Advertisement

Risk factors for breast cancer mortality after ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosis differ from those for invasive recurrence

Published:November 23, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.surg.2022.10.009

      Abstract

      Background

      Breast cancer mortality after ductal carcinoma in situ is rare, making it difficult to predict which patients are at risk and to identify whether risk factors for this outcome are the same as those for invasive recurrence. We aimed to identify whether risk factors for invasive recurrences are similar to those for breast cancer death after a diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ.

      Methods

      The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program was queried for female patients diagnosed with pure ductal carcinoma in situ. Cumulative incidence was estimated by treatment group using competing risks. Competing risks regression was then performed for the development of in-breast invasive recurrence with competing risks of breast and non–breast cancer death. Competing risks regression was then again performed for development of breast cancer mortality with the competing risk of non–breast cancer death.

      Results

      A total of 29,515 patients were identified. Of them, 164 patients suffered breast cancer mortality without an intervening invasive recurrence, and 44 suffered breast cancer mortality after an invasive in-breast recurrence. On competing risks analysis for invasive in-breast recurrence, significant factors included lesion size >5 cm (hazard ratio = 1.59, 95% confidence interval 1.24–2.04, P < .001), diffuse disease (hazard ratio = 0.0005, 95% confidence interval 0.0003–0.0007, P < .001), other race (hazard ratio = 1.29, 95% confidence interval 1.10–1.52, P = .002), Black race (hazard ratio = 1.21, 95% confidence interval 1.01–1.46, P = .04), age at diagnosis (hazard ratio = 0.99, confidence interval 0.98–1.00, P = .02), low-grade disease (hazard ratio = 0.79, 95% confidence interval 0.64–0.96, P = .02), lumpectomy with radiation (hazard ratio = 0.67, 95% confidence interval 0.58-0.77, P < .001), and mastectomy (hazard ratio = 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.30–0.44, P < .001). Significant factors for breast cancer mortality included age at diagnosis (hazard ratio = 1.04, 95% confidence interval 1.03–1.05, P < .001), Black race (hazard ratio = 2.88, 95% confidence interval 2.08–3.99, P < .001), diffuse disease (hazard ratio = 6.02, 95% confidence interval 1.39–26.07, P = .02), lumpectomy with radiation (hazard ratio = 0.51, 95% confidence interval 0.36–0.72, P < .001), and mastectomy (hazard ratio = 0.60, 95% confidence interval 0.50–0.92, P = .02).

