Next Article in Journal
Fractional Flow Reserve-Guided Coronary Revascularization: Evidence from Randomized and Non-Randomized Studies
Previous Article in Journal
Recent HIV Infection: Diagnosis and Public Health Implications
Previous Article in Special Issue
Nuclear Expression of β-Catenin Is Associated with Improved Outcomes in Endometrial Cancer
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Diagnostically Challenging Subtypes of Invasive Lobular Carcinomas: How to Avoid Potential Diagnostic Pitfalls

by
Nektarios Koufopoulos
1,*,
Ioannis S. Pateras
1,
Alina Roxana Gouloumis
1,
Argyro Ioanna Ieronimaki
1,
Andriani Zacharatou
1,
Aris Spathis
1,
Danai Leventakou
1,
Panagiota Economopoulou
2,
Amanda Psyrri
2,
Nikolaos Arkadopoulos
3 and
Ioannis G. Panayiotides
1
1
Second Department of Pathology, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Chaidari, 12462 Athens, Greece
2
Medical Oncology Unit, 2nd Department of Internal Medicine-Propaedeutic, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Chaidari, 12462 Athens, Greece
3
4th Department of Surgery, Medical School, Attikon University Hospital, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Chaidari, 12462 Athens, Greece
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Diagnostics 2022, 12(11), 2658; https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12112658
Submission received: 29 August 2022 / Revised: 11 October 2022 / Accepted: 27 October 2022 / Published: 1 November 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Diagnosis and Management of Gynecological Cancers)

Abstract

:
Invasive lobular carcinoma is the most common special breast carcinoma subtype, with unique morphological (discohesive cells, single-cell files, targetoid pattern) and immunohistochemical (loss of E-cadherin and β-catenin staining) features. Moreover, ILC displays a poor response to neoadjuvant therapy, a different metastatic pattern compared to invasive breast carcinoma of no special type, as well as unique molecular characteristics. In addition to the classic variant of invasive lobular carcinoma, several other well-recognized variants exist, including classic, alveolar, tubulolobular, solid, pleomorphic, signet-ring, and mixed. Furthermore, three novel variants of invasive lobular carcinoma, i.e., with extracellular mucin production, papillary features, and tubular elements, have been described during the last decade. We herewith focus on the unique morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of these novel varieties of invasive lobular carcinoma, as well as differential diagnostic considerations and potential diagnostic pitfalls, especially when dealing with biopsy specimens.

1. Introduction

Invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) is the second most common subtype of breast carcinoma following invasive breast carcinoma of no special type (NST), accounting for 10–15% of breast carcinoma [1]. It has unique clinical, imaging, histological, immunohistochemical, and molecular features.
While usually presenting as a mass-forming lesion, it may remain clinically undetectable.
Mammographic detection may be difficult [2]; ultrasonography is more sensitive but may underestimate tumor size [3]. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) may prove more helpful [4,5]. This underestimation of tumor size often results in positive surgical margins, thus requiring additional surgical procedures [6]. Occasionally, ILC may initially manifest as a distant metastatic lesion [7] and thus displays a different metastatic pattern from invasive breast carcinoma of NST [1]. ILC metastasizes less commonly to the lung but more frequently to the peritoneum, gastrointestinal and gynecologic systems [8,9,10,11].
Histologically, ILC is characterized by distinct morphological features, i.e., small cells lacking cohesion, forming single-cell files or arranged in a concentric pattern around existing ducts and lobular units (targetoid pattern), minimal stromal response, and the presence of a variable number of signet-ring cells [6]. Apart from the classic ILC, first described in 1941 by Foote and Stewart [12], a number of histological variants have so far been described, including alveolar [13], tubulolobular [14], solid [15], trabecular [13], signet-ring [16], pleomorphic [17,18] and mixed [1]. ILC is characterized by deleterious mutations in CDH1 gene mapping in 16q22.1 accompanied by allelic loss of the remaining allele [6] and corresponding to a lack of E-cadherin and aberrant β-catenin immunostaining [19].
ILC usually has a luminal A molecular phenotype and is often estrogen receptor (ER)- and progesterone receptor (PR)-positive and HER−2 neu-negative, therefore being a prime candidate for hormonal therapy. It also shows a poor response to neoadjuvant therapy compared to invasive breast carcinoma of NST.
ILC presents specific molecular characteristics compared to other subtypes of invasive breast carcinoma.
Apart from the aforementioned variants, three new ones have recently been described, namely, ILC with extracellular mucin production, ILC with papillary features, and ILC with tubular elements. We herewith review the literature concerning these rare variants that may prove diagnostically challenging, focusing on their special morphological and immunohistochemical features, molecular characteristics, differential diagnostic considerations, and the potential diagnostic pitfalls, especially when dealing with biopsy specimens. This study aims to increase awareness of these rare variants of ILC.

2. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma with Extracellular Mucin Production

ILC with extracellular mucin production was first described by Rosa et al. in 2009 [20]. A review of the relevant literature has yielded 12 papers describing 39 cases in toto [20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32]. In some cases, important clinicopathological data, such as tumor size, lymph node, hormone receptor, Her−2 status, therapy, and follow-up information, are not mentioned.
The age ranged from 31 to 87 years (median 63). Most cases had a palpable or a radiographically detected lesion. The tumor size ranged from 7 to 100 mm (median 40 mm). Multifocality was present in several cases, one being a coexistent invasive breast carcinoma of NST [30]. One patient presented with skin ulceration [20] and another one with skin retraction and thickening, suggestive of inflammatory breast carcinoma [32]. Nodal status was positive in 17 cases.
Histologically, ILC with extracellular mucin production consists of two components: a mucinous (with multiple, relatively circumscribed, nodular foci of extracellular mucin and/or patchy extracellular mucin production) with irregular borders and a non-mucinous. The morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of ILC with extracellular mucin production are shown in Figure 1.
The mucinous component percentage ranges from 5% to 95% of the total tumor area. In both mucinous and non-mucinous components, the architectural pattern can be of the classical, alveolar, and/or solid variants. Tumor cells are of small or intermediate size, pleomorphic or with apocrine morphology. Moreover, in most cases, a variable number of signet-ring cells can be identified in both areas. In many instances, concurrent lobular intraepithelial neoplasia was identified next to the ILC.
ER and PR were positive in 39/39 and 27/38 (one case does not mention PR status) cases, respectively. Her−2 neu was overexpressed in five tumors. The follow-up time ranged from 2 to 171 months (median 50). The clinicopathological data of all reported cases of ILC with extracellular mucin production are summarized in Table 1.
Soong et al. performed molecular analysis interrogating the full coding sequences of 447 genes for mutations and copy number variations and selected introns across for gene rearrangements in 13 cases with adequate material in their series [32]. As expected, alterations of CDH1 at the gene level were present in all but one patient. Notably, concurrent CDH1 mutations and 16q loss were detected in 11 of 13 cases. In the remaining two cases, one harbored 16q loss without detectable CDH1 mutation, and the other harbored CDH1 mutation without loss of a 16q arm. Interestingly, these two cases exhibited signet-ring cell morphology. The most common single-nucleotide variations (SNV) involved CDH1 (10 cases), followed by PIK3CA, POLQ, TP53, ERBB3 (3 cases each), ERBB2, and RUNX1 (two cases each). Other genes with isolated SNV potentially clinically significant included AKT1, FANCD2, GATA3, MAP3K1, MUTYH, PTEN, RB1, and SF3B1 [32].
Furthermore, five cases showed 17p loss, four 18q loss, and five 22q loss. GATA3, FOXA1, CCND1, VEGFA, KAT6A, and POLB recurrent gene amplifications and ERBB2, CDK12, RUNX1, AURKA, ZNF217, ESR1, FGFR1, WHSC1L1, isolated gene-level amplifications were identified. The above genomic analysis argues for the lobular type of this rare breast cancer variant.

3. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma (ILC) with Papillary Features

In 2016, Rakha et al. described three cases of ILC mimicking papillary carcinoma [33]; this was followed by four more single case reports [34,35,36,37]. This variant of ILC has been described under different terms such as “ILC mimicking papillary carcinoma” [33], “lobular breast cancer with solid growth pattern mimicking a solid-papillary carcinoma” [34], “ILC with papillary features” [35], “ILC with solid and encapsulated papillary carcinoma growth pattern” [36], “ILC mimicking encapsulated papillary carcinoma” [37].
Important clinicopathological data, including tumor size, lymph node, hormone receptor, Her−2 status, therapy, and follow-up information, are lacking in some of the aforementioned papers. In cases with available information, the age ranged from 61 to 86 years (median 73). All patients presented with a palpable lesion. Imaging findings (mammography and ultrasound) showed a well-circumscribed nodular mass in three cases [35,36,37] and a hypoechoic, highly vascularized mass in one case [34]. The tumor size ranged from 1.2 to 5.5 cm (median 2.8). There was no metastatic lymph node involvement in cases with available information.
Histologically, ILC with papillary features has, in most cases, two distinct components; the first consists of a nodular at least partially encapsulated tumor with a solid papillary growth pattern, fibrovascular cores, and focal hemosiderin deposition. In all but one case, a second component with the morphology of a classic variant ILC was found in close relation with the nodular neoplasm. The single case lacking a classic ILC component showed LCIS around the main tumor [36].
Immunohistochemically, all cases lack E-cadherin expression and are associated with loss of β-catenin [33,34] or aberrant (cytoplasmic) p120 [36,37] expression. GATA3 positivity supported a primary breast tumor [35,37]. Immunostains for various myoepithelial cell markers, such as p63, CK5/6, CK14, calponin, smooth muscle actin, and smooth muscle myosin heavy chain, were negative either within or in the periphery of the nodules. Immunostains for neuroendocrine differentiation markers (Chromogranin A, Synaptophysin, and CD56) were also negative where performed [33,35,36,37]. ER and PR showed intense staining, while HER−2 neu was uniformly negative. The morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of ILC with papillary features are presented in Figure 2.
The three cases reported by Rakha et al. did not show local recurrence or metastasis within a median follow-up of 13 months [33]. Two additional cases mentioned that patients were alive with no evidence of disease after a follow-up of 8 and 10 months, respectively [36,37]. A summary of clinicopathological characteristics is seen in Table 2.
Christgen et al. examined the molecular profile of a case of ILC encompassing solid-papillary and classic variant ILC patterns [34], classified as luminal type B and luminal type A, respectively. Both variants shared common copy number profiles, including the loss of 6q, 11q, 13q, and 16q harboring CDH1 and the gain of chromosome 1q, suggesting a common origin. Interestingly, sequencing analysis revealed a unique CDH1 mutation resulting in a truncated E-cadherin protein in both components, further arguing for a clonal origin. Li et al. performed next-generation sequencing that revealed a frameshift mutation in exon 7 of CDH1 [36].

4. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma (ILC) with Tubular Elements

This ILC variant displays tubular elements with P-cadherin expression. So far, there is only one manuscript (2020) describing 13 cases [38].
Clinically, the age ranged from 42 to 79 years (median 59). Clinical information concerning the imaging characteristics and tumor size was not mentioned. Five cases had lymph node involvement, two being micrometastases. Some cases were bifocal, multifocal, or bilateral. One case was ovarian metastasis.
Histologically, ILC with tubular elements is characterized by tumor cells arranged in several different architectural patterns seen in ILC (classic, trabecular, solid, and dispersed) admixed with tubular elements of variable shape and size (longitudinal, teardrop shaped, small round tubules with narrow lumina). Tubular elements represent a variable amount of total tumor area. Nuclear atypia is low or intermediate overall. In some cases, concurrent lobular carcinoma in situ can be identified. Figure 3 shows the histopathological and immunohistochemical features of a case of ILC with tubular elements recently diagnosed in our department.
Immunohistochemically, E-cadherin expression was strongly reduced in one and completely absent in 12 cases in both components, i.e., ILC and tubular. Despite this E-cadherin loss, most cases retained focal β-catenin expression. P-cadherin was expressed in 12 cases, with stronger staining in tubular elements and weaker or absent staining in the conventional ILC areas. All tumors were ER-positive, and Her−2 neu-negative; PR was positive in eleven cases. The tubular elements had a lower proliferative activity, as measured by Ki67 immunostaining. No information about follow-up time was available. Clinicopathological data of these cases are summarized in Table 3.
All tumors underwent molecular analysis. Eleven cases harbored CHD1 mutations, while two lacked detectable CDH1 mutations. Four patients exhibited bifocal, multifocal, and bilateral lesions with tubular elements present in a single focus. Molecular analysis in these cases showed almost always identical CDH1 mutations in all foci, suggesting clonal relatedness of ILC with tubular elements and adjacent ILC with a conventional growth pattern.
Chromosomal analysis revealed gains on 1q, 8q, 11q13, and 16p and losses on chromosomes 8p, 11q, 16q, and 22q [38]. Notably, all cases examined exhibited either a copy number loss and loss of heterozygosity (LOH) or a copy number neutral LOH of 16q22.1 harboring CDH1 gene [38]. In the same study, P-cadherin mRNA expression was assessed by quantitative real-time RT-PCR in two different regions, one with conventional morphology and the second consisting almost exclusively of tubules. The region with tubular morphology showed increased P-cadherin mRNA expression.

