The Clinicopathological Characteristics of Pure and Mixed Invasive Micropapillary Breast Carcinomas: A Single Center Experience

Background: Invasive micropapillary carcinoma (IMPC) is a rare tumor of the breast. IMPC can be classified as a pure or mixed type based on the extent of micropapillary differentiation. Aims: To evaluate the prognostic importance of the IMPC component in breast cancer through retrospective comparison of the clinicopathological characteristics and clinical outcomes of pure and mixed IMPC patients. Study Design: The data of 147 (2.2%) patients with IMPC among 6648 patients histopathologically diagnosed with invasive breast cancer between January 2000-2022 were retrospectively reviewed. The patients were assigned to two groups: pure IMPC and mixed IMPC. Methods: The clinicopathological features such as age at diagnosis, histological type, grade, size, and components of mixed carcinoma, the numbers of metastatic lymph nodes, presence of lymph vascular invasion, hormone receptor, and the Her-2 status of the tumor, T, N, M stages, and the survival rates were reviewed. The clinicopathologic features, patterns of failures, and survival rates were coded and compared between pure and mixed IMPC patients. Results: A total of 45 patients (30.6%) had pure and 102 patients (69.4%) had mixed IMPC. The median follow-up time was 46 months (3-178). The progesterone receptor positivity rate was significantly lower in the pure group than in the mixed group (66.7% vs. 83.3%, p: 0.024). In the pure and mixed groups, respectively, the 5-year overall survival was 90% and 91% (p: 0.839); progression-free survival was 70% and 77% (p: 0.537); locoregional recurrence-free survival was 86% and 95% (p: 0.043); 5-year distant metastasis-free survival was 88% and 83% (p: 0.066), and the locoregional recurrence rate was 10.3% and 2% (p: 0.052). Conclusion: Compared to the mixed IMPC, pure IMPC appears to have a more aggressive behavior with lower locoregional recurrence free survival and more locoregional recurrences. This may be due to the low progesterone receptor positivity rate.

