Introduction. According to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) guidelines in 1996, breast lesions are categorized as C1 to C5 on fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology. Very few studies are available in the English literature analyzing histopathology outcome of C3 (atypical, probably benign) and C4 (suspicious, probably malignant) lesions. Our study aims to correlate FNA cytology of breast lump diagnosed as C3 and C4 lesion with histopathological examination. Methods. During a period of 2 years, 59 cases of C3 and 26 cases of C4 were retrieved from total 1093 cases of breast FNA. All the cases were reviewed by two cytopathologists independently. The final 24 cases of C3 and 16 cases of C4 categories were correlated with histopathological diagnosis. Result. Among C3 category, 37.5% revealed malignant findings, whereas of C4 category, 87.5% were malignant on histopathology. This difference was statistically significant ( ). Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive values, and negative predictive value of C4 category in diagnosing breast malignancy were 60.8%, 88.2%, 87.5%, and 62.5%, respectively. Conclusion. Although FNAC is simple, safe, cost-effective and accurate method for diagnosis of breast masses, one must be aware of its limitations particularly in C3 and C4 categories. Also, since both these categories carry different probabilities of malignancy and thus different management, we therefore, support maintaining C3 and C4 categories. 1. Introduction Breast cancer is the most common malignant neoplasm affecting women worldwide. In India, breast cancer accounts for around 30% of all cancers in women. It has speedily replaced cervical cancer as the most common cancer among Indian women. According to figures from the National Cancer Registry, one in every 25 Indian women is likely to suffer from breast cancer at some point of time. Fine needle aspiration (FNA) cytology has become widely accepted as a reliable diagnostic tool for diagnosing breast masses. It is a simple, quick, safe, less invasive, and less expensive method with high sensitivity and specificity. The diagnostic categories used in FNA cytology of the breast masses are inadequate (C1), benign (C2), atypical, probably benign (C3), suspicious of malignancy (C4), and malignant (C5) according to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) guidelines in 1996 [1]. However, Howell [2], and Kanhoush et al. [3] suggested the use of a single term, such as “equivocal”, to describe inconclusive (C3 & C4) diagnoses on breast FNA cytology. Very few studies are available in the English literature analyzing
References
[1]
“The uniform approach to breast fine-needle aspiration biopsy. National Cancer Institute Fine-Needle Aspiration of Breast Workshop Subcommittees,” Diagnostic Cytopathology, vol. 16, no. 4, pp. 295–311, 1997.
[2]
L. P. Howell, “Equivocal diagnoses in breast aspiration biopsy cytology: sources of uncertainty and the role of, “atypical/indeterminate” terminology,” Diagnostic Cytopathology, vol. 21, pp. 217–222, 1999.
[3]
R. Kanhoush, M. Jorda, C. Gomez-Fernandez et al., “‘Atypical’ and “suspicious” diagnoses in breast aspiration cytology: is there a need for two categories?” Cancer, vol. 102, no. 3, pp. 164–167, 2004.
[4]
S. Nguansangiam, S. Jesdapatarakul, and S. Tangjitgamol, “Accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology from breast masses in Thailand,” Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 623–626, 2009.
[5]
M. Ak？il, E. Karaa？ao？lu, and B. Demirhan, “Diagnostic accuracy of fine-needle aspiration cytology of palpable breast masses: an SROC curve with fixed and random effects linear meta-regression models,” Diagnostic Cytopathology, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 303–310, 2008.
[6]
A. Berner, B. Davidson, E. Sigstad, and B. Risberg, “Fine-needle aspiration cytology vs. core biopsy in the diagnosis of breast lesions,” Diagnostic Cytopathology, vol. 29, no. 6, pp. 344–348, 2003.
[7]
P. Mendoza, M. Lacambra, P. H. Tan, and G. M. Tse, “Fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast: the non-malignant categories,” Pathology Research International, vol. 2011, Article ID 547580, 8 pages, 2011.
[8]
R. A. Deb, P. Matthews, C. W. Elston, I. O. Ellis, and S. E. Pinder, “An audit of “equivocal” (C3) and “suspicious” (C4) categories in fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast,” Cytopathology, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 219–226, 2001.
[9]
B. Chaiwun, N. Sukhamwang, S. Lekawanvijit et al., “Atypical and suspicious categories in fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast: histological and mammographical correlation and clinical significance,” Singapore Medical Journal, vol. 46, no. 12, pp. 706–709, 2005.
[10]
J. C. Lim, H. Al-Masri, A. Salhadar, H. B. Xie, S. Gabram, and E. M. Wojcik, “The significance of the diagnosis of atypia in breast fine-needle aspiration,” Diagnostic Cytopathology, vol. 31, no. 5, pp. 285–288, 2004.
[11]
B. Chaiwun, J. Settakorn, C. Ya-In, W. Wisedmongkol, S. Rangdaeng, and P. Thorner, “Effectiveness of fine-needle aspiration cytology of breast: analysis of 2,375 cases from Northern Thailand,” Diagnostic Cytopathology, vol. 26, no. 3, pp. 201–205, 2002.
[12]
A. Kim, J. Lee, J. S. Choi, N. H. Won, and B. H. Koo, “Fine needle aspiration cytology of the breast: experience at an outpatient breast clinic,” Acta Cytologica, vol. 44, no. 3, pp. 361–367, 2000.
[13]
G. P. Yeoh and K. W. Chan, “Fine needle aspiration of breast masses: an analysis of 1533 cases in private practice,” Hong Kong Medical Journal, vol. 4, pp. 283–288, 1998.
[14]
R. S. Saad and J. F. Silverman, “Breast,” in Comprehensive Cytopathology, M. Bibbo and D. Wilbur, Eds., pp. 713–772, Elsevier Saunders, Philadelphia, Pa, USA, 3rd edition, 2008.
[15]
S. H. Shah, N. Kayani, S. H. Hasan, I. N. Soomro, S. Pervez, and A. S. Hussainy, “Diagnostic evaluation of fine needle aspiration cytology in the management of palpable breast lesions,” Journal of the Pakistan Medical Association, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 7–8, 1998.
[16]
S. O'Neil, M. Castelli, P. Gattuso, L. Kluskens, K. Madsen, and G. Aranha, “Fine-needle aspiration of 697 palpable breast lesions with histopathologic correlation,” Surgery, vol. 122, no. 4, pp. 824–828, 1997.
[17]
S. R. Orell and G. Farshid, “False-positive reports in fine needle biopsy of breast lesions,” Pathology, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 428–436, 2001.
[18]
R. Logrono, D. F. Kurtycz, and S. L. Inhorn, “Criteria for reporting fine needle aspiration on palpable and nonpalpable masses of the breast,” Acta Cytologica, vol. 41, no. 3, pp. 623–627, 1997.
[19]
R. J. Brenner, L. W. Bassett, L. L. Fajardo et al., “Stereotactic core-needle breast biopsy: a multi-institutional prospective trial,” Radiology, vol. 218, no. 3, pp. 866–872, 2001.
[20]
M. Müslümano？lu, K. Dolay, V. Ozmen, A. I？ci, and Y. Bozfakio？lu, “Comparison of fine needle aspiration cytology and excisional biopsy in palpable breast cancers,” Radiologia Medica, vol. 89, no. 3, pp. 225–228, 1995.
