File Download

There are no files associated with this item.

  Links for fulltext
     (May Require Subscription)
Supplementary

Article: Comparison of ductal lavage and random periareolar fine needle aspiration as tissue acquisition methods in early breast cancer prevention trials

TitleComparison of ductal lavage and random periareolar fine needle aspiration as tissue acquisition methods in early breast cancer prevention trials
Authors
Issue Date2007
Citation
Clinical Cancer Research, 2007, v. 13 n. 16, p. 4943-4948 How to Cite?
AbstractPurpose: Short-term phase I and phase II breast cancer prevention trials require tissue acquisition at baseline and after intervention to evaluate modulation of potential biomarkers. Currently used tissue acquisition methods include ductal lavage (DL), random periareolar fine needle aspiration (RPFNA), and core needle biopsy. The optimum method to retrieve adequate samples and the most accepted method by study participants is not known. Experimental Design: We compared RPFNA and DL as breast tissue acquisition methods for short-term breast cancer prevention trials by evaluating sample adequacy and tolerability in subjects who participated in two prospective phase II breast cancer prevention trials. Eighty-six women at increased risk for breast cancer were included in this study and underwent baseline DL and RPFNA. High risk was defined as having a 5-year Gail score of >1.67% or a history of atypical hyperplasia (AH), lobular carcinoma, or breast cancer. Results: Median age was 54.5 years (range, 39-75 years); 75% of the women were postmenopausal. About 51% of the women yielded nipple aspiration fluid, and breast fluid samples via DL were retrieved in 73% of these subjects. Of these samples, 71% were adequate samples (greater than 10 epithelial cells). However, when the entire cohort was considered, only 31% of the subjects had adequate samples. RPFNA was also attempted in all subjects, and sample retrieval rate was 100%. Out of these, 96% of the subjects had adequate samples. In DL samples, AH rate was 3.7% was and hyperplasia (H) rate was 11.1%. In RPFNA samples, AH rate was 12.9%, and H rate was 24.7%. Cytology findings in RPFNA samples correlated with age, menopausal status, and breast cancer risk category (previous history of lobular carcinoma in situ). Both procedures were well tolerated, and no complications occurred among participants. Conclusions: Considering that the main end point for short-term prevention trials is the modulation of biomarkers, it is important to optimize adequate sample acquisition; therefore, RPFNA is a more practical option for future phase I and II breast cancer prevention trials compared with DL. © 2007 American Association for Cancer Research.
Persistent Identifierhttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/146584
ISSN
2015 Impact Factor: 8.738
2015 SCImago Journal Rankings: 5.314
ISI Accession Number ID
References

 

DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorArun, Ben_HK
dc.contributor.authorValero, Ven_HK
dc.contributor.authorLogan, Cen_HK
dc.contributor.authorBroglio, Ken_HK
dc.contributor.authorRivera, Een_HK
dc.contributor.authorBrewster, Aen_HK
dc.contributor.authorYin, Gen_HK
dc.contributor.authorGreen, Men_HK
dc.contributor.authorKuerer, Hen_HK
dc.contributor.authorGong, Yen_HK
dc.contributor.authorBrowne, Den_HK
dc.contributor.authorHortobagyi, GNen_HK
dc.contributor.authorSneige, Nen_HK
dc.date.accessioned2012-05-02T08:37:12Z-
dc.date.available2012-05-02T08:37:12Z-
dc.date.issued2007en_HK
dc.identifier.citationClinical Cancer Research, 2007, v. 13 n. 16, p. 4943-4948en_HK
dc.identifier.issn1078-0432en_HK
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10722/146584-
dc.description.abstractPurpose: Short-term phase I and phase II breast cancer prevention trials require tissue acquisition at baseline and after intervention to evaluate modulation of potential biomarkers. Currently used tissue acquisition methods include ductal lavage (DL), random periareolar fine needle aspiration (RPFNA), and core needle biopsy. The optimum method to retrieve adequate samples and the most accepted method by study participants is not known. Experimental Design: We compared RPFNA and DL as breast tissue acquisition methods for short-term breast cancer prevention trials by evaluating sample adequacy and tolerability in subjects who participated in two prospective phase II breast cancer prevention trials. Eighty-six women at increased risk for breast cancer were included in this study and underwent baseline DL and RPFNA. High risk was defined as having a 5-year Gail score of >1.67% or a history of atypical hyperplasia (AH), lobular carcinoma, or breast cancer. Results: Median age was 54.5 years (range, 39-75 years); 75% of the women were postmenopausal. About 51% of the women yielded nipple aspiration fluid, and breast fluid samples via DL were retrieved in 73% of these subjects. Of these samples, 71% were adequate samples (greater than 10 epithelial cells). However, when the entire cohort was considered, only 31% of the subjects had adequate samples. RPFNA was also attempted in all subjects, and sample retrieval rate was 100%. Out of these, 96% of the subjects had adequate samples. In DL samples, AH rate was 3.7% was and hyperplasia (H) rate was 11.1%. In RPFNA samples, AH rate was 12.9%, and H rate was 24.7%. Cytology findings in RPFNA samples correlated with age, menopausal status, and breast cancer risk category (previous history of lobular carcinoma in situ). Both procedures were well tolerated, and no complications occurred among participants. Conclusions: Considering that the main end point for short-term prevention trials is the modulation of biomarkers, it is important to optimize adequate sample acquisition; therefore, RPFNA is a more practical option for future phase I and II breast cancer prevention trials compared with DL. © 2007 American Association for Cancer Research.en_HK
dc.languageengen_US
dc.relation.ispartofClinical Cancer Researchen_HK
dc.subject.meshAdulten_US
dc.subject.meshAgeden_US
dc.subject.meshBiopsy, Needle - Adverse Effects - Methodsen_US
dc.subject.meshBody Fluids - Cytologyen_US
dc.subject.meshBreast - Pathologyen_US
dc.subject.meshBreast Neoplasms - Diagnosis - Pathology - Prevention & Controlen_US
dc.subject.meshFemaleen_US
dc.subject.meshHumansen_US
dc.subject.meshMiddle Ageden_US
dc.subject.meshTherapeutic Irrigationen_US
dc.titleComparison of ductal lavage and random periareolar fine needle aspiration as tissue acquisition methods in early breast cancer prevention trialsen_HK
dc.typeArticleen_HK
dc.identifier.emailYin, G: gyin@hku.hken_HK
dc.identifier.authorityYin, G=rp00831en_HK
dc.description.naturelink_to_subscribed_fulltexten_US
dc.identifier.doi10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2732en_HK
dc.identifier.pmid17699874-
dc.identifier.scopuseid_2-s2.0-34548086468en_HK
dc.relation.referenceshttp://www.scopus.com/mlt/select.url?eid=2-s2.0-34548086468&selection=ref&src=s&origin=recordpageen_HK
dc.identifier.volume13en_HK
dc.identifier.issue16en_HK
dc.identifier.spage4943en_HK
dc.identifier.epage4948en_HK
dc.identifier.isiWOS:000248837900038-
dc.publisher.placeUnited Statesen_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridArun, B=6603689664en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridValero, V=7004692933en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridLogan, C=36943193800en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBroglio, K=6602915196en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridRivera, E=7101648447en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBrewster, A=7006836351en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridYin, G=8725807500en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridGreen, M=8091387100en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridKuerer, H=7006194871en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridGong, Y=8610494600en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridBrowne, D=8660122600en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridHortobagyi, GN=7202399346en_HK
dc.identifier.scopusauthoridSneige, N=7007099187en_HK

Export via OAI-PMH Interface in XML Formats


OR


Export to Other Non-XML Formats