PDF

___

Nassar H, Wallis T, Andea A, Dey J, Adsay V, Visscher D. Clinicopathologic analysis of invasive micropapillary differentiation in breast carcinoma. Mod Pathol. 2001;14:836-841. [CrossRef]
Acs G, Paragh G, Chuang ST, Laronga C, Zhang PJ. The presence of micropapillary features and retraction artifact in core needle biopsy material predicts lymph node metastasis in breast carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:202-210. [CrossRef]
Luna-More S, Gonzalez B, Acedo C, Rodrigo I, Luna C. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. A new special type of invasive mammary carcinoma. Pathol Res Pract. 1994;190:668-674. [CrossRef]
Nassar H. Carcinomas with micropapillary morphology: clinical significance and current concepts. Adv Anat Pathol. 2004;11:297-303. [CrossRef]
Paterakos M, Watkin WG, Edgerton SM, Moore DH 2nd, Thor AD. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a prognostic study. Hum Pathol. 1999;30:1459-1463. [CrossRef]
Yu JI, Choi DH, Park W, et al. Differences in prognostic factors and patterns of failure between invasive micropapillary carcinoma and invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: matched case–control study. Breast. 2010;19:231-237. [CrossRef]
Chen H, Wu K, Wang M, Wang F, Zhang M, Zhang P. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast has a better long-term survival than invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast in spite of its aggressive clinical presentations: a comparison based on large population database and case–control analysis. Cancer Med. 2017;6:2775-2786. [CrossRef]
Tang SL, Yang JQ, Du ZG, et al. Clinicopathologic study of invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. Oncotarget. 2017;8:42455-42465. [CrossRef]
Chen AC, Paulino AC, Schwartz MR, et al. Prognostic markers for invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a population-based analysis. Clin Breast Cancer. 2013;13:133-139. [CrossRef]
Ye F, Yu P, Li N, et al. Prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma compared with invasive ductal carcinoma in breast: A meta-analysis of PSM studies. Breast. 2020;51:11-20. [CrossRef]
Hao S, Zhao YY, Peng JJ, et al. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast had no difference in prognosis compared with invasive ductal carcinoma: a propensity-matched analysis. Sci Rep. 2019;9:286. [CrossRef]
Chen HL, Ding A. Comparison of invasive micropapillary and triple negative invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Breast. 2015;24:723-731. [CrossRef]
Gokce H, Durak MG, Akin MM, et al. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: a clinicopathologic study of 103 cases of an unusual and highly aggressive variant of breast carcinoma. Breast J. 2013;19:374-381. [CrossRef]
Wang R, Li N, Wang XJ, et al. Differences in the clinicopathological characteristics of pure and mixed invasive micropapillary breast carcinomas from eastern China. Ann Transl Med. 2021;9:412. [CrossRef]
Kaya C, Uçak R, Bozkurt E, et al. The Impact of micropapillary component ratio on the prognosis of patients with invasive micropapillary breast carcinoma. J Invest Surg. 2020;33:31-39. [CrossRef]
Li Y, Kaneko M, Sakamoto DG, Takeshima Y, Inai K. The reversed apical pattern of MUC1 expression is characteristics of invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer. 2006;13:58-63. [CrossRef]
Pettinato G, Manivel CJ, Panico L, Sparano L, Petrella G. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: clinicopathologic study of 62 cases of a poorly recognized variant with highly aggressive behavior. Am J Clin Pathol. 2004;121:857-866. [CrossRef]
Wu Y, Zhang N, Yang Q. The prognosis of invasive micropapillary carcinoma compared with invasive ductal carcinoma in the breast: a meta-analysis. BMC Cancer. 2017;17:839. [CrossRef]
Chen L, Fan Y, Lang RG, et al. Breast carcinoma with micropapillary features: clinicopathologic study and long-term follow-up of 100 cases. Int J Surg Pathol. 2008;16:155-163. [CrossRef]
Chen L, Fan Y, Lang RG, Guo XJ, Sun YL, Fu L. [Diagnosis and prognosis study of breast carcinoma with micropapillary component]. Zhonghua Bing Li Xue Za Zhi. 2007;36:228-232. [CrossRef]
Kim MJ, Gong G, Joo HJ, Ahn SH, Ro JY. Immunohistochemical and clinicopathologic characteristics of invasive ductal carcinoma of breast with micropapillary carcinoma component. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:1277-1282. [CrossRef]
Walsh MM, Bleiweiss IJ. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: eighty cases of an underrecognized entity. Hum Pathol. 2001;32:583-589. [CrossRef]
Guo X, Chen L, Lang R, Fan Y, Zhang X, Fu L. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: association of pathologic features with lymph node metastasis. Am J Clin Pathol. 2006;126:740-746. [CrossRef]
Adrada B, Arribas E, Gilcrease M, Yang WT. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: mammographic, sonographic, and MRI features. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2009;193:W58-W63. [CrossRef]
Wasif N, Maggard MA, Ko CY, Giuliano AE. Invasive lobular vs. ductal breast cancer: a stage-matched comparison of outcomes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:1862- 1869. [CrossRef]
Siriaunkgul S, Tavassoli FA. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast. Mod Pathol. 1993;6:660-662. [CrossRef]
Page DL. Prognosis and breast cancer. Recognition of lethal and favorable prognostic types. Am J Surg Pathol. 1991;15:334-349. [CrossRef]
Tresserra F, Grases PJ, Fábregas R, Férnandez-Cid A, Dexeus S. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma. Distinct features of a poorly recognized variant of breast carcinoma. Eur J Gynaecol Oncol. 1999;20:205-208. [CrossRef]
Zekioglu O, Erhan Y, Ciris M, Bayramoglu H, Ozdemir N. Invasive micropapillary carcinoma of the breast: high incidence of lymph node metastasis with extranodal extension and its immunohistochemical profile compared with invasive ductal carcinoma. Histopathology. 2004;44:18-23. [CrossRef