Skip to main content
Log in

The need for epidemiologic studies of in-situ carcinoma of the breast

  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The purpose of this paper is to present background information on carcinoma in situ (CIS) of the breast and to provide a theoretical framework for planning epidemiologic studies which may further our understanding of breast cancer. Two types of epidemiologic studies are needed which incorporate CIS of the breast: (i) case-control studies, in which in-situ lesions serve as disease outcomes (endpoints), and (ii) cohort studies and clinical trials, in which diagnosis of in-situ carcinoma serves as a starting point for patient treatment and follow-up. Case-control studies focusing on the causes of CIS have distinct advantages: if risk factors for cancer contribute to pathways involving some intermediate stages but not others (e.g. comedo-type but not non-comedo-type DCIS; LCIS versus DCIS), the use of precursor lesions may more clearly reveal risk factor associations than studies of invasive breast cancer alone; epidemiologic studies of precursor lesions are conducted closer in time to the exposures suspected to be causes and may reduce recall bias or other forms of misclassification; genetic alterations in early lesions are more likely to represent causal events in development of the malignant phenotype. Population-based case-control studies of CIS may thus prove useful in understanding breast cancer etiology and designing preventive strategies. CIS patients identified for case-control studies may be followed up over time as a cohort. Cohort studies (and clinical trials) of CIS aim to elucidate mechanisms influencing progression of CIS to invasive cancer as well as to evaluate effectiveness of specific treatment modalities. Although the majority of CIS lesions of the breast are ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), epidemiologic studies which also include patients with lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) address potential differences between DCIS and LCIS with respect to both etiology and progression.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Harris J, Lippman M, Veronesi U, Willett W: Breast cancer (part two). N Engl J Med 327:390–398, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Page D, Anderson T: Diagnostic Histopathology of the Breast. Churchill Livingstone, New York, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Lennington W, Jensen R, Dalton L, Page D: Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: heterogeneity of individual lesions. Cancer 73:118–124, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Silverstein M, Waisman J, Gamagami P, Gierson E, Colburn W, Rosser R, Gordon P, Lewinsky B, Fingerhut A: Intraductal carcinoma of the breast (208 cases): clinical factors influencing treatment choice. Cancer 66:102–108, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Ottesen G, Graversen H, Blichert-Toft M: Lobular carcinoma in situ of the female breast: short term results of a prospective study. Am J Surg Path 17:14–21, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Osteen R, Karnell L: The national cancer data base report on breast cancer. Cancer 73:1994–2000, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Andersson I: Radiographic screening for breast cancer carcinoma: prognostic considerations on the basis of a short-term follow-up. Acta Radiol 22:227–233, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Ashikari R, Hadju S, Robbins G: Intraductal carcinoma of the breast (1930–69). Cancer 28:1182–1187, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fisher G, Constantino J, Redmond C, Fisher E, Margolese R, Dimitrov N, et al: Lumpectomy compared with lumpectomy and radiation therapy for the treatment of intraductal breast cancer. N Engl J Med 328: 1581–1586, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Sonnenfield M, Frenna T, Weidner N, Meyer J: Lobular carcinoma in situ: mammographic-pathologic correlation of results of needle-directed biopsy. Radiol 181:363–367, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Pope T Jr, Fechner R, Wilhelm M, Wonebo H, de Paredes ES: Lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast: mammographic features. Radiol 168:63–66, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Rebner M, Raju U: Noninvasive breast cancer. Radiol 190:623–631, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Gump F: Lobular carcinoma in situ: pathology and treatment. Surg Clin N Am 70:873–883, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Osborne M, Hoda S: Current management of lobular carcinoma in situ of the breast. Oncology 8:45–54, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bodian C: Benign breast diseases, carcinoma in situ, and breast cancer risk. Epidem Rev 15:177–187, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Weiss N, Liff J: Accounting for the multicausal nature of disease in the design and analysis of epidemiologic studies. Am J Epidem 117:14–18, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Sivaraman L, Leatham M, Yee J, Wilkens L, Lau A, Le Marchand L: CYPIA1 genetic polymorphisms and in situ colorectal cancer. Cancer Res 54:3692–3695, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Fielding J: Preventing colon cancer: yet another reason not to smoke. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:162–164, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Giovannucci E, Rimm E, Stampfer M, Colditz G, Ascherio A, Kearney J, Willet W: A prospective study of cigarette smoking and risk of colorectal adenoma and colorectal cancer in U.S. men. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:183–191, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Fearon E, Vogelstein B: A genetic model for colorectal tumorigenesis. Cell 61: 759–767, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Spruck C, Ohneseit P, Gonzalez-Zulueta, Esrig D, Miyao N, Tsai Y, Lerner S, Schmutte C, Yang A, Cote R, Dubeau L, Nichols P, Hermann G, Steven K, Horn T, Skinner D, Jones P: Two molecular pathways to transitional cell carcinoma of the bladder. Cancer Res 54:784–788, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Pellegata M, Sessa F, Renault B, Bonato M, Leone B, Solcia E, Ranzani G: K-RAS and p53 gene mutations in pancreatic cancer: ductal and nonductal tumors progress through different genetic lesions. Cancer Res 54:1556–1560, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Van Meir E, Kikuchi T, Tada M, Li H, Diserens A-C, Wojcik B, Huang H-J, Friedmann T, de Tribolet N, Cavenee W: Analysis of the p53 gene and its expression in human glioblastoma cells. Cancer Res 54: 649–652, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Taylor J, Sandler D, Bloomfield C, Shore D, Ball E, Neubauer A, McIntyre O, Liu E: Ras oncogene activation and occupational exposures in acute myeloid leukemia. J Natl Cancer Inst 84:1626–1632, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Vogelstein B, Kinzler K: Carcinogens leave fingerprints. Nature 355:209–210, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Greenblatt M, Bennett W, Hollstein M, Harris C: Mutations in the p53 tumor suppressor gene: clues to cancer etiology and molecular pathogenesis. Cancer Res 54:4844–4878, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Biggs P, Warren W, Benitt S, et al: Does a genotoxic carcinogen contribute to human breast cancer? The value of mutational spectra in unravelling the etiology of cancer. Mutagenesis 8:275–283, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Sommer S, Cunningham J, McGovern R, et al: Pattern of p53 gene mutations in breast cancers of women of the midwestern United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 84: 246–252, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Blaszyk H, Vaughn C, Hartmann A, et al: Novel pattern of p53 gene mutations in an American black cohort with mortality from breast cancer. Lancet 343: 1195–1197, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Olsson H, Borg A, Ferno M, et al: HER-2/neu and INT2 proto-oncogene amplification in malignant breast tumors in relation to reproductive factors and exposure to exogenous hormones. J Natl Cancer Inst 83:1483–1486, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Matsuda S, Kadowaki Y, Ichino M, et al: 17 betaestradiol mimics ligand activity of the c-erbB2 protooncogene product. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 90: 10803–10807, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Allred D, Clark G, Molina R, Tandon A, Schnitt S, Gilchrist K, Osborne C, Tormey E, McGuire W: Overexpression of HER-2/neu and its relationship with other prognostic factors change during the progression of in situ to invasive breast cancer. Hum Path 23:974–979, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Liu E, Thor A, Barcos M, Ljung B-M, Benz C: The HER2 (c-erbB-2) oncogene is frequently amplified in in situ carcinomas of the breast. Oncogene 7:1027–1032, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Iglehart D, Kraus M, Langton B, Huper B, Kerns B, Marks J: Increased erbB-2 gene copies and expression in multiple stages of breast cancer. Cancer Res 50: 6701–6707, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Thor A, Moore D, Edgerton S, et al: Accumulation of p53 tumor suppressor gene protein: an independent marker of prognosis in breast cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 84:845–855, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Poller D, Roberts E, Bell J, Elston C, Blamey R, Ellis I: p53 protein expression in mammary ductal carcinoma in situ. Hum Path 24:463–468, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Royds J, Stephenson T, Rees R, Shorthouse A, Silcocks P: Nm23 protein expression in ductal in situ and invasive human breast carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:727–731, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Jensen R, Page D, Holt J: Identification of genes expressed in premalignant breast disease by microscopy-directed cloning. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, in press.