5. Discussion

All three aforementioned ILC variants may be diagnostically challenging, especially in limited biopsy material. This is due to the broad differential diagnosis of these variants, occasional sampling of the mucinous, solid papillary, or tubular component, and finally, lack of awareness.
The differential diagnosis of ILC with extracellular mucin production includes invasive mucinous carcinoma of Capella type B, solid papillary carcinoma (SPC), mixed ILC and mucinous carcinoma, metaplastic matrix-producing carcinoma (MMPC), and polymorphous mammary adenocarcinoma.
Invasive mucinous carcinoma of the Capella B type lacks the classic morphological features of ILC and shows an expression of E-cadherin and β-catenin. SPC may show extracellular mucin production and can be associated with invasive mucinous carcinoma [39]; nevertheless, SPC lacks ILC morphology and shows an expression of E-cadherin and β-catenin. Also, Chromogranin and Synaptophysin are expressed in 50% of cases [40]. In mixed ILC and invasive mucinous carcinoma, immunostaining for E-cadherin will delineate the two different immunophenotypes. MMPC [41] and polymorphous mammary adenocarcinoma [42,43] also resemble ILC with extracellular mucin production since the former has a mucoid/matrix stroma, and the latter may simulate the single-file pattern of ILC [42,44]. Immunohistochemically, they may lack E-cadherin expression [42,45]. Moreover, both tumors lack ER expression, while MMPC also shows positive staining for S-100 with rare exceptions [41,46]. Finally, one should also not forget the possibility (albeit rare) of metastatic signet-ring cell carcinomas to the breast [25]. The morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of ILC with extracellular mucin production and its mimickers are summarized in Table 4 and Table 5.
The differential diagnosis of ILC with papillary features includes solid papillary carcinoma (SPC), encapsulated papillary carcinoma (EPC), the solid or alveolar variant of ILC, an ILC-SPC collision tumor, confluent growth of LCIS, and colonization of a papillary neoplasm by lobular carcinoma in situ. Both SPC and EPC display cellular cohesion and are E-cadherin-positive. The solid and alveolar variants of ILC, the confluent growth of LCIS, and the colonization of a papillary neoplasm by LCIS lack the characteristic supporting fibrovascular cores. In the case of a collision tumor between an ILC and SPC, only the cells of the latter show cohesion. The morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of ILC with papillary features and its mimickers are summarized in Table 6 and Table 7.
Tubular carcinoma, the tubulolobular variant of ILC, and mixed-type invasive breast carcinoma of NST and ILC may be considered in the differential diagnosis of ILC with tubular elements. Tubular carcinoma will not display a classic ILC pattern and shows strong E-cadherin, β-catenin, and membranous p120 expression. The mixed-type invasive breast carcinoma of NST and ILC will show positive staining for adhesion molecules in the tubules and an absence of staining in the ILC area [47]. The tubulolobular pattern of ILC shows strong E-cadherin and beta-catenin staining in both tubules and cells lacking cohesion [48,49,50]. Many authors consider this histological pattern a variant of invasive breast carcinoma of NST; however, the latest WHO edition still classifies this type as a variant of ILC [51].
The presence of tubular or pseudocribriform structures does not exclude a diagnosis of ILC [25], but an E-cadherin stain should be performed whenever these are present.
The morphological and immunohistochemical characteristics of ILC with tubular elements and its mimickers are summarized in Table 8 and Table 9.
In the literature, cases of ILC with extracellular mucin production have occasionally been diagnosed as invasive mucinous carcinoma [25,28]. ILC with papillary features has been diagnosed as ductal carcinoma in situ, SPC, or encapsulated papillary carcinoma (EPC) in biopsy specimens [33,34]. In our own experience, we have misdiagnosed ILC with tubular structures as invasive breast carcinoma of NST in biopsy specimens (see Figure 3).
The result of misdiagnosis in these cases can be the misclassification of an ILC as a mucinous carcinoma with a favorable prognosis. In contrast, ILC clinical behavior is more aggressive than mucinous carcinoma, characterized as “initially indolent but slowly progressive” by Rakha et al. [52]. Misdiagnosis of ILC as SPC or EPC may have a worse impact on patient management since these entities are managed as in situ lesions, thus leading to suboptimal staging. The effect of diagnosing ILC with tubular structures as carcinoma of NST or mixed NST-ILC cannot be estimated, with no data concerning the former’s biologic behavior being available up to now. It is important for pathologists to keep in mind that extracellular mucin, solid papillary architecture, and tubular structures are not always associated with a ductal phenotype. Careful examination of lesions with the abovementioned characteristics on small biopsy specimens may reveal morphological findings suggestive of ILC (presence of signet-ring cells, lack of cellular cohesion, limited areas with a single-file pattern) that may otherwise be missed. Staining for E-cadherin, β-catenin, and p120 can be helpful in this context.
Concerning molecular findings, the analysis revealed in all three variants biallelic inactivation of CDH1 due to concurrent CDH1 mutation and complete or partial 16q arm loss [32,34,38], which is the genetic hallmark of ILC. Also, copy number alterations consistent with invasive carcinoma of NST, mucinous, SPC, or EPC were not found, thus confirming the morphologic and immunohistochemical findings.
Soong et al. concluded that ILC with extracellular mucin production cases with local recurrence and lymph node involvement bore more mutations with biologic significance compared to those lacking these features, this difference being not statistically significant, at least up to now [32].
In the case of ILC with papillary features presented by Christgen et al., molecular analysis confirmed a common clonal ancestry of the two morphologically distinct tumor components and that the papillary component was the result of subclonal evolution [34].
In what concerns ILC with tubular elements, molecular analysis showed, apart from the lobular phenotype, clonality of ILC with tubular elements with foci having a conventional ILC growth pattern in bifocal, multifocal, and bilateral tumors, and expression of P-cadherin in the mRNA and protein level [38].

