Background: Specific cytological criteria for the luminal phenotype of breast carcinoma, despite it being the most common and having a better prognosis as well as targeted therapies under study, remain to be established. Using fine-needle aspiration cytology (FNAC), we aimed to identify the luminal phenotype through the evaluation of cytological criteria recognized in routine practice. Methods: We correlated 169 FNACs of breast carcinomas with their tissue specimens, classified into phenotypes by immunohistochemistry (applying tissue microarray technology) as luminal A, luminal B, HER2 overexpression, and triple negative. All FNAC samples were blindly reviewed according to cellularity, cell cohesion, necrosis, nucleoli, and nuclear atypia. Fisher's exact test was used to test associations between the cytological criteria and phenotypes. Results: The following phenotypes were obtained - luminal A: 107 (63.3%), luminal B: 39 (23.1%), HER2 overexpression: 8 (4.7%), and triple negative: 15 (8.9%). The luminal phenotype showed mild/moderate cellularity (40.4%) (OR = 7.12, 95% CI: 1.61-31.52), inconspicuous, present nucleoli (55.5%) (OR = 8.31, 95% CI: 2.36-29.19), and mild/moderate nuclear atypia (44.5%) (OR = 8.42, 95% CI: 1.90-37.25). Conclusion: The criteria that might indicate the luminal phenotype of breast carcinoma in FNAC were mild/moderate cellularity, inconspicuous, present, and nonprominent nucleoli, and mild/moderate nuclear atypia.

Keywords:
Breast carcinoma, Cytological criteria, Cytopathology, breast, Fine needle aspiration cytology, Luminal phenotype, Molecular classification
1.
Kohler BA, Sherman RL, Howlader N, et al: Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2011, featuring incidence of breast cancer subtypes by race/ethnicity, poverty, and state. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015;107:djv048.
2.
Blows FM, Driver KE, Schmidt MK, Broeks A, Van Leeuwen FE, Wesseling J, Cheang MC, Gelmon K, Nielsen TO, Blomqvist C, et al: Subtyping of breast cancer by immunohistochemistry to investigate a relationship between subtype and short and long term survival: a collaborative analysis of data for 10,159 cases from 12 studies. PLoS Med 2010;7:e1000279.
3.
Cancer Genome Atlas Network: Comprehensive molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2012;490:61-70.
4.
Geyer FC, Rodrigues DN, Weigelt B, Reis- Filho JS: Molecular classification of estrogen receptor-positive/luminal breast cancers. Adv Anat Pathol 2012;19:39-53.
5.
Perou CM, Sørlie T, Eisen MB, Van de Rijn M, Jeffrey SS, Rees CA, et al: Molecular portraits of human breast tumours. Nature 2000;406:747-752.
6.
Sørlie T, Perou CM, Tibshirani R, Aas T, Geisler S, Johnsen H, et al: Gene expression patterns of breast carcinomas distinguish tumor subclasses with clinical implications. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 2001;98:10869-10874.
7.
Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Piccart-Gebhart M, Thürlimann B, et al: Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 2013;24:2206-2223.
8.
Maisonneuve P, Disalvatore D, Rotmensz N, et al: Proposed new clinicopathological surrogate definitions of luminal A and luminal B (HER2-negative) intrinsic breast cancer subtypes. Breast Cancer Res 2014;16:R65.
9.
Coates AS, Winer EP, Goldhirsch A, et al: Tailoring therapies - improving the management of early breast cancer: St. Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer. Ann Oncol 2015;26:1533-1546.
10.
Callagy G, Cattaneo E, Daigo Y, Happerfield L, Bobrow LG, Pharoah PD, Caldas C: Molecular classification of breast carcinomas using tissue microarrays. Diagn Mol Pathol 2003;12:27-34.
11.
Martin H, Ellis E: Biopsy by needle puncture and aspiration. Ann Surg 1930;92:169-181.
12.
Chaiwun B, Thorner P: Fine needle aspiration for evaluation of breast masses. Curr Opin Obstet and Gynecol 2007;19:48-55.
13.
Kocjan G, Feichter G, Hagmar B, et al: Fine needle aspiration cytology: a survey of current European practice. Cytopathology 2006;17:219-226.
14.
Kocjan G, Bourgain C, Fassina A, et al: The role of breast FNAC in diagnosis and clinical management: a survey of current practice. Cytopathology 2008;19:271-278.
15.
Koss LG: The palpable breast nodule: a cost-effectiveness analysis of alternate diagnostic approaches. The role of the needle aspiration biopsy. Cancer 1993;72:1499-1502.
16.
Collins BT, Garcia TC, Hudson JB: Effective clinical practices for improved FNA biopsy cell block outcomes. Cancer Cytopathol 2015;123:540-547.
17.
Billgren AM, Tani E, Liedberg A, Skoog L, Rutqvist LE: Prognostic significance of tumor cell proliferation analyzed in fine needle aspirates from primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002;71:161-170.
