Evaluation de la validité du traitement conservateur dans le carcinome lobulaire infiltrant du sein: à propos d'une étude rétrospective portant sur 217 carcinomes lobulaires infiltrants et 2155 carcinomes canalaires infiltrants [Accuracy of conservative treatment for infiltrating lobular breast cancer: a retrospective study of 217 infiltrating lobular carcinomas and 2155 infiltrating ductal carcinomas]

Détails

ID Serval
serval:BIB_07D00C297BD8
Type
Article: article d'un périodique ou d'un magazine.
Collection
Publications
Titre
Evaluation de la validité du traitement conservateur dans le carcinome lobulaire infiltrant du sein: à propos d'une étude rétrospective portant sur 217 carcinomes lobulaires infiltrants et 2155 carcinomes canalaires infiltrants [Accuracy of conservative treatment for infiltrating lobular breast cancer: a retrospective study of 217 infiltrating lobular carcinomas and 2155 infiltrating ductal carcinomas]
Périodique
Journal de gynécologie, obstétrique et biologie de la reproduction
Auteur(s)
Paumier  A., Sagan  C., Campion  L., Fiche  M., Andrieux  N., Dravet  F., Pioud  R., Classe  J. M.
ISSN
0368-2315 (Print)
Statut éditorial
Publié
Date de publication
2003
Volume
32
Numéro
6
Pages
529-534
Notes
PT - Comparative Study PT - English Abstract PT - Journal Article
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: Prognosis factors used for the management of infiltrative lobular carcinoma (ILC) are not different from those for infiltrative cuctal carcinoma (IDC). The aim of our work was to evaluate indications for conservative treatment for patients with ILC and to compare the results to those of patients with IDC. MATERIAL AND METHODS. Between 1985 and 1999 we retrospectively compared cases of 217 ILC with cases of 2155 IDC treated in Centre Rene Gauducheau, Nantes. RESULTS: Clinical size of tumors was not different between ILC and IDC but pathological size>30 mm was more frequent for IDC. Good prognosis factors as pathological SBR classification I or II, positive hormone receptor, and the lack of axillary lymph node involvement, were more frequent for ILC. Clinical examination underestimated tumor size more frequently of ILC than IDC (p=0.02). Secondary mastectomy for involved margin was more frequent for ILC than IDC (p=0.001). For tumor with good prognosis factors, such as T<20mm, lack of lymph node involvement and SBR I or II with conservative treatment, 5 years local relapse were less frequent for ILC than IDC (p=0.025). CONCLUSION: Parameters to validate conservative or radical treatment are the same for ILC and IDC. Diagnosis of ILC should not influence decisions regarding surgical treatment
Mots-clé
Breast Neoplasms/Pathology/surgery/Carcinoma,Ductal,Breast/Carcinoma,Lobular/Female/France/epidemiology/Humans/Lymphatic Metastasis/Mastectomy/statistics & numerical data/Middle Aged/Neoplasm Recurrence,Local/Prognosis/Receptors,Estrogen/analysis/Receptors,Progesterone/Retrospective Studies/Risk Factors/Breast/Carcinoma
Pubmed
Création de la notice
29/01/2008 19:35
Dernière modification de la notice
03/03/2018 13:28
Données d'usage