Clinical features, diagnosis, and staging of newly diagnosed breast cancer
- Laura J Esserman, MD, MBA
Laura J Esserman, MD, MBA
- Professor of Surgery and Radiology
- University of California, San Francisco
- Director, UCSF Carol Franc Buck Breast Care Center
- Bonnie N Joe, MD, PhD
Bonnie N Joe, MD, PhD
- Professor of Radiology and Biomedical Imaging
- UCSF Breast Imaging
Globally, breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed malignancy, accounting for over a million cases each year . It is also the leading cause of cancer death in women worldwide. In the United States, breast cancer is the most common female cancer, the second most common cause of cancer death in women .
Once a diagnosis of breast cancer is established, it is important to accurately define the initial extent of disease since this information will affect treatment recommendations. This topic will review the clinical manifestations, differential diagnosis, and staging following a diagnosis of breast cancer.
The factors that modify breast cancer risk, diagnostic evaluation of women with suspected breast cancer, the treatment approach to in situ and invasive breast cancer, and the use of prognostic and predictive factors when making adjuvant treatment decisions are reviewed as separate topics.
Breast cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer worldwide, including low and middle income countries [1,3,4]. The incidence rates are highest in North America, Australia/New Zealand, and in western and northern Europe, and lowest in Asia and sub-Saharan Africa . These international differences are likely related to societal changes as a result of industrialization (eg, changes in fat intake, body weight, age at menarche, and/or lactation, and reproductive patterns such as fewer pregnancies and later age at first birth). Studies of migration patterns to the US are consistent with the importance of cultural and/or environmental changes . In general, incidence rates of breast cancer are greater in second-generation migrants and increase further in third- and fourth- generation migrants.
In the United States, breast cancer accounts for over 250,000 cases each year and is responsible for over 40,000 deaths . The incidence rates decreased from 1999 to 2007 by 1.8 percent per year . It is likely that two factors have contributed to this: the discontinuation of hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and the saturation/leveling of screening mammography rates [7-11]. Of these factors, the discontinuation of HRT has probably had a greater effect [9,12,13]. This was demonstrated in a report from the Women’s Health Initiative where a rapid decline in breast cancer incidence was noted in trial participants following discontinuation of HRT . Discontinuation of HRT was not accompanied by changes in mammographic utilization, suggesting that the latter did not play a role in the decline in incidence rates. (See "Menopausal hormone therapy: Benefits and risks", section on 'Breast cancer'.)To continue reading this article, you must log in with your personal, hospital, or group practice subscription. For more information on subscription options, click below on the option that best describes you:
- Globocan 2012. Fast Stats. Most frequent cancers: both sexes. http://globocan.iarc.fr/old/bar_sex_site_prev.asp?selection=3152&title=Breast&statistic=3&populations=6&window=1&grid=1&color1=5&color1e=&color2=4&color2e=&submit=%C2%A0Execute%C2%A0 (Accessed on December 12, 2013).
- Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer Statistics, 2017. CA Cancer J Clin 2017; 67:7.
- World Health Organization (WHO). Breast cancer: prevention and control. www.who.int/cancer/detection/breastcancer/en/index1.html (Accessed on December 12, 2013).
- Anderson BO, Yip CH, Smith RA, et al. Guideline implementation for breast healthcare in low-income and middle-income countries: overview of the Breast Health Global Initiative Global Summit 2007. Cancer 2008; 113:2221.
- Torre LA, Bray F, Siegel RL, et al. Global cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 2015; 65:87.
- Kohler BA, Ward E, McCarthy BJ, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2007, featuring tumors of the brain and other nervous system. J Natl Cancer Inst 2011; 103:714.
- Ravdin PM, Cronin KA, Howlader N, et al. The decrease in breast-cancer incidence in 2003 in the United States. N Engl J Med 2007; 356:1670.
- Breen N, A Cronin K, Meissner HI, et al. Reported drop in mammography : is this cause for concern? Cancer 2007; 109:2405.
- Glass AG, Lacey JV Jr, Carreon JD, Hoover RN. Breast cancer incidence, 1980-2006: combined roles of menopausal hormone therapy, screening mammography, and estrogen receptor status. J Natl Cancer Inst 2007; 99:1152.
- Robbins AS, Clarke CA. Regional changes in hormone therapy use and breast cancer incidence in California from 2001 to 2004. J Clin Oncol 2007; 25:3437.
- Toriola AT, Colditz GA. Trends in breast cancer incidence and mortality in the United States: implications for prevention. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2013; 138:665.
- Chlebowski RT, Kuller LH, Prentice RL, et al. Breast cancer after use of estrogen plus progestin in postmenopausal women. N Engl J Med 2009; 360:573.
- Marshall SF, Clarke CA, Deapen D, et al. Recent breast cancer incidence trends according to hormone therapy use: the California Teachers Study cohort. Breast Cancer Res 2010; 12:R4.
- Kohler BA, Sherman RL, Howlader N, et al. Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2011, Featuring Incidence of Breast Cancer Subtypes by Race/Ethnicity, Poverty, and State. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107:djv048.
- Esserman LJ, Shieh Y, Rutgers EJ, et al. Impact of mammographic screening on the detection of good and poor prognosis breast cancers. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2011; 130:725.
- Stavros AT, Thickman D, Rapp CL, et al. Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology 1995; 196:123.
- Macura KJ, Ouwerkerk R, Jacobs MA, Bluemke DA. Patterns of enhancement on breast MR images: interpretation and imaging pitfalls. Radiographics 2006; 26:1719.
