BMC Cancer (Aug 2024)

Micropapillary breast carcinoma in comparison with invasive duct carcinoma. Does it have an aggressive clinical presentation and an unfavorable prognosis?

  • Yasmine Hany Abdel Moamen Elzohery,
  • Amira H. Radwan,
  • Sherihan W. Y. Gareer,
  • Mona M. Mamdouh,
  • Inas Moaz,
  • Abdelrahman Mohammad Khalifa,
  • Osama Abdel Mohen,
  • Mohamed Fathy Abdelfattah Abdelrahman Elithy,
  • Mahmoud Hassaan

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-024-12673-0
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 24, no. 1
pp. 1 – 14

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) was first proposed as an entity by Fisher et al. In the 2003 World Health Organization (WHO) guidelines for histologic classification of the breast tumors. IMPC was recognized as a distinct, rare histological subtype of breast cancer. IMPC is emerging as a surgical and oncological challenge due to its tendency to manifest as a palpable mass, larger in size and higher in grade than IDC with more rate of lymphovascular invasion (LVI) and lymph node (LN) involvement, which changes the surgical and adjuvant management plans to more aggressive, with comparative prognosis still being a point of ongoing debate. Aim of the study In this study, we compared the clinicopathological characteristics, survival and surgical management of breast cancer patients having invasive micropapillary carcinoma pathological subtype in comparison to those having invasive duct carcinoma. Method This is a comparative study on female patients presented to Baheya center for early detection and treatment of breast cancer, in the period from 2015 to 2022 diagnosed with breast cancer of IMPC subtype in one group compared with another group of invasive duct carcinoma. we analyzed 138 cases of IMPC and 500 cases of IDC. Results The incidence of LVI in the IMPC group was 88.3% in comparison to 47.0% in the IDC group (p < 0.001). IMPC had a higher incidence of lymph node involvement than the IDC group (68.8% and 56% respectively). IMPC had a lower rate of breast conserving surgery (26% vs.37.8%) compared with IDC. The survival analysis indicated that IMPC patients had no significant difference in overall survival compared with IDC patients and no differences were noted in locoregional recurrence rate and distant metastasis rate comparing IMPCs with IDCs. Conclusion The results from our PSM analysis suggested that there was no statistically significant difference in prognosis between IMPC and IDC patients after matching them with similar clinical characteristics. However, IMPC was found to be more aggressive, had larger tumor size, greater lymph node metastasis rate and an advanced tumor stage.

Keywords