6. Conclusions

In conclusion, we herewith present the clinicopathologic, morphological, immunohistochemical, and molecular characteristics of three rare variants of ILC, emphasizing the potential differential diagnostic issues. Additional cases need to be presented, and additional molecular studies should be performed to better understand both the biological potential and clinical behavior of these rare entities.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, N.K. and I.G.P.; writing—original draft preparation, N.K., I.S.P. and I.G.P.; writing—review and editing, I.S.P., A.R.G., A.Z., P.E., A.I.I., D.L., A.S., N.A., A.P. and I.G.P.; funding acquisition, A.P. and I.G.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

This article is a review and not an original study. All the references are listed.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Christgen, M.; Steinemann, D.; Kühnle, E.; Länger, F.; Gluz, O.; Harbeck, N.; Kreipe, H. Lobular breast cancer: Clinical, molecular and morphological characteristics. Pathol. Res. Pr. 2016, 212, 583–597. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Johnson, K.S.; Sarma, D.; Hwang, E.S. Lobular breast cancer series: Imaging. Breast Cancer Res. 2015, 17, 94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Watermann, D.O.; Tempfer, C.; Hefler, L.A.; Parat, C.; Stickeler, E. Ultrasound morphology of invasive lobular breast cancer is different compared with other types of breast cancer. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2005, 31, 167–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Schelfout, K.; Van Goethem, M.; Kersschot, E.; Verslegers, I.; Biltjes, I.; Leyman, P.; Colpaert, C.; Thienpont, L.; Haute, J.V.D.; Gillardin, J.P.; et al. Preoperative breast MRI in patients with invasive lobular breast cancer. Eur. Radiol. 2004, 14, 1209–1216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Dietzel, M.; Baltzer, P.; Vag, T.; Gröschel, T.; Gajda, M.; Camara, O.; Kaiser, W.A. Magnetic resonance mammography of invasive lobular versus ductal carcinoma: Systematic comparison of 811 patients reveals high diagnostic accuracy irrespective of typing. J. Comput. Assist. Tomogr. 2010, 34, 587–595. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Reed, A.E.M.; Kutasovic, J.R.; Lakhani, S.R.; Simpson, P.T. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: Morphology, biomarkers and ‘omics. Breast Cancer Res. 2015, 17, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Koufopoulos, N.; Goudeli, C.; Pigadioti, E.; Balalis, D.; Manatakis, D.K.; Antoniadou, F.; Korkolis, D.P. Synchronous Colonic Adenocarcinoma and Metastatic Lobular Carcinoma in a Colectomy Specimen: A Rare Finding. Cureus 2018, 10, e3207. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Arpino, G.; Bardou, V.J.; Clark, G.M.; Elledge, R.M. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: Tumor characteristics and clinical outcome. Breast Cancer Res. 2004, 6, R149–R156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  9. Mathew, A.; Rajagopal, P.S.; Villgran, V.; Sandhu, G.S.; Jankowitz, R.C.; Jacob, M.; Rosenzweig, M.; Oesterreich, S.; Brufsky, A. Distinct Pattern of Metastases in Patients with Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2017, 77, 660–666. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Inoue, M.; Nakagomi, H.; Nakada, H.; Furuya, K.; Ikegame, K.; Watanabe, H.; Omata, M.; Oyama, T. Specific sites of metastases in invasive lobular carcinoma: A retrospective cohort study of metastatic breast cancer. Breast Cancer 2017, 24, 667–672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Panayiotides, J.; Arapantoni-Dadioti, P.; Triantafillidis, J.K.; Nikolakis, D.; Papatheodorou, C. Gastrointestinal metastases from breast carcinoma. Breast Dis. 1994, 7, 347–352. [Google Scholar]
  12. Foote, F.W.; Stewart, F.W. Lobular carcinoma in situ: A rare form of mammary cancer. Am. J. Pathol. 1941, 17, 491–496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  13. Martinez, V.; Azzopardi, J.G. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: Incidence and variants. Histopathology 1979, 3, 467–488. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Fisher, E.R.; Gregorio, R.M.; Redmond, C.; Fisher, B. Tubulolobular invasive breast cancer: A variant of lobular invasive cancer. Hum. Pathol. 1977, 8, 679–683. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Fechner, R.E. Histologic variants of infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast. Hum. Pathol. 1975, 6, 373–378. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Steinbrecher, J.S.; Silverberg, S.G. Signet-ring cell carcinoma of the breast. The mucinous variant of infiltrating lobular carcinoma? Cancer 1976, 37, 828–840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Weidner, N.; Semple, J.P. Pleomorphic variant of invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast. Hum. Pathol. 1992, 23, 1167–1171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Eusebi, V.; Magalhaes, F.; Azzopardi, J.G. Pleomorphic lobular carcinoma of the breast: An aggressive tumor showing apocrine differentiation. Hum. Pathol. 1992, 23, 655–662. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. De Leeuw, W.J.; Berx, G.; Vos, C.B.; Peterse, J.L.; van de Vijver, M.J.; Litvinov, S.; Van Roy, F.; Cornelisse, C.J.; Cleton-Jansen, A.M. Simultaneous loss of E-cadherin and catenins in invasive lobular breast cancer and lobular carcinoma in situ. J. Pathol. 1997, 183, 404–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Rosa, M.; Mohammadi, A.; Masood, S. Lobular carcinoma of the breast with extracellular mucin: New variant of mucin-producing carcinomas? Pathol. Int. 2009, 59, 405–409. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yu, J.; Bhargava, R.; Dabbs, D.J. Invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production and HER-2 overexpression: A case report and further case studies. Diagn. Pathol. 2010, 5, 36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Haltas, H.; Bayrak, R.; Yenidunya, S.; Kosehan, D.; Sen, M.; Akin, K. Invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin as a distinct variant of lobular carcinoma: A case report. Diagn. Pathol. 2012, 7, 91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  23. Bari, V.B.; Bholay, S.U.; Sane, K.C. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast with extracellular mucin—A new rare variant. J. Clin. Diagn. Res. 2015, 9, ED05–ED06. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Macías, G.G.; Saucedo, J.P.; Huerta, S.C.; Montemayor, M.G.; Garza, C.V.; Hernández, I.G. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast with extracellular mucin: A case report. Int. J. Surg. Case Rep. 2016, 25, 33–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Cserni, G.; Floris, G.; Koufopoulos, N.; Kovács, A.; Nonni, A.; Regitnig, P.; Stahls, A.; Varga, Z. Invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production—A novel pattern of lobular carcinomas of the breast. Clinico-pathological description of eight cases. Virchows Arch. Int. J. Pathol. 2017, 471, 3–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Boukhechba, M.; Kadiri, H.; El Khannoussi, B. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast with Extracellular Mucin: Case Report of a New Variant of Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast. Case Rep. Pathol. 