      Conclusion

      Our results suggested that risk factors for in-breast invasive recurrence after a diagnosis of pure ductal carcinoma in situ differ from risk factors for breast cancer mortality and development of metastatic recurrence. In-breast invasive recurrence is not the only consideration for breast cancer specific mortality in ductal carcinoma in situ patients.
      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Surgery
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Punglia R.
        • Bifolck K.
        • Golshan M.
        • et al.
        Epidemiology, biology, treatment, and prevention of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
        JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2018; 2
        • Correa C.
        • McGale P.
        • et al.
        • Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG)
        Overview of the randomized trials of radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
        J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 2010; 2010: 162-177
        • Barrio A.V.
        • Van Zee K.J.
        Controversies in the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ. Ann.
        Rev Med. 2017; 68: 197-211
        • Narod S.A.
        • Iqbal J.
        • Giannakeas V.
        • Sopik V.
        • Sun P.
        Breast cancer mortality after a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ.
        JAMA Oncol. 2015; 1: 888-896
        • Ernster V.L.
        • Ballard-Barbash R.
        • Barlow W.E.
        • et al.
        Detection of ductal carcinoma in situ in women undergoing screening mammography.
        JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 2002; 94: 1546-1554
        • Ernster V.L.
        • Barclay J.
        Increases in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast in relation to mammography: a dilemma.
        JNCI Monogr. 1997; 1997: 151-156
        • van Seijen M.
        • Lips E.H.
        • Thompson A.M.
        • et al.
        Ductal carcinoma in situ: to treat or not to treat, that is the question.
        Br J Cancer. 2019; 121: 285-292
        • Hwang E.S.
        • Hyslop T.
        • Lynch T.
        • et al.
        The COMET (Comparison of Operative versus Monitoring and Endocrine Therapy) trial: a phase III randomised controlled clinical trial for low-risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).
        BMJ Open. 2019; 9e026797
        • Francis A.
        • Thomas J.
        • Fallowfield L.
        • et al.
        Addressing overtreatment of screen detected DCIS; the LORIS trial.
        Eur J Cancer. 2015; 51: 2296-2303
        • Elshof L.E.
        • Tryfonidis K.
        • Slaets L.
        • et al.
        Feasibility of a prospective, randomised, open-label, international multicentre, phase III, non-inferiority trial to assess the safety of active surveillance for low risk ductal carcinoma in situ: the LORD study.
        Eur J Cancer (Oxf Engl). 1990. 2015; 51: 1497-1510
        • Kanbayashi C.
        • Thompson A.M.
        • Hwang E.-S.S.
        • et al.
        The international collaboration of active surveillance trials for low-risk DCIS (LORIS, LORD, COMET, LORETTA).
        J Clin Oncol. 2019; 37 (TPS603–TPS603)
        • O’Keefe T.J.
        • Wallace A.M.
        Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program underestimates breast cancer-specific mortality after ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosis.
        Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020; 182: 761-762
        • Solin L.J.
        Management of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: present approaches and future directions.
        Curr Oncol Rep. 2019; 21: 33
        • Iwamoto T.
        • Booser D.
        • Valero V.
        • et al.
        Estrogen receptor (ER) mRNA and ER-related gene expression in breast cancers that are 1% to 10% ER-positive by immunohistochemistry.
        J Clin Oncol. 2012; 30: 729-734
        • Hammond M.E.H.
        • Hayes D.F.
        • 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
        • Gray R.J.
        A class of $K$-sample tests for comparing the cumulative incidence of a competing risk.
        Ann Stat. 1988; 16: 1141-1154
        • Fine J.P.
        • Gray R.J.
        A proportional hazards model for the subdistribution of a competing risk.
        J Am Stat Assoc. 1999; 94: 496-509
        • O’Keefe T.J.
        • Harismendy O.
        • Wallace A.M.
        Large and diffuse ductal carcinoma in situ: potentially lethal subtypes of “preinvasive” disease.
        Int J Clin Oncol. 2022; 27: 121-130
        • Tot T.
        Clinical relevance of the distribution of the lesions in 500 consecutive breast cancer cases documented in large-format histologic sections.
        Cancer. 2007; 110: 2551-2560
        • O’Keefe T.J.
        • Harismendy O.
        • Wallace A.M.
        Histopathological growth distribution of ductal carcinoma in situ: tumor size is not “one size fits all.
        Gland Surg. 2022; 11: 307-318
        • Nofech-Mozes S.
        • Spayne J.
        • Rakovitch E.
        • Hanna W.
        Prognostic and predictive molecular markers in DCIS: a review.
        Adv Anat Pathol. 2005; 12: 256-264
        • O’Keefe T.J.
        • Blair S.L.
        • Hosseini A.
        • Harismendy O.
        • Wallace A.M.
        HER2-overexpressing ductal carcinoma in situ associated with increased risk of ipsilateral invasive recurrence, receptor discordance with recurrence.
        Cancer Prev Res (Phila Pa). 2020; 13: 761-772
        • Borgquist S.
        • Zhou W.
        • Jirström K.
        • et al.
        The prognostic role of HER2 expression in ductal breast carcinoma in situ (DCIS): a population-based cohort study.
        BMC Cancer. 2015; 15: 468
        • Davis J.E.
        • Nemesure B.
        • Mehmood S.
        • et al.
        Her2 and Ki67 biomarkers predict recurrence of ductal carcinoma in situ.
        Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2016; 24
        • Nofech-Mozes S.
        • Spayne J.
        • Rakovitch E.
        • et al.
        Biological markers predictive of invasive recurrence in DCIS.
        Clin Med Oncol. 2008; 2: 7-18
        • Silverstein M.J.
        The University of Southern California/Van Nuys prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
        Am J Surg. 2003; 186: 337-343
        • Silverstein M.J.
        • Lagios M.D.
        • Craig P.H.
        • et al.
        A prognostic index for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
        Cancer. 1996; 77: 2267-2274
        • Wang S.-Y.
        • Shamliyan T.
        • Virnig B.A.
        • Kane R.
        Tumor characteristics as predictors of local recurrence after treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ: a meta-analysis.
        Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011; 127: 1-14
        • Pinder S.E.
        • Duggan C.
        • Ellis I.O.
        • et al.
        A new pathological system for grading DCIS with improved prediction of local recurrence: results from the UKCCCR/ANZ DCIS trial.
        Br J Cancer. 2010; 103: 94-100
        • Kerlikowske K.
        • Molinaro A.
        • Cha I.
        • et al.
        Characteristics associated with recurrence among women with ductal carcinoma in situ treated by lumpectomy.
        JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst. 2003; 95: 1692-1702
        • Liu Y.
        • Colditz G.A.
        • Gehlert S.
        • Goodman M.
        Racial disparities in risk of second breast tumors after ductal carcinoma in situ.
        Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2014; 148: 163-173
        • Liu Y.
        • West R.
        • Weber J.D.
        • Colditz G.A.
        Race and risk of subsequent aggressive breast cancer following ductal carcinoma in situ.
        Cancer. 2019; 125: 3225-3233
        • Innos K.
        • Horn-Ross P.L.
        Risk of second primary breast cancers among women with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast.
        Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008; 111: 531-540
        • Madubata C.C.
        • Liu Y.
        • Goodman M.S.
        • et al.
        Comparing treatment and outcomes of ductal carcinoma in situ among women in Missouri by race.
        Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016; 160: 563-572
        • Giannakeas V.
        • Sopik V.
        • Narod S.A.
        Association of a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ with death from breast cancer.
        JAMA Netw Open. 2020; 3 (e2017124–e2017124)
        • Giannakeas V.
        • Sopik V.
        • Narod S.A.
        Association of radiotherapy with survival in women treated for ductal carcinoma in situ with lumpectomy or mastectomy.
        JAMA Netw Open. 2018; 1 (e181100–e181100)