Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao European Journal of ...arrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao Closed Access logo, derived from PLoS Open Access logo. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Closed_Access_logo_transparent.svg Jakob Voss, based on art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina and Beao
European Journal of Surgical Oncology
Article . 2003 . Peer-reviewed
License: Elsevier TDM
Data sources: Crossref
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Is invasive lobular carcinoma different from invasive ductal carcinoma?

Authors: H, Mersin; E, Yildirim; K, Gülben; U, Berberoğlu;

Is invasive lobular carcinoma different from invasive ductal carcinoma?

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to determine whether the histopathologic features and outcome in invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) are different, and whether the histologic type is a prognostic factor for outcome.A retrospective cohort study was conducted in consecutive 510 stage I/II breast carcinoma patients who underwent modified radical mastectomy. The features of 65 patients with ILC were compared with those of 445 patients with IDC. In patients with median follow-up period of 44 months, univariate and multivariate prognostic factor analyses for cancer-specific death and relapse were carried out.The median ages in patients with ILC and those with IDC were 52 and 41 (P=0.04). Tumor size, estrogen receptor positive expression and nodal positivity were not significantly different between the histologic types. Patients with ILC had more frequently (81.5%) low grade tumors and less lymphatic vascular invasion (9.3%) in primary tumor than those with IDC (P<0.05). Whereas the rates of 5-year overall survival were 94% in ILC and 90% in IDC, the rates of 5-year event-free survival were 71 and 67%, respectively (P=NS). Multivariate analyses in all patients demonstrated that tumor size, pathologic lymph node status and age at diagnosis were the most important prognostic factors for overall and event-free survival. Histologic type was not statistically significant for both outcomes.Although patients with ILC had older age, low grade tumor and less lymphatic vascular invasion, they had no survival advantage comparing with their counterparts. Histologic type was not an independent prognostic factor for outcome.

Keywords

Adult, Analysis of Variance, Carcinoma, Ductal, Breast, Breast Neoplasms, Middle Aged, Survival Analysis, Disease-Free Survival, Carcinoma, Lobular, Receptors, Estrogen, Lymphatic Metastasis, Humans, Lymph Node Excision, Female, Aged, Retrospective Studies

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    81
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Top 10%
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Top 10%
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
81
Top 10%
Top 10%
Top 10%
Related to Research communities
Cancer Research
Upload OA version
Are you the author of this publication? Upload your Open Access version to Zenodo!
It’s fast and easy, just two clicks!