- Dizon DS, Tejada-Berges T, Steinhoff MM, et al.. Breast Cancer. In: Principles and Practice of Gynecologic Oncology, 5, RR Barakat, M Markman, ME Randall. (Eds), Lippincott, Williams, & Wilkins, Baltimore 2009. p.910.
- Blanpain C. Tracing the cellular origin of cancer. Nat Cell Biol 2013; 15:126.
- Parise CA, Bauer KR, Brown MM, Caggiano V. Breast cancer subtypes as defined by the estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and the human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) among women with invasive breast cancer in California, 1999-2004. Breast J 2009; 15:593.
- O'Brien KM, Cole SR, Tse CK, et al. Intrinsic breast tumor subtypes, race, and long-term survival in the Carolina Breast Cancer Study. Clin Cancer Res 2010; 16:6100.
- National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical practice guidelines in oncology. http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/f_guidelines.asp (Accessed on February 27, 2016).
- Myers RE, Johnston M, Pritchard K, et al. Baseline staging tests in primary breast cancer: a practice guideline. CMAJ 2001; 164:1439.
- Puglisi F, Follador A, Minisini AM, et al. Baseline staging tests after a new diagnosis of breast cancer: further evidence of their limited indications. Ann Oncol 2005; 16:263.
- Ravaioli A, Pasini G, Polselli A, et al. Staging of breast cancer: new recommended standard procedure. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2002; 72:53.
- Stomper PC, Winston PS, Proulx GM, et al. Mammographic detection and staging of ductal carcinoma in situ: mammographic-pathologic correlation. Semin Breast Dis 2000; 3:1.
- Holland R, Hendriks JH, Vebeek AL, et al. Extent, distribution, and mammographic/histological correlations of breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Lancet 1990; 335:519.
- Kopans DB, Lindfors K, McCarthy KA, Meyer JE. Spring hookwire breast lesion localizer: use with rigid-compression mammographic systems. Radiology 1985; 157:537.
- Healey EA, Osteen RT, Schnitt SJ, et al. Can the clinical and mammographic findings at presentation predict the presence of an extensive intraductal component in early stage breast cancer? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 1989; 17:1217.
- Gluck BS, Dershaw DD, Liberman L, Deutch BM. Microcalcifications on postoperative mammograms as an indicator of adequacy of tumor excision. Radiology 1993; 188:469.
- Waddell BE, Stomper PC, DeFazio JL, et al. Postexcision mammography is indicated after resection of ductal carcinoma-in-situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 2000; 7:665.
- Baines CJ, Dayan R. A tangled web: factors likely to affect the efficacy of screening mammography. J Natl Cancer Inst 1999; 91:833.
- Mandelson MT, Oestreicher N, Porter PL, et al. Breast density as a predictor of mammographic detection: comparison of interval- and screen-detected cancers. J Natl Cancer Inst 2000; 92:1081.
- Fish EB, Chapman JA, Link MA. Assessment of tumor size for multifocal primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 1998; 5:442.
- Coombs NJ, Boyages J. Multifocal and multicentric breast cancer: does each focus matter? J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:7497.
- Andea AA, Wallis T, Newman LA, et al. Pathologic analysis of tumor size and lymph node status in multifocal/multicentric breast carcinoma. Cancer 2002; 94:1383.
- Morris EA, Schwartz LH, Drotman MB, et al. Evaluation of pectoralis major muscle in patients with posterior breast tumors on breast MR images: early experience. Radiology 2000; 214:67.
- Shen J, Hunt KK, Mirza NQ, et al. Intramammary lymph node metastases are an independent predictor of poor outcome in patients with breast carcinoma. Cancer 2004; 101:1330.
- Egan RL, McSweeney MB. Intramammary lymph nodes. Cancer 1983; 51:1838.
- Jadusingh IH. Intramammary lymph nodes. J Clin Pathol 1992; 45:1023.
- Stomper PC, Leibowich S, Meyer JE. The prevalence and distribution of well circumscribed nodules on screening mammography: Analysis of 1500 mammograms. Breast Dis 1991; 4:197.
- Upponi S, Kalra S, Poultsidis A, et al. The significance of intramammary nodes in primary breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2001; 27:707.
- Günhan-Bilgen I, Memiş A, Ustün EE. Metastatic intramammary lymph nodes: mammographic and ultrasonographic features. Eur J Radiol 2001; 40:24.
- de Freitas R Jr, Costa MV, Schneider SV, et al. Accuracy of ultrasound and clinical examination in the diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1991; 17:240.
- Lanng C, Hoffmann J, Galatius H, Engel U. Assessment of clinical palpation of the axilla as a criterion for performing the sentinel node procedure in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2007; 33:281.
- Vaidya JS, Vyas JJ, Thakur MH, et al. Role of ultrasonography to detect axillary node involvement in operable breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 1996; 22:140.
- CLINICAL FEATURES
- Signs and symptoms
- - Breast mass
- - Locally advanced disease
- - Metastatic disease
- Imaging findings
- - Infiltrating ductal carcinoma
- - Infiltrating lobular carcinoma
- - Mixed ductal/lobular carcinoma
- Molecular subtypes
- - Luminal subtypes
- - HER2-enriched
- - Basal subtypes
- DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
- POST-DIAGNOSIS EVALUATION
- Breast cancer receptor testing
- - ER and PR
- - HER2
- - Frequency of subtypes
- Role of imaging
- Assessing the extent of disease
- Significance of intramammary lymph nodes
- Primary tumor
- Lymph nodes
- INFORMATION FOR PATIENTS
- SUMMARY AND RECOMMENDATIONS