Case report reveals distinct components of AcCC and metaplastic carcinoma in a breast tumor, suggesting diagnostic complexity.
Breast acinar cell carcinoma (AcCC) is a rare subtype of triple-negative breast cancer. Its histological origin remains controversial, and it exhibits poor sensitivity to conventional chemotherapy. High-grade transformation and co-existence with matrix-producing metaplastic carcinoma are uncommon, and their clinical and molecular genetic features are poorly understood. A 42-year-old woman incidentally discovered a breast mass for 10 days. Ultrasound revealed an irregular hypoechoic lesion in the upper inner quadrant of the left breast, classified as BI-RADS 4b, leading to a clinical diagnosis of breast cancer. Microscopically, the tumor comprised two distinct components. Component one exhibited tubular or solid nested patterns with eosinophilic secretions in lumina; some cells were amphophilic, and focal areas showed marked high-grade transformation with significant nuclear atypia. Component two featured tumor cell cords and nests distributed within a chondromyxoid stromal matrix. Immunophenotypically, tumor cells in both components diffusely and strongly expressed S-100, GATA3, AE1/AE3, and EMA. Component one expressed Lysozyme (LYS) and α1-antichymotrypsin (AACT). Both components were negative for ER, PR, HER2, CK5/6, CD117, P63, and Collagen IV. The Ki-67 proliferation index was approximately 10% in the low-grade areas of component one, reached about 30% in its high-grade areas, and was approximately 70% in component two. Molecular genetics: Next-generation sequencing detected a somatic frameshift mutation in the TP53 gene with a variant allele frequency of 36.51%, as well as germline variants in APC, ATM, BRCA1, BRCA2, and others. This report describes a breast tumor exhibiting concurrent features of AcCC and matrix-producing metaplastic carcinoma, summarizing its immunophenotypic characteristics and molecular genetic alterations. This information may provide diagnostic insights for future encounters with similar cases.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Liu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: