暂无摘要。

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is one of the most common skin malignancies worldwide. Morpheaform basal cell carcinoma (MBCC) is a rare aggressive subtype of BCC that presents with unique histologic features. Both are treated surgically and have an excellent survival rate. Metastatic breast carcinoma, on the other hand, has a poor survival rate along with a more burdensome therapeutic route including chemotherapy. Due to an overlap in common immunohistochemistry stains, there is a possibility of confusing the diagnosis of BCC with metastatic breast carcinoma resulting in potential patient harm. Therefore, a timely and accurate diagnosis distinguishing these malignancies is essential. We report a near-miss event in which a 77-year-old female with MBCC was mistakenly diagnosed with metastatic breast carcinoma. We discuss the details of these stains, characteristic features of MBCC, and treatment options and emphasize the importance of combining laboratory medicine with clinical expertise to improve patient outcomes.

Cancer of unknown primary (CUP) is a heterogeneous group of metastatic tumors in the absence of a clinically identifiable site. We describe the case of a 66-year-old female with an extensive history of non-specific imaging concerning for malignancy who did not undergo further workup and in whom a diagnosis of CUP was made. The patient initially presented to her specialist with concern of right leg pain. Imaging at that time was concerning for a progressive malignant process. Given this, the patient was referred urgently for surgery. Final surgical pathology and breast prognostic panel were consistent with metastatic breast carcinoma at that time. Follow-up imaging performed 1-week postoperatively did not show suspicious findings in either breast, further supporting a diagnosis of CUP. To this end, we highlight the importance of follow-up imaging but recognize the challenges facing healthcare professionals in navigating the ethical principles of nonmalificience and beneficence in diagnostic workup.

暂无摘要。

Approximately 6-10% of all breast carcinoma is metastatic at diagnosis, termed de novo metastatic breast carcinoma (dnMBC). Systemic therapy remains the first line of treatment in dnMBC, but there is growing evidence that adjuvant locoregional treatment (LRT) of the primary tumor increases progression-free and overall survival (OS). Although selection bias may exist, real-world data from nearly half a million patients show that patients are undergoing primary tumor removal because of the survival benefit. The main question for the advocates for LRT in this patient population is not whether primary surgery is beneficial in dnMBC patients, but rather who is a good candidate for it. Oligometastatic disease (OMD) is a distinct subset of dnMBC that affects a limited number of organs. A better OS can be achieved with LRT in breast cancer patients, especially in those with OMD, bone only, or favorable subtypes. Though there is currently no consensus among breast care specialists on how to treat dnMBC patients, primary surgery for dnMBC should be taken into consideration for a subset of patients following an extensive multidisciplinary discussion.

暂无摘要。

BACKGROUND: Identifying metastatic breast carcinoma (mBC) in malignant effusion cytology (MEC) specimens is critical, as this will determine the patient\'s prognosis and therapeutic management. Overlapping cytomorphologic features of breast carcinoma (BC) with other neoplastic entities makes the use of sensitive and specific markers highly desirable. Recent studies have reported trichorhinophalangeal syndrome type 1 (TRPS1) as a sensitive and specific marker for primary BC and mBC. We aimed to investigate TRPS1 expression in MEC of mBC and its most common diagnostic mimickers.
METHODS: A retrospective search from the pathology archives identified 82 MEC. TRPS1 expression in mBC was analyzed, and the results were compared to those in metastatic carcinoma of Müllerian origin (mMC) and metastatic pulmonary adenocarcinoma (mPAC). TRPS1 immunoperoxidase was performed on cytospin or cell block preparations, and p < 0.05 was considered significant.
RESULTS: Nuclear expression for TRPS1 was evaluated and scored as positive (≥1% of tumor cells) or negative. Nuclear TRPS1 expression was seen in 100% (30/30) mBC, 72% (18/25) mMC, and 7% (2/27) mPAC. This resulted in sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive values of 100%, 61%, 60%, and 100%, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: TRPS1 is a sensitive marker for mBC and can be reliably performed on cytology specimens. TRPS1 expression was also identified in a significant proportion of mMC, creating a potential diagnostic pitfall. Therefore, caution should be exercised when evaluating MEC of mBC with TRPS1. Consequently, a combination of immunoperoxidase panels should be employed in this setting.

BACKGROUND: The tumor phenotype may change between primary and metastatic breast cancer. We compared the expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 in a series of primary breast carcinomas (PBC) with their metastatic relapses and analyzed the impact of any changes on survival.
METHODS: It was a single-center retrospective study, collecting consecutive cases of metastatic breast carcinoma diagnosed in the pathology and medical oncology departments at Habib Bourguiba University Hospital in Sfax, Tunisia. An immunohistochemical study was used to assess ER, PR, and HER2 expression. Overall survival (OS) and post-metastasis survival (PMS) were evaluated using multivariable Cox regression analysis.
RESULTS: Our study included 68 patients. ER and PR status changed in 29.4 % and 39.7 % of cases, respectively. Conversions were mainly from positive to negative status (22 % and 23.5 % for ER and PR, respectively). Differences in HER2 status were observed in 19.6 % of cases, with loss of overexpression in 6 patients (10.7 %). Adjuvant trastuzumab therapy and PBC molecular subtype (HR-, HER2+) were associated with HER2 status discordance (p = 0.02 and 0.03, respectively). On multivariable analysis, HR-negative conversion tumors were significantly associated with a worse OS (p = 0.042) and PMS (p < 0.001), compared to HR-concordant positive tumors.
CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes that HR and HER2 status discordance between primary and metastatic breast carcinoma has a prognostic impact on patient outcome. Analyzing these receptors\' status in all newly diagnosed cases of metastatic breast carcinoma is strongly recommended and would provide information for changing treatment strategies.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Peritoneal fluid (PF) cytology is critical for distinguishing high-grade serous carcinoma (HGSC) from metastatic disease in patients with breast carcinoma who present with peritoneal carcinomatosis (PC).
METHODS: A 50-year-old woman underwent surgery and adjuvant therapy for pT1N0 grade 2/2 luminal A breast carcinoma. Sixteen months postoperatively, palliative chemotherapy was administered following a pleural biopsy and diagnosis of metastatic carcinoma. The patient developed PC despite chemotherapy. PF cytology specimens suggested metastatic carcinoma. However, we observed a papillary cellular arrangement during the review of cytology slides. HGSC was confirmed by immunocytochemistry showing positive paired box 8 (PAX8) and Wilms\' tumor 1 (WT1) expression and negative GATA-binding protein 3 expression.
CONCLUSIONS: In patients with breast carcinoma history, an awareness of characteristic cytomorphology of HGSC, including a papillary pattern with positive PAX8 and WT1 immunoreactivity, is essential to prevent the misdiagnosis of such cases and in ensuring accurate treatment and management.