2018, 2018, 5362951. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  27. Singh, K.; Diazgomez, B.; Wang, Y.; Ou, J.; Hansen, K. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma with Extracellular Mucin: Not All Mucinous Mammary Carcinomas Are Ductal! Int. J. Surg. Pathol. 2019, 27, 55–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Baig, A.; Omeroglu-Altinel, G.; Omeroglu, A. Invasive pleomorphic-type lobular carcinoma of the breast presenting as a mucinous carcinoma. Case Rep. Pathol. 2019, 2019, 1839208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Koufopoulos, N.; Antoniadou, F.; Kokkali, S.; Pigadioti, E.; Khaldi, L. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma with Extracellular Mucin Production: Description of a Case and Review of the Literature. Cureus 2019, 11, e5550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Burky, M.J.; Ray, E.M.; Ollila, D.W.; O’Connor, S.M.; Hertel, J.D.; Calhoun, B.C. Pleomorphic Invasive Lobular Carcinoma of the Breast with Extracellular Mucin and HER2 Amplification. Breast Cancer Basic Clin. Res. 2020, 14, 1178223420976383. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hort, A.; O’Toole, S.A.; Yunaev, M. An unusual case of invasive lobular carcinoma with abundant extracellular mucin. Pathology 2022, 54, 138–140. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Soong, T.R.; Dillon, D.A.; Rice-Stitt, T.L.; Wieczorek, T.J.; Baker, G.M.; Darvishian, F.; Collins, L.C.; Lester, S.C.; Schnitt, S.J.; Harrison, B.T. Invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin (ILCEM): Clinicopathologic and molecular characterization of a rare entity. Mod. Pathol. 2022. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Rakha, E.A.; Abbas, A.; Sheeran, R. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma Mimicking Papillary Carcinoma: A Report of Three Cases. Pathobiol. J. Immunopathol. Mol. Cell. Biol. 2016, 83, 221–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Christgen, M.; Bartels, S.; van Luttikhuizen, J.L.; Schieck, M.; Pertschy, S.; Kundu, S.; Lehmann, U.; Sander, B.; Pelz, E.; Länger, F.; et al. Subclonal analysis in a lobular breast cancer with classical and solid growth pattern mimicking a solid-papillary carcinoma. J. Pathol. Clin. Res. 2017, 3, 191–202. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Motanagh, S.A.; Muller, K.E. Invasive lobular carcinoma with papillary features: A newly described variant that poses a difficult histologic differential diagnosis. Breast J. 2020, 26, 1231–1233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Li, X.; Lin, M.; Xu, J.; Pang, Y.; Chen, H.; Sun, P.; Hou, G. New variant of breast-invasive lobular carcinoma with solid and encapsulated papillary carcinoma growth pattern. Breast Cancer 2021, 28, 1383–1388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Zheng, L.; Saluja, K.; Guo, T. Invasive Lobular Carcinoma Mimicking Encapsulated Papillary Carcinoma with a Literature Review: A Rare Variant Detected Serendipitously. Int. J. Surg. Pathol. 2022, 10668969221088878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Christgen, M.; Bartels, S.; van Luttikhuizen, J.L.; Bublitz, J.; Rieger, L.U.; Christgen, H.; Stark, H.; Sander, B.; Lehmann, U.; Steinemann, D.; et al. E-cadherin to P-cadherin switching in lobular breast cancer with tubular elements. Mod. Pathol. 2020, 33, 2483–2498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Tan, P.H.; Schnitt, S.J.; van de Vijver, M.J.; Ellis, O.I.; Lakhani, S.R. Papillary and neuroendocrine breast lesions: The WHO stance. Histopathology 2015, 66, 761–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Tan, B.Y.; Thike, A.A.; Ellis, I.O.; Tan, P.H. Clinicopathologic characteristics of solid papillary carcinoma of the breast. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2016, 40, 1334–1342. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Koufopoulos, N.; Dimas, D.; Antoniadou, F.; Sitara, K.; Balalis, D.; Boutas, I.; Gouloumis, A.R.; Kontogeorgi, A.; Khaldi, L. Metaplastic Matrix-Producing Carcinoma and Apocrine Lobular Carcinoma In Situ Associated with Microglandular Adenosis: A Unique Case Report. Diagnostics 2022, 12, 1458. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Asioli, S.; Marucci, G.; Ficarra, G.; Stephens, M.; Foschini, M.P.; Ellis, I.O.; Eusebi, V. Polymorphous adenocarcinoma of the breast. Report of three cases. Virchows Arch. Int. J. Pathol. 2006, 448, 29–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Trihia, H.J.; Valavanis, C.; Novkovic, N.; Koutsodontis, G.; Petraki, M.; Efstathiou, E. Polymorphous adenocarcinoma of the breast-an exceptionally rare entity: Clinicopathological description of a case and brief review. Breast J. 2020, 26, 261–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Nicol, K.K.; Iskandar, M.S.S. Lobular carcinoma of the breast metastatic to the oral cavity mimicking polymorphous low-grade adenocarcinoma of the minor salivary glands. Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 2000, 124, 157–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Petersson, F.; Putti, T.C. Multifocal matrix-producing mammary carcinoma mimicking lobular carcinoma on core biopsy—A case with long survival reported. Pathol. Res. Pract. 2010, 206, 527–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Koufopoulos, N.; Kokkali, S.; Antoniadou, F.; Dimas, D.T.; Missitzis, I.L. Matrix-producing Breast Carcinoma: A Rare Subtype of Metaplastic Breast Carcinoma. Cureus 2019, 11, e5188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  47. Reed, A.E.M.; Kutasovic, J.R.; Nones, K.; Saunus, J.M.; Da Silva, L.; Newell, F.; Kazakoff, S.; Melville, L.; Jayanthan, J.; Vargas, A.C.; et al. Mixed ductal-lobular carcinomas: Evidence for progression from ductal to lobular morphology. J. Pathol. 2018, 244, 460–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Cserni, G. Histological type and typing of breast carcinomas and the WHO classification changes over time. Pathologica 2020, 112, 25–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Wheeler, D.T.; Tai, L.H.; Bratthauer, G.L.; Waldner, D.L.; Tavassoli, F.A. Tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast: An analysis of 27 cases of a tumor with a hybrid morphology and immunoprofile. Am. J. Surg. Pathol. 2004, 28, 1587–1593. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Kuroda, H.; Tamaru, J.-I.; Takeuchi, I.; Ohnisi, K.; Sakamoto, G.; Adachi, A.; Kaneko, K.; Itoyama, S. Expression of E-cadherin, alpha-catenin, and beta-catenin in tubulolobular carcinoma of the breast. Virchows Arch. Int. J. Pathol. 2006, 448, 500–505. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Allison, K.H.; Brogi, E.; Ellis, I.O.; Fox, S.B.; Morris, E.A.; Sahin, A.; Salgado, R.; Sapino, A.; Sasano, H.; Schnitt, S.; et al. WHO Classification of Tumours Editorial Board. Breast Tumours; International Agency for Research on Cancer: Lyon, France, 2019. [Google Scholar]
  52. Rakha, E.A.; El-Sayed, M.E.; Powe, D.G.; Green, A.R.; Habashy, H.; Grainge, M.J.; Robertson, J.F.; Blamey, R.; Gee, J.; Nicholson, R.I.; et al. Invasive lobular carcinoma of the breast: Response to hormonal therapy and outcomes. Eur. J. Cancer 2008, 44, 73–83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Figure 1. ILC with extracellular mucin production. ((A) 40×): The tumor consists of a mucinous (blue arrows) and a non-mucinous (red arrow) component. ((B,C) 40×): The mucinous component consists of multiple, relatively circumscribed, nodular foci of extracellular mucin. ((D) 100×): On higher power, tumor cells are arranged as single cells, clusters, pseudocribriform structures, or solid nests. ((E,F) 200×): The non-mucinous component shows typical ILC features such as a single-file pattern (blue arrows) and single cells lacking cohesion. ((G) 200×): In both areas without (1(G)) and with extracellular mucin production (1(H)), intracellular mucin and signet-ring cells can be seen. ((I) E-cadherin 200×) On immunohistochemistry, E-cadherin stain was negative; the red arrow points to positive internal control.
Figure 1. ILC with extracellular mucin production. ((A) 40×): The tumor consists of a mucinous (blue arrows) and a non-mucinous (red arrow) component. ((B,C) 40×): The mucinous component consists of multiple, relatively circumscribed, nodular foci of extracellular mucin. ((D) 100×): On higher power, tumor cells are arranged as single cells, clusters, pseudocribriform structures, or solid nests. ((E,F) 200×): The non-mucinous component shows typical ILC features such as a single-file pattern (blue arrows) and single cells lacking cohesion. ((G) 200×): In both areas without (1(G)) and with extracellular mucin production (1(H)), intracellular mucin and signet-ring cells can be seen. ((I) E-cadherin 200×) On immunohistochemistry, E-cadherin stain was negative; the red arrow points to positive internal control.
Diagnostics 12 02658 g001
Figure 2. ILC with papillary features. ((A,B) 40×): The tumor consists of two components. The first had a solid architectural pattern. ((C) 200×): On high power examination, fibrovascular cores (red arrows) were observed. ((D,E) 40×): The second component shows a typical classic variant ILC morphology, with a single-file pattern and single-cell infiltration. ((F) 200×) On high-power examination, several signet-ring cells were visible. ((G,H) E-cadherin 100×): Immunohistochemically, E-cadherin was negative in both tumor components. Normal ducts and lobules served as an internal control (red arrow). ((I) β-catenin 100×): β-catenin was negative as well.
Figure 2. ILC with papillary features. ((A,B) 40×): The tumor consists of two components. The first had a solid architectural pattern. ((C) 200×): On high power examination, fibrovascular cores (red arrows) were observed. ((D,E) 40×): The second component shows a typical classic variant ILC morphology, with a single-file pattern and single-cell infiltration. ((F) 200×) On high-power examination, several signet-ring cells were visible. ((G,H) E-cadherin 100×): Immunohistochemically, E-cadherin was negative in both tumor components. Normal ducts and lobules served as an internal control (red arrow). ((I) β-catenin 100×): β-catenin was negative as well.
Diagnostics 12 02658 g002
Figure 3. ILC with tubular elements ((A,B) 100×): Areas of conventional growth pattern consisting of single-cell files. ((C,D) 200×): On higher power examination, tumor cells are characterized by a lack of cohesion. ((E,F) 40×): Adjacent to the single-cell files, several tubular elements can be seen. ((G) E-cadherin 40): On immunohistochemistry, the tubular elements lack E-cadherin staining ((H) β-catenin 40×), but retain β-catenin expression ((I) 40×): This ILC variant may be misdiagnosed as well as differentiated NST or as tubular carcinoma, especially in a biopsy specimen consisting only of tubular structures.
Figure 3. ILC with tubular elements ((A,B) 100×): Areas of conventional growth pattern consisting of single-cell files. ((C,D) 200×): On higher power examination, tumor cells are characterized by a lack of cohesion. ((E,F) 40×): Adjacent to the single-cell files, several tubular elements can be seen. ((G) E-cadherin 40): On immunohistochemistry, the tubular elements lack E-cadherin staining ((H) β-catenin 40×), but retain β-catenin expression ((I) 40×): This ILC variant may be misdiagnosed as well as differentiated NST or as tubular carcinoma, especially in a biopsy specimen consisting only of tubular structures.
Diagnostics 12 02658 g003
Table 1. Clinicopathological findings of invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production.
Table 1. Clinicopathological findings of invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production.
CaseAuthorYearAgeSize (mm)Positive LΝpTNMNottingham GradeER/PR/HER2SurgeryAdjuvant TherapyFollow-Up (Months)
1Rosa et al. [20]20096090NApT3XNA.NA/NA/NAMNANA
2Yu et al. [21]201065ΝA1pXN1NAP/N/PBCS + SLNBNANA
3Haltas et al. [22]201243ΝA1pXN1NAP/P/NM + ALNDNANA
4Bari et al. [23]201538352npT2N1NAP/P/NM + ALNDNANA
5Gomez Macias et al.
[24]
20166090pT1bN0snGrade 1P/P/NBCS + SLNBRT + HTNA
6Cserni et al. [25]201769>241pT2N1snGrade 2P/P/NM + SLNBRT + HTANED 26
7Cserni et al. [25]2017659011pT3N3Grade 2P/P/NBCS > MRT + HT + CTDOD 40
8Cserni et al. [25]201771460pT2N0snGrade 2P/P/PBCS + SLNBRT + HT + CTANED 29
9Cserni et al. [25] 2017628010pT3N3Grade 2P/P/NampBCS > M + ALNDRTAWD 68
10Cserni et al. [25]201745290pT2N0snGrade 3P/P/NBCS + SLNBRT + CTANED 2
11Cserni et al. [25]201756220pT2N0snGrade 2P/P/NM + SLNBRTANED 11
12Cserni et al. [25]201775307pT2N2Grade 2/3P/N/NEB > M + ALNDNeoadj CTDOD 21
13Cserni et al. [25]201760503pT2N1Grade 2P/P/NampM + ALNDRT + HT + CTNA
14Boukhechba et al. [26]20187515NANA.NAP/N/NNANANA
15Singh et al. [27]2019871001pT3N1Grade 2P/NA/NNANANA
16Singh et al. [27]20197216NA.NAGrade 3P/NA/NNANANA
17Singh et al. [27]201970>200pT2N0Grade 3P/NA/NNANANA
18Singh et al. [27] 20197780pT1bN0Grade 1P/NA/NNANANA
19Baig et al. [28]201967600pT3N0Grade 3P/N/NampBCSNANA
20Koufopoulos et al. [29]20196513 and 60pT1cmN0snGrade 2P/N/NM + SLNBRT + HTANED 10
21Burky et al. [30]202070230pT2mN0snGrade 3P/P/PM + SLNBHT + CTANED 8
22Hort et al. [31]202262701pT3N1miGrade 2P/P/NampM + ALNDHT + CTNA
23Soong et al. [32]202271150pT1cmN0Grade 2P/N/NNANADOD 114
24Soong et al. [32]20227115NApT1cmXGrade 2P/P/NNANADOD 95
25Soong et al. [32]202231303pT2N1Grade 3P/P/PNANAANED 35
26Soong et al. [32]202250231pT2N1Grade 2P/P/PNANAANED 88
27Soong et al. [32]20226970pT1bmN0Grade 2P/P/NNANANA
28Soong et al. [32]202268703pT3mN1Grade 3P/N/NNANANA
29Soong et al. [32]20227214NApT1cmXGrade 2P/P/NNANAAWD 81
30Soong et al. [32]202270731pT3mN1Grade 2P/N/NNANADOD 25
31Soong et al. [32]202277520pT3N0Grade 2P/P/NNANAANED 3
32Soong et al. [32]20226610023pT3N3Grade 2P/P/NNANAAWD 28
33Soong et al. [32]202259281pT2mN1miGrade 3P/P/NNANAANED 171
34Soong et al. [32]202245180pT1cmN0Grade 2P/P/NNANAANED 167
35Soong et al. [32]202255807pT1cmN2Grade 2P/N/NNANADOD 86
36Soong et al. [32]202266160pt1cN0Grade 2P/N/NNANANA
37Soong et al. [32]202256NANANAGrade 2P/P/NNANAANED 42
38Soong et al. [32]202273NANANAGrade 2P/P/NNANANA
39Soong et al. [32]202250NANANAGrade 3P/P/NNANANA
Abbreviations: LN: lymph node; ER: estrogen receptors; PR: progesterone receptors; NA: not available; BCS: breast-conserving surgery; M: mastectomy; SLNB: sentinel lymph node biopsy; ALND: axillary lymph node dissection; RT: radiotherapy; HT: hormonal therapy; CT: chemotherapy: Neoadj: neoadjuvant therapy; ANED: alive no evidence of disease; AWD: alive with disease; DOD: died of disease.
