Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Lobular Breast Carcinoma and Its Variants
Rattachement africain : br, ca. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
OBJECTIVE: To identify associations between cytological criteria in fine needle aspiration (FNA) specimens and histological subtypes of lobular breast carcinoma (classical and other types). STUDY DESIGN: FNA cytology and mastectomy specimens from 72 cases of invasive lobular breast carcinoma were consecutively retrieved from the files of the Amaral de Carvalho Hospital, Jaú-São Paulo, Brazil. All cases were reviewed regarding five cytological criteria: cellularity, cellular cohesion, presence of inflammation, nucleoli and nuclear atypia. The χ2 test or Fisher's exact tests with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used. RESULTS: The classical type showed lower initial cytological diagnosis of malignancy compared to the other variants (p=0.017; odds ratio (OR) 0.26, 95% CI 0.89-0.80). Moderate/intense cellular cohesion (p=0.011; OR 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.73) and mild atypia (p=0.000; OR 16.15, 95% CI 3.20-81.48) were significantly associated with the classical type of lobular breast carcinoma, while the absence of inflammation (p=0.082; OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.12-1.15) was marginally associated with the classical type. CONCLUSIONS: In cytology, the characterization of lobular carcinoma as malignant is difficult, especially the classical type. The association between cell cohesion and the classical type of lobular breast carcinoma may be one of the factors that complicate this diagnosis.
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology of Lobular Breast Carcinoma and Its Variants
- Date Crossref
- 01/01/2015
- Éditeur
- S. Karger AG
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.