Prognostic Significance of a Micropapillary Pattern in Pure Mucinous Carcinoma of the Breast: Comparative Analysis with Micropapillary Carcinoma.
- Author:
Hyun Jung KIM
1
;
Kyeongmee PARK
;
Jung Yeon KIM
;
Guhyun KANG
;
Geumhee GWAK
;
Inseok PARK
Author Information
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords: Breast; Micropapillary; Mucinous; Prognosis
- MeSH: Adenocarcinoma, Mucinous*; Breast Neoplasms; Breast*; Humans; Lymph Nodes; Mucins*; Multivariate Analysis; Neoplasm Metastasis; Prognosis; Receptor, Epidermal Growth Factor; Receptors, Progesterone; Risk Factors
- From:Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine 2017;51(4):403-409
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
- Abstract: BACKGROUND: Mucinous carcinoma of the breast is an indolent tumors with a favorable prognosis; however, micropapillary features tend to lead to aggressive behavior. Thus, mucinous carcinoma and micropapillary carcinoma exhibit contrasting biologic behaviors. Here, we review invasive mucinous carcinoma with a focus on micropapillary features and correlations with clinicopathological factors. METHODS: A total of 64 patients with invasive breast cancer with mucinous or micropapillary features were enrolled in the study. Of 36 pure mucinous carcinomas, 17 (47.2%) had micropapillary features and were termed mucinous carcinoma with micropapillary features (MUMPC), and 19 (52.8%) had no micropapillary features and were termed mucinous carcinoma without micropapillary features. MUMPC were compared with 15 invasive micropapillary carcinomas (IMPC) and 13 invasive ductal and micropapillary carcinomas (IDMPC). RESULTS: The clinicopathological factors of pure mucinous carcinoma and MUMPC were not significantly different. In contrast to IMPC and IDMPC, MUMPC had a low nuclear grade, lower mitotic rate, higher expression of hormone receptors, negative human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) status, lower Ki-67 proliferating index, and less frequent lymph node metastasis (p < .05). According to univariate analyses, progesterone receptor, HER2, T-stage, and lymph node metastasis were significant risk factors for overall survival; however, only T-stage remained significant in a multivariate analysis (p < .05). CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to IMPC and IDMPC, the micropapillary pattern in mucinous carcinoma does not contribute to aggressive behavior. However, further analysis of a larger series of patients is required to clarify the prognostic significance of micropapillary patterns in mucinous carcinoma of the breast.