Table 2. Clinicopathological findings of invasive lobular carcinoma with papillary features.
Table 2. Clinicopathological findings of invasive lobular carcinoma with papillary features.
CaseAuthorYearAgeSize (mm)Positive LΝpTNMNottingham GradeER/PR/HER2SurgeryAdjuvant therapyFollow-Up (months)
1Rakha et al. [33]2016NA280pT2N0(sn)NAP/NA/NR + SLNBNAANED
2Rakha et al. [33]2016NA220pT2N0(sn)Grade 2P/NA/NM + SLNBNAANED
3Rakha et al. [33]2016NA230pT2N0(sn)Grade 2NA/NA/NAR + SLNBNAANED
4Christgen et al. [34]20177455NA.pT3N0(sn)Grade 2P/P/NM + SLNBNANA
5Motanagh et al. [35]20208630No *pT2XNAP/P/NBCSNo *NA
6Li et al. [36]202161250pT2N0(sn)NAP/P/NM + SLNBCTANED 10
7Zheng et al. [37]20227312NA.pT1cXNAP/P/NBCSHTANED 8
Abbreviations: LN: lymph node; ER: estrogen receptors; PR: progesterone receptors; NA: not available; BCS: breast-conserving surgery; R: resection: M: mastectomy; SLNB: sentinel lymph node biopsy; HT: hormonal therapy; CT: chemotherapy; ANED: alive no evidence of disease; *: Patient refused further treatment;.
Table 3. Clinicopathological findings of invasive lobular carcinoma with tubular elements.
Table 3. Clinicopathological findings of invasive lobular carcinoma with tubular elements.
Case Author Year Age Size (mm) Positive LΝ pTNM Nottingham Grade ER/PR/HER2 Status Surgery Adjuvant Therapy Follow-up (Months)
1 Christgen et al. [38]202169NANApT2mN0Grade 3P/N/NampNANANA
2 Christgen et al. [38]202174NANApT1cNxGrade 2P/P/NNANANA
3 Christgen et al. [38]202164NANApM1 *Grade 2P/P/NNANANA
4 Christgen et al. [38]202150NANApTxmNxGrade 2P/P/NNANANA
5 Christgen et al. [38]202161NANApT1cmN0Grade 2P/P/NNANANA
6 Christgen et al. [38]202156NANApT1bN0Grade 2P/N/NNANANA
7 Christgen et al. [38]202158NANApT2N0Grade 2P/P/NNANANA
8 Christgen et al. [38]202150NANApT2N1miGrade 2P/P/NNANANA
9 Christgen et al. [38]202142NANApT2mN1Grade 2P/P/NNANANA
10 Christgen et al. [38]202160NANApT2N0Grade 2P/P/NNANANA
11 Christgen et al. [38]202159NANApT1cN1miGrade 2P/P/NNANANA
12 Christgen et al. [38]202175NANApT3N1Grade 2P/P/NNANANA
13 Christgen et al. [38]202148NANApT1cN1Grade 3P/P/NNANANA
Abbreviations: LN: lymph node; ER: estrogen receptors; PR: progesterone receptors; NA: not available; Namp: 2+ immunohistochemical staining no amplification on FISH; * metastasis to the ovary.
Table 4. Morphological characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production and its differential diagnoses.
Table 4. Morphological characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production and its differential diagnoses.
ILCEMP IMC SPC MMPC PAdCa
Extracellular mucinPresentPresentPresent *AbsentAbsent
Single-file patternPresentAbsentAbsentAbsentPresent
Targetoid patternPresentAbsentAbsentAbsentAbsent
Signet-ring cellsPresentPresent *Present *AbsentAbsent
Mucoid matrixAbsentAbsentAbsentPresentAbsent
Fibrovascular coresAbsentAbsentPresentAbsentAbsent
Abbreviations: ILCEMP: invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production; IMC: invasive mucinous carcinoma; SPC: solid papillary carcinoma; MMPC: metaplastic matrix producing carcinoma; PAdCa: polymorphous adenocarcinoma; *: occasionally present.
Table 5. Immunohistochemical characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production and its differential diagnoses.
Table 5. Immunohistochemical characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production and its differential diagnoses.
ILCEMP IMC SPC MMPC PAdCa
E-cadherinNegativePositivePositivePositivePositive
ERPositivePositivePositiveNegativeNegative
PRPositivePositivePositiveNegativeNegative
S-100NegativeNegativeNegativePositiveNA
ChromograninNegativePositivePositiveNegativeNegative
SynaptophysinNegativePositivePositiveNegativeNA
Abbreviations: ILCEMP: invasive lobular carcinoma with extracellular mucin production; IMC: invasive mucinous carcinoma; SPC: solid papillary carcinoma; MMPC: metaplastic matrix producing carcinoma; PAdCa: polymorphous adenocarcinoma; NA: not available.
Table 6. A summary of the most important distinguishing features of ILC with papillary pattern and its histological mimics.
Table 6. A summary of the most important distinguishing features of ILC with papillary pattern and its histological mimics.
ILC with Papillary Features SPC EPC Solid/Alveolar ILC Confluent LCIS Growth LCIS Colonization of a Papilloma
ILC componentPresentAbsentPresentPresentAbsentAbsent
Fibrovascular coresPresentPresentPresentAbsentAbsentPresent
Fibrous capsulePresentAbsentPresentAbsentAbsentAbsent
Cellular cohesionAbsentPresentPresentAbsentAbsentAbsent
Abbreviations: ILC: invasive lobular carcinoma; SPC: solid papillary carcinoma; EPC: encapsulated papillary carcinoma; LCIS: lobular carcinoma in situ.
Table 7. Immunohistochemical characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with papillary features and its differential diagnoses.
Table 7. Immunohistochemical characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with papillary features and its differential diagnoses.
ILC with Papillary Features SPC EPC Solid ILC Confluent LCIS LCIS Colonization of a Papilloma
E-cadherinNegativePositivePositiveNegativeNegativeNegative
β-cateninNegativePositivePositiveNegativeNegativeNegative
ChromograninOccasionally positivePositivePositiveNegativeNegativeNegative
SynaptophysinOccasionally positivePositivePositiveNegativeNegativeNegative
p63NegativeNegativeNegativeNegativePositive *Positive *
Abbreviations: ILC: invasive lobular carcinoma; SPC: solid papillary carcinoma; EPC: encapsulated papillary carcinoma; *: In the myoepithelial layer.
Table 8. Morphological characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with tubular elements and its differential diagnoses.
Table 8. Morphological characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with tubular elements and its differential diagnoses.
Tubular Carcinoma Tubulolobular Carcinoma Mixed NST–Lobular Carcinoma ILC with Tubular Elements
Tubules/glandsSmall, round to ovoid or angular glands and tubules with open luminaSmall, round to angulated tubulesVariable morphology when presentLongitudinal, tear-drop shaped, small, round with narrow lumina
Single-cell filesAbsentPresentPresent in ILC componentPresent
Targetoid patternAbsentPresentPresent in ILC componentPresent
Abbreviations: ILC: invasive lobular carcinoma; NST: no special type.
Table 9. Immunohistochemical characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with tubular elements and its differential diagnoses.
Table 9. Immunohistochemical characteristics of invasive lobular carcinoma with tubular elements and its differential diagnoses.
Tubular Carcinoma Tubulolobular Carcinoma Mixed NST–Lobular Carcinoma ILC with Tubular Elements
E-cadherinPositivePositivePositive in NST.Negative in ILC.Negative
Beta-cateninPositivePositivePositive in NST.Negative in ILC.Negative
P-cadherinNegativeNegativeNegativeNegative or weak in ILC. Positive in tubules
Abbreviations: ILC: invasive lobular carcinoma; NST: no special type.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Koufopoulos, N.; Pateras, I.S.; Gouloumis, A.R.; Ieronimaki, A.I.; Zacharatou, A.; Spathis, A.; Leventakou, D.; Economopoulou, P.; Psyrri, A.; Arkadopoulos, N.; et al. Diagnostically Challenging Subtypes of Invasive Lobular Carcinomas: How to Avoid Potential Diagnostic Pitfalls. Diagnostics 2022, 12, 2658. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12112658

