The comparison between cytological and histological grading of breast cancers in a Nigerian tertiary hospital
Keywords:
Breast Cancer, fine needle aspiration cytology, cytological grading, histological gradingAbstract
Background: Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers in Nigeria. The tumour grade is an important prognostic factor and is also important in treatment of patients. Fine needle aspiration cytology can be used as an initial diagnostic tool for planning definitive management. Grading of tumours on cytology further guides therapeutic decisions. The aim of this study is to compare the correlation between the cytological and histological grading of malignant breast lumps using the Robinson's cytological grading system and Nottingham histological grading system respectively. The Objectives are, to determine the age distribution of breast cancer in our environment, to grade breast cancers cytologically using the Robinson's cytological grading system and to grade breast cancers histologically using the Nottingham histological grading system.
Methods: This was a one year prospective study that involved 30 patients who had malignant smears on fine needle aspiration cytology of their breast lump. These smears were graded using the Robinson's cytological grading system and compared with the Nottingham histological grading systems of same lumps obtained from either tissue biopsies or mastectomies.
Results: The mean age of the study participants was 50.23±10.11 years with a range of 35-70 years. Most (56.7%) malignat smears were of cytologic grade 3. The histological grade was 2 in 16(53.3%) and 3 in 14(46.7%) of the same breast tissue samples. The grade 2 tumours had the highest concordance rate of 83.3%. The absolute concordance rate between Robinson's cytological and Nottingham histological grading system of breast cancers was 73.3%.
Conclusion: The Robinson's cytological and Nottingham histological grading systems showed good correlation.
References
Porter PL. Global trends in breast cancer incidence and mortality. Salud. Publica. Mex. 2009; 51: 141-146.
Hayanga AJ, Newman LA. Investigating the phenotypes and genotypes of breast cancer in women with African ancenstry: the need for more genetic epidemiology. Surg. Clin. North Am. 2000; 87: 551.
Fitzgibbons PL, Page DL, Weaver D, Thor AD, Allred DC, Clark GM et al. Prognostic fators in breast cancer. College of American Pathologists consensus statement 1999. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2000; 124: 966-978.
Stankov A, Bargallo-Rocha JE, Mamendys-Silva, Salvio A, Ramirez MT, Stankova-Ninova K, Menesis-Garcia A. Prognostic factors and recurrence in breast cancer. Experience at the National Cancer Institute of Mexico. ISRN Oncology, 2012, Article ID 825258, 7 pages, 2012. https://doi.org 10.5402/2012/825258.
Khan MZ, Haleem A, Al Hassani H, Kfoury H. Cytopathological grading as a predictor of histopathological grade in ductal carcinoma (NOS) of breast on air-dried Diff-Quik smears. Diagn. Cytopathol. 2003; 29: 185-193.
Black MM, Speer FD. Nuclear structure in cancer tissues. Surgery, Gynaecology and Obstetrics 1957;105: 97-102.
Robinson IA, Mckee G, Nicholson A. Prognostic value of cytological grading of fine needle aspirates from breast carcinomas. The Lancet. 1994: 343; 947-949.
Taniguchi E, Yang Q, Tang W. Cytological grading of invasive breast carcinoma correlation with Clinicopathologic variables and predictive value of nodal metastasis. Acta Cytol. 2000; 44: 587-591.
Pandey P, Dixit A, Chandra S, Kaur S. A comparative and evaluative study of two cytological grading systems in breast carcinoma with histological grading: an important prognostic factor. Anat Cellular Pathology. 2014.
Das AK, Kapila K, Dinda AK, Verma K. Comparative evaluation of grading of breast carcinoma in fine needle aspirates by two methods. Indian J. of Med. Res. 2003; 118: 247250.
Wani FA, Bhardway S, Kumar D, Katoch P. Cytological grading of breast cancers and comparative evaluation of two grading systems. Journal of Cytology. 2010; 27: 55-58.