18.
Löfgren L, Skoog L, Von Schoultz E, Tani E, Isaksson E, Fernstad R, Carlström K, Von Schoultz B: Hormone receptor status in breast cancer - a comparison between surgical specimens and fine needle aspiration biopsies. Cytopathology 2003;14:136-142.
19.
Marinšek ZP, Nolde N, Kardum-Skelin I, Nizzoli R, Onal B, Rezanko T, Tani E, Ostović KT, Vielh P, Schmitt F, Kocjan G: Multinational study of oestrogen and progesterone receptor immunocytochemistry on breast carcinoma fine needle aspirates. Cytopathology 2013;24:7-20.
20.
Dufloth RM, Alves JM, Martins D, et al: Cytological criteria to predict basal phenotype of breast carcinomas. Diagn Cytopathol 2009;37:809-814.
21.
Sikora MJ, Cooper KL, Bahreini A, Luthra S, Wang G, Chandran UR, Davidson NE, Dabbs DJ, Welm AL, Oesterreich S: Invasive lobular carcinoma cell lines are characterized by unique estrogen-mediated gene expression patterns and altered tamoxifen response. Cancer Res 2014;74:1463-1474.
22.
Van't Veer LJ, Dai H, Van de Vijver MJ, He YD, Hart AA, Mao M, et al: Gene expression profiling predicts clinical outcome of breast cancer. Nature 2002;415:530-536.
23.
Badve S, Dabbs DJ, Schnitt SJ, et al: Basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers: a critical review with an emphasis on the implications for pathologists and oncologists. Mod Pathol 2011;24:157-167.
24.
Bose S: Triple-negative breast carcinoma: morphologic and molecular subtypes. Adv Anat Pathol 2015;22:306-313.
25.
Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, et al: World Health Organization Classification of Tumours of the Breast, ed 4. Lyon, IARC Press, 2012, pp 34-42.
26.
Goldhirsch A, Winer EP, Coates AS, et al: Personalizing the treatment of women with early breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2013. Ann Oncol 2013;24:2206-2223.
27.
Mirlacher M, Kasper M, Storz, et al: Influence of slide aging on results of translational research studies using immunohistochemistry. Mod Pathol 2004;17:1414-1420.
28.
Nuovo A, Garofalo M, Mikhail A, Nicol AF, Vianna-Andrade C, Nuovo GJ: The effect of aging of formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissues on the in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry signals in cervical lesions. Diagn Mol Pathol 2013;22:164-173.
29.
Hammond MEH, Hayes DF, Dowsett M, et al: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists guideline recommendations for immunohistochemical testing of estrogen and progesterone receptors in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010;28:2784-2795.
30.
Wolff A, Hammond ME, Hicks DG, et al: Recommendations for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 testing in breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology/College of American Pathologists clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2013;31:3997-4013.
31.
Knoepp SM, Roh MH: Ancillary techniques on direct-smear aspirate slides: a significant evolution for cytopathology techniques. Cancer Cytopathol 2013;121:120-128.
32.
Jain D, Mathur SR, Iyer VK: Cell blocks in cytopathology: a review of preparative methods, utility in diagnosis and role in ancillary studies. Cytopathology 2014;25:356-371.
33.
Creighton CJ: The molecular profile of luminal B breast cancer. Biologics 2012;6:289-297.
34.
Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, Gao D, Leung S, Snider J, Watson M, Davies S, Bernard PS, Parker JS, et al: Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 2009;101:736-750.
35.
Wakasa T, Nakamura M, Kagiya T, et al: Loss of cellular cohesion in cytology composes a special subgroup of breast tumors - analyses of 37 cases. Acta Cytol 2014;58:89-95.
36.
Yadav H, Gill M, Srivastava D, Gupta V, Sen R: Significance of morphometric parameters in the categorization of breast lesions on cytology. Turk Patoloji Derg 2015;31:188-193.
37.
Anand M, Kumar R, Jain P, Asthana S, Deo SV, Shukla NK, Karak A: Comparison of three different staining techniques for intraoperative assessment of nodal metastasis in breast cancer. Diagn Cytopathol 2004;31:423-426.
38.
Cibas ES, Ducatman BS: Cytology: Diagnostic Principles and Clinical Correlates, ed 3. Philadelphia, Saunders Elsevier, 2009, pp 221-227.
39.
Falck AK, Fernö M, Bendahl PO, Rydén L: St Gallen molecular subtypes in primary breast cancer and matched lymph node metastases - aspects on distribution and prognosis for patients with luminal A tumours: results from a prospective randomized trial. BMC Cancer 2013;13:558.
40.
Ciriello G, Gatza ML, Beck AH, et al: Comprehensive molecular portraits of invasive lobular breast cancer. Cell 2015;163:506-519.
© 2016 S. Karger AG, Basel
2016
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.