Introduction: Salivary gland intraductal carcinoma (IDC) is rare. We present the second case of IDC originating from an intraparotid lymph node (LN) with a more detailed description of the histogenesis, immunohistochemistry (IHC) and updated molecular information. Case Report: An 87-year-old male had a tumour nodule over the left parotid tail for about 20 years. Physical examinations revealed a 4.5 cm soft, non-tender and fixed mass. After the left parotidectomy, pathology confirmed the diagnosis of IDC arising within an intraparotid lymph node. The cystic component of the tumour was lined by single to multilayered ductal cells with micropapillary growth pattern. The solid part showed intraductal proliferation of neoplastic cells in solid, cribriform, micropapillary and Roman bridge-like structure. By immunohistochemistry (IHC), the tumour cells were positive for S-100, CK (AE1/AE3), mammaglobin, SOX10, and estrogen receptor (ER), with myoepithelial cell rimming highlighted by positive p63 and calponin IHC stains. The prognosis of this patient is excellent after complete excision. Discussion: The mechanism of salivary gland tumour arising in the intra-parotid gland LN was assumed to be related to salivary duct inclusion within the intraparotid gland LN which is a normal occurrence during embryology development. Although the terminology may raise some confusion about the relationship between IDC and conventional salivary duct carcinoma (SDA), they are different in immunophenotype and clinicopathologic features. IDC is characterised by S100 (+) ER (+) with predominant intraductal growth and excellent prognosis; while SDC features S100 (-) androgen receptor (+) with predominant invasive growth and aggressive behavior. Recent discovery of recurrent RET gene rearrangement in IDC but not SDC also supports that IDC is not precursor lesion of the SDC.
intraductal carcinoma

No abstract available.
Breast* ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating* ; Fibroadenoma*

No abstract available.
Breast* ; Carcinoma, Ductal* ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating*

PURPOSE: Architectural distortion is a suspicious abnormality for the diagnosis of breast cancer. The aim of this study was to investigate the clinical significance of sonographically detected architectural distortion. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From January 2006 to June 2008, 20 patients were identified who had sonographically detected architectural distortions without a history of trauma or surgery and abnormal mammographic findings related to an architectural distortion. All of the lesions were pathologically verified. We evaluated the clinical and pathological findings and then assessed the clinical significance of the sonographically detected architectural distortions. RESULTS: Based on the clinical findings, one (5%) of the 20 patients had a palpable lump and the remaining 19 patients had no symptoms. No patient had a family history of breast cancer. Based on the pathological findings, three (15%) patients had malignancies. The malignant lesions included invasive ductal carcinomas (n = 2) and ductal carcinoma in situ (n = 1). Four (20%) patients had high-risk lesions; atypical ductal hyperplasia (n = 3) and lobular carcinoma in situ (n = 1). The remaining 13 (65%) patients had benign lesions, however, seven (35%) out of 13 patients had mild-risk lesions (three intraductal papillomas, three moderate or florid epithelial hyperplasia and one sclerosing adenosis). CONCLUSION: Of the sonographically detected architectural distortions, 35% were breast cancers or high-risk lesions and 35% were mild-risk lesions. Thus, a biopsy might be needed for an architectural distortion without an associated mass as depicted on breast ultrasound, even though the mammographic findings are normal.
Biopsy ; Breast ; Breast Neoplasms ; Carcinoma, Ductal ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating ; Carcinoma, Lobular ; Humans ; Hyperplasia ; Mammography ; Papilloma, Intraductal

