PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
March 31, 2022The Journal of Pathology96 citationsOpen Access

Field cancerization in breast cancer

View Full Paper
EGEmanuela GadaletaQueen Mary University of LondonGTGraeme J. ThornQueen Mary University of LondonHRHelen Ross‐AdamsQueen Mary University of London

Key Points

Key points are not available for this paper at this time.

Abstract

Breast cancer affects one in seven women worldwide during their lifetime. Widespread mammographic screening programs and education campaigns allow for early detection of the disease, often during its asymptomatic phase. Current practice in treatment and recurrence monitoring is based primarily on pathological evaluations but can also encompass genomic evaluations, both of which focus on the primary tumor. Although breast cancer is one of the most studied cancers, patients still recur at a rate of up to 15% within the first 10 years post-surgery. Local recurrence was originally attributed to tumor cells contaminating histologically normal (HN) tissues beyond the surgical margin, but advances in technology have allowed for the identification of distinct aberrations that exist in the peri-tumoral tissues themselves. One leading theory to explain this phenomenon is the field cancerization theory. Under this hypothesis, tumors arise from a field of molecularly altered cells that create a permissive environment for malignant evolution, which can occur with or without morphological changes. The traditional histopathology paradigm dictates that molecular alterations are reflected in the tissue phenotype. However, the spectrum of inter-patient variability of normal breast tissue may obfuscate recognition of a cancerized field during routine diagnostics. In this review, we explore the concept of field cancerization focusing on HN peri-tumoral tissues: we present the pathological and molecular features of field cancerization within these tissues and discuss how the use of peri-tumoral tissues can affect research. Our observations suggest that pathological and molecular evaluations could be used synergistically to assess risk and guide the therapeutic management of patients. © 2022 The Authors. The Journal of Pathology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of The Pathological Society of Great Britain and Ireland.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Gadaleta et al. (2022) studied this question.

synapsesocial.com/papers/69d8e4b417a1cc0598d18c7dhttps://doi.org/10.1002/path.5902
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Also Consider

Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context:

  1. 1Perturbation of the gut microbiota by antibiotics results in accelerated breast tumour growth and metabolic dysregulation2019 · 34 citations
  2. 2Association of mammographically defined percent breast density with epidemiologic risk factors for breast cancer (United States)2000 · 374 citations
  3. 3BCNTB bioinformatics: the next evolutionary step in the bioinformatics of breast cancer tissue banking2017 · 7 citations
  4. 4Quantitative Assessment of Promoter Hypermethylation during Breast Cancer Development2002 · 221 citations
  5. 5Collagen reorganization at the tumor-stromal interface facilitates local invasion2006 · 1,833 citations