AMA Style

Koufopoulos N, Pateras IS, Gouloumis AR, Ieronimaki AI, Zacharatou A, Spathis A, Leventakou D, Economopoulou P, Psyrri A, Arkadopoulos N, et al. Diagnostically Challenging Subtypes of Invasive Lobular Carcinomas: How to Avoid Potential Diagnostic Pitfalls. Diagnostics. 2022; 12(11):2658. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12112658

Chicago/Turabian Style

Koufopoulos, Nektarios, Ioannis S. Pateras, Alina Roxana Gouloumis, Argyro Ioanna Ieronimaki, Andriani Zacharatou, Aris Spathis, Danai Leventakou, Panagiota Economopoulou, Amanda Psyrri, Nikolaos Arkadopoulos, and et al. 2022. "Diagnostically Challenging Subtypes of Invasive Lobular Carcinomas: How to Avoid Potential Diagnostic Pitfalls" Diagnostics 12, no. 11: 2658. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12112658

APA Style

Koufopoulos, N., Pateras, I. S., Gouloumis, A. R., Ieronimaki, A. I., Zacharatou, A., Spathis, A., Leventakou, D., Economopoulou, P., Psyrri, A., Arkadopoulos, N., & Panayiotides, I. G. (2022). Diagnostically Challenging Subtypes of Invasive Lobular Carcinomas: How to Avoid Potential Diagnostic Pitfalls. Diagnostics, 12(11), 2658. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics12112658

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop