig M, Ghorab Z, Ganjei-Azar P: Atypical and suspicious diagnoses in breast aspiration cytology. Cancer Cytopathol 2004;102:164-167.
26.
Gornstein B, Jacobs T, Bedard Y, Biscotti C, Ducatman B, Layfield L, McKee G, Sneige N, Wang H: Interobserver agreement of a probabilistic approach to reporting breast fine-needle aspirations on ThinPrep. Diagn Cytopathol 2004;30:389-395.
27.
Mottahedeh M, Rashid MH, Gateley CA: Final diagnoses following C3 (atypical, probably benign) breast cytology. Breast 2003;12:276-279.
28.
Bulgaresi P, Cariaggi P, Ciatto S, Houssami N: Positive predictive value of breast fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) in combination with clinical and imaging findings: a series of 2,334 subjects with abnormal cytology. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006;97:319-321.
29.
Farshid G, Downey P: Combined use of imaging and cytologic grading schemes for screen-detected breast abnormalities improves overall diagnostic accuracy. Cancer 2005;105:282-288.
30.
Masood S: Cytopathology of the Breast, vol 5. Chicago, American Society of Clinical Pathologists, 1996.
31.
Krishnamurthy S, Sneige N, Thompson PA, Marcy SM, Singletary SE, Cristofanilli M, Hunt KK, Kuerer HM: Nipple aspirate fluid cytology in breast carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol 2003;99:97-104.
32.
Orell SR, Miliauskas J: Fine needle biopsy cytology of breast lesions. a review of interpretative difficulties. Adv Anat Pathol 2005;12:233-245.
33.
Orell SR: Pitfalls in fine needle aspiration cytology. Cytopathology 2003;14:173-182.
34.
Howell LP: Equivocal diagnoses in breast aspiration biopsy cytology: sources of uncertainty and the role of ‘atypical/indeterminate' terminology. Diagn Cytopathol 1999;21:217-222.
35.
Simsir A, Cangiarella J: Challenging breast lesions: pitfalls and limitations of fine-needle aspiration and the role of core biopsy in specific lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 2012;40:262-272.
36.
al-Kaisi N: The spectrum of the ‘gray zone' in breast cytology: a review of 186 cases of atypical and suspicious cytology. Acta Cytol 1994;38:898-908.
37.
Moyes C, Dunne B: Predictive power of cytomorphological features in equivocal (C3, C4) breast FNAC. Cytopathology 2004;15:305-310.
38.
Pogačnik A, Us-Krašovec M: Analysis of routine cytopathologic reports in 1,598 histologically verified benign breast lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 2004;30:125-130.
39.
Papeix G, Zardawi IM, Douglas CD, Clark DA, Braye SG: The accuracy of the ‘triple test' in the diagnosis of papillary lesions of the breast. Acta Cytol 2012;56:41-46.
40.
Masood S, Rosa M: Borderline breast lesions: diagnostic challenges and clinical implications. Adv Anat Pathol 2011;18:190-198.
41.
Ueng SH, Mezzetti T, Tavassoli FA: Papillary neoplasms of the breast: a review. Arch Pathol Lab Med 2009;133:893-907.
42.
Field A, Mak A: A prospective study of the diagnostic accuracy of cytological criteria in the FNAB diagnosis of breast papillomas. Diagn Cytopathol 2007;35:465-475.
43.
Kollur SM, El Hag IA: FNA of breast fibroadenoma: observer variability and review of cytomorphology with cytohistological correlation. Cytopathology 2006;17:239-244.
44.
Gómez-Aracil V, Mayayo E, Azua J, Mayayo R, Azua-Romeo J, Arraiza A: Fine needle aspiration cytology of mammary hamartoma: a review of nine cases with histological correlation. Cytopathology 2003;14:195-200.
45.
Field A, Mak A: The fine needle aspiration biopsy diagnostic criteria of proliferative breast lesions: a retrospective statistical analysis of criteria for papillomas and radial scar lesions. Diagn Cytopathol 2007;35:386-397.
46.
Greenberg ML, Camaris C, Psarianos T, Ung OA, Lee WB: Is there a role for fine-needle aspiration in radial scar/complex sclerosing lesions of the breast? Diagn Cytopathol 1997;16:537-542.
47.
Inoue S, Inoue M, Kawasaki T, Takahashi H, Inoue A, Maruyama T, Matsuda K, Kunitomo K, Murata S, Fujii H: Six cases showing radial scar/complex sclerosing lesions of the breast detected by breast cancer screening. Breast Cancer 2008;15:247-251.
48.
Masood S: Cytomorphology of fibrocystic change, high-risk proliferative breast disease, and premalignant breast lesions. Clin Lab Med 2005;25:713-731.
49.
Manfrin E, Falsirollo F, Remo A, Reghellin D, Mariotto R, Dalfior D, Piazzola E, Bonetti F: Cancer size, histotype, and cellular grade may limit the success of fine-needle aspiration cytology for screen-detected breast carcinoma. Cancer Cytopathol 2009;117:491-499.
50.
Karimzadeh M, Sauer T: Diagnostic accuracy of fine-needle aspiration cytology in histological grade 1 breast carcinomas: are we good enough? Cytopathology 2008;19:279-286.
51.
Pogačnik A, Strojan Fležar M, Rener M: Ultrasonographically and stereotactically guided fine-needle aspiration cytology of non-palpable breast lesions: cyto-histological correlation. Cytopathology 2008;19:303-310.
52.
Dawson AE, Mulford DK, Taylor AS, Logan-Young W: Breast carcinoma detection in women age 35 years and younger: mammography and diagnosis by fine-needle aspiration cytology. Cancer 1998;84:163-168.
53.
Sundara Rajan S, White J, Peckham-Cooper A, Lane S, Lansdown M: Management of palpable but radiologically occult breast abnormalities. Acta Cytol 2012;56:266-270.
54.
Giles T: Breast fine needle aspiration: a way forward for a threatened art. Cytopathology 2008;19:269-270.
55.
Ly A, Pitman MB: Breast ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration: a case report stressing the sonographic features of benign versus malignant breast masses and the pitfalls of lobular carcinoma. Pathol Case Rev 2013;18:40-42.
56.
Hwang S, Ioffe O, Lee I, Waisman J, Cangiarella J, Simsir A: Cytologic diagnosis of invasive lobular carcinoma: factors associated with negative and equivocal diagnoses. Diagn Cytopathol 2004;31:87-93.
© 2013 S. Karger AG, Basel
2013
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
You do not currently have access to this content.
