Will oncotype DX DCIS testing guide therapy? A single-institution correlation of oncotype DX DCIS results with histopathologic findings and clinical management decisions.

Lin CY1, Mooney K1, Choy W2, Yang SR1, Barry-Holson K1, Horst K3, Wapnir I4, Allison K1.

Author information

Abstract

Given the increased detection rates of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and the limited overall survival benefit from adjuvant breast irradiation after breast-conserving surgery, there is interest in identifying subsets of patients who have low rates of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence such that they might safely forgo radiation. The Oncotype DCIS score is a reverse transcription-PCR (RT-PCR)-based assay that was validated to predict which DCIS cases are most likely to recur. Clinically, these results may be used to assist in selecting which patients with DCIS might safely forgo radiation therapy after breast-conserving surgery; however, little is currently published on how this test is being used in practice. Our study examines traditional histopathologic features used in predicting DCIS risk with Oncotype DCIS results and how these results affect clinical decision-making at our academic institution. Histopathologic features and management decisions for 37 cases with Oncotype DCIS results over the past 4 years were collected. Necrosis, high nuclear grade, biopsy site change, estrogen receptor and progesterone receptor positivity <90% on immunohistochemistry, and Van Nuys Prognostic Index score of 8 or greater were significant predictors of an intermediate-high recurrence score on multivariate regression analysis (P<0.02). Low Oncotype DCIS scores and low nuclear grade were associated with lower rate of radiation therapy (P<0.008). There were seven cases (19%) with Oncotype DCIS results that we considered unexpected in relation to the histopathologic findings (ie, high nuclear grade with comedonecrosis and a low Oncotype score, or hormone receptor discrepancies). Overall, pathologic features correlate with Oncotype DCIS scores but unexpected results do occur, making individual recommendations sometimes challenging.Modern Pathology advance online publication, 15 December 2017; doi:10.1038/modpathol.2017.172.