Recently developed new classifications (Holland, Van Nuys, modified Lagios) of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) linked to outcome have emphasized the importance of nuclear morphology rather than architecture. We have evaluated these three classifications in ductal carcinomas composed of in situ and invasive carcinomas. The reproducibility of three classifications was assessed (n=49), and the histological grade of the DCIS was compared with the histologic differentiation (modified Bloom & Richardson method) and nuclear grade (modified Black method) of the coexisting invasive ductal carcinoma (n=45). According to Holland classification, the DCIS component was poorly differentiated in 51.0%, intermediately differentiated in 40.8%, and well differentiated in 8.2%. Using the Van Nuys classification, the DCIS component was group 3 (high grade with or without necrosis) in 44.9%, group 2 (non-high grade with necrosis) in 28.6%, and group 1 (non-high grade without necrosis) in 26.5%. According to the modified Lagios classification, the DCIS component was high-grade in 42.8%, intermediate-grade in 32.7%, and low-grade in 24.5%. The histologic grades of the three classifications revealed significant correlations between Holland and Van Nuys classification (p<0.0001) and between Holland and modified Lagios classification (p<0.0001), especially in poorly differentiated/group 3/high-grade DCIS. The reproducibility of classification of the DCIS was 71.4% in the Holland, 61.2% in the Van Nuys, and 55.1% in the modified Lagios classifications. The grade of the DCIS showed significant correlation with the grade of coexisting invasive ductal carcinoma (p<0.0001), especially in poorly differentiated/group 3/high-grade DCIS. In conclusion, DCIS grade, determined by the Holland, Van Nuys or modified Lagios classifications, is closely correlated with the histologic grade of the invasive ductal component in tumors composed of in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma, and may be a useful factor to estimate clinical behavior of DCIS. In our experience the Holland classification is recommended for DCIS classification due to its high reproducibility.
Breast* ; Carcinoma, Ductal* ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating* ; Classification* ; Netherlands

PURPOSE: To compare the mammographic features and histologic subtypes of ductal carcinoma in situ(DCIS) of the breast. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Mammograms of 34 patients with DCIS of the breast detected between January 1992 and November 1998 were retrospectively analyzed. Histologic subtypes were classified as either comedo or noncomedo. Mammographic findings were classified in one of four ways : microcalcification only, microcalcification with mass, mass or asymmetrical density only, or normal. Microcalcifications was classified as either predominantly casting or granular. We also determined whether microcalcification was multifocal. RESULTS: Histologic examination revealed the comedo type in eight patients and the noncomedo type in 26. Among the eight comedo-type cases, mammography demonstrated microcalcification only in five and micro-calcification with mass in three. Among 26 noncomedo-type cases, microcalcifications only was seen in ten, microcalcification with mass in two, mass or asymmetrical density only in six, and normal features in eight. Six of the comedo type were predominantly casting and two were predominantly granular. Predominantly casting calcification was present in four of 12 cases of the noncomedo type and predominatly granular was in eight. Multifocality was seen in four comedo-type cases, but in none of those that were of the noncomedo type. CONCLUSION: We conclude that the comedo subtype of DCIS of the breast is more likely than the noncomedo subtype to be accompanied by microcalcification of the predominantly casting type. Multifocally located microcalcification is a more frequent feature of the comedo subtype than of the noncomedo subtype.
Breast ; Carcinoma, Ductal* ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating* ; Humans ; Mammography ; Retrospective Studies

PURPOSE: To verify the role of additional sonography on routine mammograms in the diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between 2005 and 2008, a total of 105 breasts belonging to 102 patients were diagnosed with DCIS by surgery. Preoperative ultrasound and mammographic findings and reports using BI-RADS were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. In both mammogram and ultrasound, BI-RADS categories 1, 2, and 3 were regarded as negative results and categories 4 and 5 as positive results. We analyzed the frequency in which additional ultrasound examinations aided in the diagnosis in each mammographic finding. RESULTS: Out of the 105 cases, 96 showed positive results on a mammogram and 9 cases showed negative results. Clustered microcalcifications, positive mammographic findings, were found most often (64/96, 66.67%). In those cases, ultrasound examinations gave no additional information, but did enablesonographically-guided biopsies in 38. In the 32 cases with other positive mammographic findings, ultrasound examinations were helpful in 15 cases. Of the 9 cases showing negative results on a mammogram, 8 cases were correctly diagnosed with DCIS because of the additionally-performed ultrasound examination, but 1 case returned a false negative on both the mammogram and ultrasound examination. CONCLUSION: Additional sonography contributes to a diagnosis of DCIS in patients with negative mammographic findings, nonspecific mammographic findings, or multifocal lesions.
Biopsy ; Breast ; Carcinoma, Ductal ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating ; Humans ; Retrospective Studies

