+ Site Statistics
+ Search Articles
+ PDF Full Text Service
How our service works
Request PDF Full Text
+ Follow Us
Follow on Facebook
Follow on Twitter
Follow on LinkedIn
+ Subscribe to Site Feeds
Most Shared
PDF Full Text
+ Translate
+ Recently Requested

Invasive ductal carcinoma with coexisting ductal carcinoma in situ (IDC/DCIS) versus pure invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC): a comparison of clinicopathological characteristics, molecular subtypes, and clinical outcomes



Invasive ductal carcinoma with coexisting ductal carcinoma in situ (IDC/DCIS) versus pure invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC): a comparison of clinicopathological characteristics, molecular subtypes, and clinical outcomes



Journal of Cancer Research and Clinical Oncology 145(7): 1877-1886



Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is widely recognized as the precursor of invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). We aimed to analyze the clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes of coexisting DCIS component in IDC and its clinical significance according to molecular subtypes. Data from 3001 patients with IDC (79.4%) and IDC/DCIS (20.6%) who underwent surgery from January 2009 to June 2016 were retrospectively assessed. The clinical outcomes of IDC with coexistent DCIS in different molecular subtypes were evaluated. IDC/DCIS patients were more likely to be younger (P < 0.001), had low tumor grade (P = 0.001), had less lymph node involvement (P = 0.038) and received more mastectomy (P = 0.002) than IDC patients. In the comparison of molecular subtype prevalence, IDC/DCIS patients were more frequently presented with luminal B/HER2 positive (12.5% vs 11.0%, P < 0.001) and HER2 positive subtypes (20.9% vs 9.8%, P < 0.001). The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS, 90.9% vs 87.5%, P = 0.021) and 5-year overall survival (OS 96.1% vs 94.0%, P = 0.018) were significantly improved in IDC/DCIS patients compared to IDC patients. In multivariate analysis, the presence of coexisting DCIS (P = 0.048), tumor size (P < 0.001), lymph node status (P < 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.007) and molecular subtypes (P < 0.001) were independent prognostic factors for DFS. Furthermore, coexistence of DCIS component in IDC significantly improved DFS in HER2 positive (94.8% vs 78.5%, P = 0.003), but had no association in luminal and triple negative subtypes. IDC with coexisting DCIS was associated with improved prognosis. Patients with IDC/DCIS presented with more HER2 positive expression and might improve DFS in HER2 positive breast cancer.

Please choose payment method:






(PDF emailed within 0-6 h: $19.90)

Accession: 066784778

Download citation: RISBibTeXText

PMID: 31089799

DOI: 10.1007/s00432-019-02930-2


Related references

Breast density, scintimammographic (99m)Tc(V)DMSA uptake, and calcitonin gene related peptide (CGRP) expression in mixed invasive ductal associated with extensive in situ ductal carcinoma (IDC + DCIS) and pure invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC): correlation with estrogen receptor (ER) status, proliferation index Ki-67, and histological grade. Breast Cancer 18(4): 286-291, 2011

Expression of cytokeratin markers, ER-alpha, PR, HER-2/neu, and EGFR in pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and DCIS with co-existing invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) of the breast. Annals of Clinical and Laboratory Science 37(2): 127-134, 2007

Expression of Her2/neu, steroid receptors (ER and PR), Ki67 and p53 in invasive mammary ductal carcinoma associated with ductal carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) Versus invasive breast cancer alone. Anticancer Research 25(3a): 1719-1723, 2005

DCIS subtype versus IDC grade in tumours composed of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive ductal carcinoma. Journal of Pathology 179(Suppl. ): 16A, 1996

Increased breast density correlates with the proliferation-seeking radiotracer (99m)Tc(V)-DMSA uptake in florid epithelial hyperplasia and in mixed ductal carcinoma in situ with invasive ductal carcinoma but not in pure invasive ductal carcinoma or in mild epithelial hyperplasia. Molecular Imaging 10(5): 370-376, 2011

Invasive ductal carcinoma accompanied by ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): Comparison of DCIS grade with grade of invasive component. Breast 6(3): 132-137, 1997

HER2 status in pure ductal carcinoma in situ and in the intraductal and invasive components of invasive ductal carcinoma determined by fluorescence in situ hybridization and immunohistochemistry. Histopathology 48(6): 702-707, 2006

Intracrinology of sex steroids in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of human breast: comparison to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) and non-neoplastic breast. Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 114(1-2): 68-71, 2009

Invasive Ductal Carcinoma With Lobular Features: A Comparison Study of Tumor Characteristics and Clinical Outcomes to Pure Ductal and Lobular Carcinomas. American Journal of Clinical Pathology 138(Suppl 2): A143-A143, 2012

Selection and evolution in the genomic landscape of copy number alterations in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and its progression to invasive carcinoma of ductal/no special type: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 153(1): 101-121, 2015

Differences and Relationships Between Normal and Atypical Ductal Hyperplasia, Ductal Carcinoma In Situ, and Invasive Ductal Carcinoma Tissues in the Breast Based on Raman Spectroscopy. Applied Spectroscopy 71(2): 300-307, 2017

Comparison of the association of mammographic density and clinical factors with ductal carcinoma in situ versus invasive ductal breast cancer in Korean women. Bmc Cancer 17(1): 821, 2017

Breast ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion A definition supported by a long-term study of 1401 serially sectioned ductal carcinomas 268 DCIS-MI versus 829 DCIS and versus 304 infiltrating ductal carcinomas with a predominant DCIS component. Laboratory Investigation 80(1): 19A, 2000

Genomic differences between pure ductal carcinoma in situ and synchronous ductal carcinoma in situ with invasive breast cancer. Oncotarget 6(10): 7597-7607, 2015

Pure ductal carcinoma in situ and in situ component of ductal invasive carcinoma of the breast. A preliminary morphometric study. Journal of Experimental and Clinical Cancer Research 22(2): 279-288, 2003