Non-operative diagnostic sub-group of the
National Co-ordinating Group for Breast Screening Pathology. June, 2001. Guidelines for non-operative diagnostic procedures and reporting in breast cancer screening; pp. 18-22. NHSBSP-Publication No. 50
Elston CW, Ellis IO. Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 1991; 19: 403-410.
Omoniyi-Esan GO, Osasan S, Titiloye N, Olasode B. Cytopathological review of breast lesions in Ile-Ife, Nigeria. The Internet J Third World Med. 2008; 8:106-112.
Ngadda HA, Gali BM, Bakari AA, Yawe-Terna EH, Tahir MB, Apari E et al. The spectrum of female breast diseases among Nigerian population in Sahel climatic zone. J Med Med Sci. 2011; 2: 1157-1161.
Khokher S, Qureshi MV, Riaz M, Akhtar N, Saleem A. Clinicopathologic profile of breast cancer patients in Pakistan; Ten years data of a local cancer hospital. Asian Pacific J. Cancer Prev. 2012; 13: 693-698.
Weedon-Fekjaer H, Bakken K, Vatten LJ, Tretli S. Understanding recent trends in incidence of invasive breast cancer in Norway; age-periodcohort analysis based on registry data on mammography screening and hormone treatment use. BMJ. 2012; 344: e299.
Pal S, Gupta ML. Correlation between cytological and histological grading of breast cancer and its role in prognosis. J. Cytol. 2016; 33:182-186.
Phukan JP, Sinha A, Deka JP. Cytological grading of breast carcinoma on fine needle aspirates and its relation with histological grading. South Asian J. Cancer. 2015; 4:32-34.
Bogdanska MU, Bodnar M, Piotrowska MJ,
Murek M, Schucht P, Beck J et al. A mathematical model describes the malignant transformation of low grade gliomas: Prognostic implications. PLoS ONE. 12(8): e0179999.
Salaudeen AG, Akande TM, Musa OI. Knowledge and attitudes to breast cancer and breast self examination among female undergraduates in a state in Nigeria. Eur. J. Soc. Sci. 2009; 7: 157-165.
Sood N, Nigan JS, Yadav P, Rewri S, Sharma A,
Omhare A et al. Comparative study of
Cytomorphological Robinson's grading for breast carcinoma with modified Bloom-Richardson Histopathological grading. Patholog. Res. Int. 2013. 2013: 146542.
Bukya VP, Nandyala R, Banoth M, Yootla M, Chowhan AK, Prayaga A. Comparative study of Robinson's and Morinquand's cytological grading systems and correlation with histological grading in breast carcinoma. J. Clin. And Diagn. Res. 2018; 12:4-8.
Einstein D, Omprakash, B.O, Ganapathy H, Rahman S. Comparison of a 3-Tier Cytological Grading Systems for Breast Carcinoma. ISRN Oncol. 2014: 252103.
Bhargava V, Jain M, Agarwal K, Thomas S, Singh S. Critical appraisal of cytological nucleargrading in carcinoma of the breast and its correlation with ER/PR expression. J. of Cytology. 2008;25(2): 58-61.
Saha K, Raychaudhuri G, Chattopadhyay BK, Das I. Comparative evaluation of six cytological grading systems in breast carcinoma. Journal of Cytology. 2013; 30: 87-93.
Walke VA, Gunjkar G. Comparative evaluation of six parametric Robinson and three parametric Howell's modification of Scarf-Bloom Richardson grading method on breast aspirates with histopathology: A prospective study. Cytojournal. 2017; 14: 31.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2023 Research Journal of Health Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Research Journal of Health Sciences journal is a peer reviewed, Open Access journal. The Journal subscribed to terms and conditions of Open Access publication. Articles are distributed under the terms of Creative Commons License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). (http://creativecommons.org/licences/by-nc-nd/4.0). All articles are made freely accessible for everyone to read, download, copy and distribute as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