PURPOSE: For the accurate diagnosis of non-palpable breast lesions with microcalcification, a localization and biopsy procedure should be performed by using mammography. Recently, a stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy has been reported as a convenient and accurate method for a procedure. This study was performed to determine whether the upright add-on type stereotactic biopsy was suitable for the diagnosis of microcalcified breast lesions in Korean women. METHODS: Between April 2002 and March 2003, an upright add-on type stereotactic vacuum-assisted biopsy was performed in 21 cases with microcalcification; that had been categorized from 2 to 5 according to the BI-RADS (Breast Imaging Reporting and Data System). The microcalcified lesions in biopsy specimens were confirmed with tissue mammogram and a pathological review performed. RESULTS: The pathological findings revealed fibrocystic changes in 15 cases, intraductal papilloma in 1 and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) in 5. There were no malignancy among the BI-RADS category 2 & 3 cases, but DCIS was found in 2 (25%) out of 8 BI-RADS category 4 cases, and in all 3 (100%) of BI-RADS category 5 cases. The malignancy detection rate among the cases with microcalcification with a BI-RADS category above 4 was 45.4% (5/11). CONCLUSION: An upright add-on type stereotactic vacuum assisted biopsy is an accurate, safe and very convenient tool for the diagnosis of breast lesions with microcalcification.
Biopsy* ; Breast* ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating ; Diagnosis* ; Female ; Humans ; Mammography ; Papilloma, Intraductal ; Vacuum

Pigmented mammary Paget disease (PMPD) is a rare subtype of mammary Paget disease that presents as a hyperpigmented patch or plaque over the areola and nipple. We herein report on an unusual case of PMPD with reticulated features in a 98-year-old female. The histology showed intraepidermal pagetoid cells containing melanin pigments without any underlying intraductal carcinoma.
Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating ; Female ; Humans ; Melanins ; Nipples ; Paget's Disease, Mammary

PURPOSE: To evaluate the results of mammography and ultrasound-guided localization biopsy of nonpalpable lesions, and the differences between them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Between January 1999 and December 2000, localization biopsies of 441 nonpalpable breast lesions were performed immediately after preoperative localization using a wire hook. Localization was mammography guided in 241 cases and ultrasound guided in 200. The former group included clustered microcalcifications( 195/241, 80.9%), mass (22/241,9.1%) and mass with microcalcifications (24/241, 10.0%), while the latter were almost all mass, or mass with microcalcifications (198/200, 99%). Only two lesions (1%) showed clustered microcalcifications only, and these were previously demonstrated at mammography. RESULTS: Overall, 68 lesions (15.4%) were confirmed as malignancy. Forty-six of 241 mammography guided localization biopsies indicated malignancy: there were 28 noninvasive carcinomas (60.9%), 25 ductal cancers in situ (DCIS), one DCIS combined with lobular cancer in situ (LCIS), and two DCIS combined with microinvasion. Twenty-two of 200 ultrasound-guided localization biopsies revealed malignancy; five such lesions (22.7%) were noninvasive carcinomas. CONCLUSION: The malignancy rate and proportion of noninvasive breast cancers indicated by mammography and ultrasound-guided localization biopsy differed, and this was because the former involved mainly microcalcifications and the latter, masses.
Biopsy* ; Breast Neoplasms ; Breast* ; Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating ; Mammography* ; Ultrasonography