  39. Tanner M, Tirkkonen M, Kallioniemi A, Collins C, Stokke T, et al: Increased copy number at 20q13 in breast cancer: defining the critical region and exclusion of candidate genes. Cancer Res 54:4257–4260, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Peinado M, Malkhosyan S, Velazquez A, Perucho M: Isolation and characterization of allelic losses and gains in colorectal tumors by arbitrarily primed polymerase chain reaction. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:10065–10069, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Fisher E, Siderit S: Value of cytometric analysis for distinction of intraductal carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat 21:165–172, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Carpenter R, Gibbs N, Matthews J, Cooke T: Importance of cellular DNA content in premalignant breast disease and pre-invasive carcinoma of the female breast. Br J Surg 74:905–906, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Locker A, Horrocks C, Gilmour A, Ellis I: Flow cytometric and histological analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Br J Surg 77:564–567, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Meyer J: Cell kinetics of histologic variants of in situ breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 7:171–180, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Barnes D, Meyer J, Gonzalez J, Bullick W, Millis R: Relationship between c-erbB2 immunoreactivity and thymidine labelling index in breast carcinoma in situ. Breast Cancer Res Treat 18:11–17, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Guidi A, Fischer L, Harris J, Schnitt S: Microvessel density and distribution in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:614–619, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Petersen O, Ronnov-Jessen L, Howlett A, Bissell M: Interaction with basement membrane serves to rapidly distinguish growth and differentiation pattern of normal and malignant human breast epithelial cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 89:9064–9068, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  48. Rosner D, Lane W, Penetrante R: Ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion: a curable entity using surgery alone without need for adjuvant therapy. Cancer 67:1498–1503, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Wetzels R, Holland R, Haelst U, et al: Detection of basement membrane components and basal cell keratin 14 in noninvasive and invasive carcinomas of the breast. Am J Path 134:571–579, 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Porter P, Garcia R, Moe R, et al: c-erb-B2 oncogene protein in in-situ and invasive lobular breast neoplasia. Cancer 68:331–334, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Somerville J, Clarke L, Biggart J: c-erb-B2 overexpression and histological type of in situ and invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Pathol 45:16–20, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Gusterson B, Gelber T, Goldhirsch A, et al: Prognostic importance of c-erb-B2 expression in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 10:1049–1056, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  53. Schimmelpenning H, Eriksson E, Pallis L, et al: Immunohistochemical c-erb-B2 protooncogene expression and nuclear DNA content in human mammary carcinoma in situ. Am J Clin Path 97:S48-S52, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Pallis L, Skoog L, Falkmer U, et al: The DAN profile of breast cancer in situ. Eur J Surg Oncol 18:108–111, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  55. Palmer J, Rosenberg L: Cigarette smoking and the risk of breast cancer. Epidem Rev 15:145–156, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Forrester KL, Hayes JD, Millis R, Barnes D, Harris A, Schlager J, Powis G, Wolf C: Expression of glutathione S-transferases and cytochrome P450 in normal and tumor breast tissue. Carcinogenesis 11: 2163–2170, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  57. Buetow K, Rosvold E, Rebbeck T, Lustbader E, McGlynn K: GSTM1 and risk for breast and prostate cancer. Cancer Res 35:293, Abstract 1746, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Harvey E, Schairer C, Brinton L, et al. Alcohol consumption and breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 78: 657–661, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  59. White E, Malone K, Weiss N, Daling J: Breast cancer among young U.S. women in relation to oral contraceptive use. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:505–514, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  60. Wolff M, Toniolo P, Lee E, Rivera M, Dubin N: Blood levels of organochlorine residues and risk of breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:648–652, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Krieger N, Wolff M, Hiatt R, Rivera M, Vogelman J, Orentreich: Breast cancer and serum organochlorines: a prospective study among white, black, and asian women. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:589–599, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Acquavella J, Ireland B, Ramlow J: Organochlorines and breast cancer [letter]. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:1872–1873, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Wolff M, Dubin N, Toniolo P: Response [letter]. J Natl Cancer Inst 85:1873–1875, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Kelsey J, Gammon M: Epidemiology of breast cancer. Epidem Rev 12:228–236, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Newman B, Moorman P, Millikan R, Aldrich T, Liu E: The Carolina Breast Cancer Study: integrating population-based epidemiology and molecular biology. Breast Cancer Res Treat (this issue).

  66. Swanson G, Ragheb N, Lin C-S, Hankey B, Miller B, Horn-Ross P, White E, Liff J, Harlan L, McWhorter W, Mullan P, Key C: Breast cancer among black and white women in the 1980s. Cancer 72:788–798, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  67. Hoff M, Simon M, Meyer L: Racial differences in survival of women with invasive breast cancer in the Detroit metropolitan area. Breast Cancer Res Treat 27:178 (Abstract 189), 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  68. Elledge R, Clark G, Chamness G, Osborne C: Tumor biologic factors and breast cancer prognosis among white, Hispanic, and black women in the United States. J Natl Cancer Inst 86:705–712, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  69. Kelsey J, Horn-Ross P: Breast cancer: magnitude of the problem and descriptive epidemiology. Epidem Rev 15:7–16, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Weinberg C, Sandler D: Randomized recruitment in case-control studies. Am J Epid 134:421–432, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Weinberg C, Wacholder S: The design and analysis of case-control studies with biased sampling. Biometrics 46:963–975, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  72. Rosai J: Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am J Surg Path 15:209–221, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  73. Schwartz G, Carter D, Conant E, Gannon F, Finkel G, Feig S: Mammographically detected breast cancer: nonpalpable is not a synonym for inconsequential. Cancer 73:1660–1665, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Kaaks R, van der Tweel I, van Noord P, Riboli E: Efficient use of biological banks for biochemical epidemiology: exploratory hypothesis testing by means of a sequential t-test. Epidem 5:429–438, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  75. Schatzkin A, Freedman L, Schiffman M, Dawsey S: Validation of intermediate end points in cancer research. J Natl Cancer Inst 82: 1746–1752, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Lagios M: Duct carcinoma in situ: pathology and treatment. Surg Clin N Am 70:853–871, 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  77. Posner M, Wolmack N: Noninvasive breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 21:155–164, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  78. Holt J, Jensen R, Page D: Histopathology: old principles and new methods. Cancer Surv 18:115–133, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  79. Muss H, Thor A, Berry D, Kute T, Liu E, Koerner F, Cirrincione M, Budman D, Wood W, Barcos M, Henderson I: c-erbB-2 expression and response to adjuvant therapy in women with node-positive early breast cancer. N Engl J Med 330:1260–1266, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Millikan, R., Dressler, L., Geradts, J. et al. The need for epidemiologic studies of in-situ carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Tr 35, 65–77 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00694747

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00694747

Key words

Navigation