To access 4,300 diagnoses written by the world's leading experts in radiology, please log in or subscribe.Log inSubscribe
0
31
1
0
KEY FACTS
Terminology
Imaging
Pathology
Clinical Issues
TERMINOLOGY
Abbreviations
Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), no special type (NST)
Synonyms
Infiltrating ductal carcinoma
Definitions
Grading
Grade 1: Well differentiated
Grade 2: Moderately differentiated
Grade 3: Poorly differentiated
Invasive (infiltrating): Extension of tumor cells through duct basement membrane
"Ductal" implies tumors derived from ductal epithelium vs. "lobular" carcinomas from lobules
E-cadherin retained in ductal lesions, lost in lobular lesions
IDC NST does not meet criteria for special type
Special types of IDC: Medullary, mucinous, tubular, invasive micropapillary
Microinvasion: Invasive carcinoma with no focus measuring > 0.1 cm, typically in association with DCIS
IMAGING
General Features
Mammographic Findings
Ultrasonographic Findings
MR Findings
Nuclear Medicine Findings
Image-Guided Biopsy
Imaging Recommendations
DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
PATHOLOGY
General Features
Staging, Grading, & Classification
Gross Pathologic & Surgical Features
CLINICAL ISSUES
Presentation
Demographics
Natural History & Prognosis
Treatment
DIAGNOSTIC CHECKLIST
Consider
Selected References
Amin MB et al: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. American College of Surgeons, 2018
Lee SJ et al: Correlation of tumor uptake on breast-specific gamma imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT with molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 97(43):e12840, 2018
Narayanan D and Berg WA: Dedicated Breast Gamma Camera Imaging and Breast PET: Current Status and Future Directions. PET Clin. 13(3):363-381, 2018
Parikh U et al: Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: The Whole Truth. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 210(2):246-255, 2018
Patel BK et al: Initial Experience of Tomosynthesis-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Biopsies of Tomosynthesis-Detected (2D Mammography and Ultrasound Occult) Architectural Distortions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 210(6):1395-1400, 2018
Plichta JK et al: Anatomy and Breast Cancer Staging: Is It Still Relevant? Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 27(1):51-67, 2018
Rakha EA et al: Impact of breast cancer grade discordance on prediction of outcome. Histopathology. 73(6):904-915, 2018
Wang C et al: Can imaging kinetic parameters of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging be valuable in predicting clinicopathological prognostic factors of invasive breast cancer? Acta Radiol. 59(7):813-821, 2018
Wilson PC et al: Breast cancer histopathology is predictive of low-risk Oncotype Dx recurrence score. Breast J. 24(6):976-980, 2018
Au FW et al: Histological Grade and Immunohistochemical Biomarkers of Breast Cancer: Correlation to Ultrasound Features. J Ultrasound Med. 36(9):1883-1894, 2017
Bahl M et al: Breast Cancer Characteristics Associated with 2D Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Screening-detected and Interval Cancers. Radiology. 171148, 2017
Heacock L et al: Feasibility analysis of early temporal kinetics as a surrogate marker for breast tumor type, grade, and aggressiveness. J Magn Reson Imaging. ePub, 2017
Nyante SJ et al: The association between mammographic calcifications and breast cancer prognostic factors in a population-based registry cohort. Cancer. 123(2):219-227, 2017
Robson M et al: Olaparib for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Patients with a Germline BRCA Mutation. N Engl J Med. 377(6):523-533, 2017
Chesebro AL et al: Developing Asymmetries at Mammography: A Multimodality Approach to Assessment and Management. Radiographics. 36(2):322-34, 2016
Doebar SC et al: Extent of ductal carcinoma in situ according to breast cancer subtypes: a population-based cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 158(1):179-87, 2016
Meshkat B et al: A comparison of clinical-pathological characteristics between symptomatic and interval breast cancer. Breast. 24(3):278-82, 2015
Daveau C et al: Histological grade concordance between diagnostic core biopsy and corresponding surgical specimen in HR-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma. Br J Cancer. 110(9):2195-200, 2014
Schwartz AM et al: Histologic grade remains a prognostic factor for breast cancer regardless of the number of positive lymph nodes and tumor size: a study of 161 708 cases of breast cancer from the SEER Program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 138(8):1048-52, 2014
Aguiar FN et al: Comparison of nuclear grade and immunohistochemical features in situ and invasive components of ductal carcinoma of breast. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 35(3):97-102, 2013
Aho M et al: Correlation of sonographic features of invasive ductal mammary carcinoma with age, tumor grade, and hormone-receptor status. J Clin Ultrasound. 41(1):10-7, 2013
Cunningham JE et al: Mind the gap: racial differences in breast cancer incidence and biologic phenotype, but not stage, among low-income women participating in a government-funded screening program. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 137(2):589-98, 2013
Irshad A et al: Assessing the role of ultrasound in predicting the biological behavior of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 200(2):284-90, 2013
SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Breast. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html#incidence-mortality. Accessed February 17, 2013
Sun Y et al: Clinical usefulness of breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality to mammography for diagnosis of breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 40(3):450-63, 2013
Zheng J et al: Invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: correlation between tumor grade determined by ultrasound-guided core biopsy and surgical pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 200(1):W71-4, 2013
Arvold ND et al: Pathologic characteristics of second breast cancers after breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer. 118(24):6022-30, 2012
Blaichman J et al: Sonographic appearance of invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast according to histologic grade. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 199(3):W402-8, 2012
Boisserie-Lacroix M et al: Radiological features of triple-negative breast cancers (73 cases). Diagn Interv Imaging. 93(3):183-90, 2012
Evans A et al: Invasive breast cancer: relationship between shear-wave elastographic findings and histologic prognostic factors. Radiology. 263(3):673-7, 2012
Gokalp G et al: Malignant spiculated breast masses: dynamic contrast enhanced MR (DCE-MR) imaging enhancement characteristics and histopathological correlation. Eur J Radiol. 81(2):203-8, 2012
Gupta S et al: Molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma-in-situ and invasive ductal carcinoma: a comparative study. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 55(1):43-6, 2012
Mavaddat N et al: Pathology of breast and ovarian cancers among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 21(1):134-47, 2012
Song WJ et al: The Risk Factors Influencing between the Early and Late Recurrence in Systemic Recurrent Breast Cancer. J Breast Cancer. 2012 Jun;15(2):218-23. doi: 10. 4048/jbc. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3395746, 2012
Tadwalkar RV et al: Breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality for the diagnosis of invasive breast cancer with correlation to tumour size and grade. Br J Radiol. 85(1014):e212-6, 2012
Jiang L et al: Mammographic features are associated with clinicopathological characteristics in invasive breast cancer. Anticancer Res. 31(6):2327-34, 2011
Perez EA et al: Four-year follow-up of trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: joint analysis of data from NCCTG N9831 and NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol. 29(25):3366-73, 2011
Wang CL et al: Positron emission mammography: correlation of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and 18F-FDG. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 197(2):W247-55, 2011
Rakha EA et al: Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res. 12(4):207, 2010
Ildefonso C et al: The mammographic appearance of breast carcinomas of invasive ductal type: relationship with clinicopathological parameters, biological features and prognosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 136(2):224-31, 2008
Kim SH et al: Correlation of ultrasound findings with histology, tumor grade, and biological markers in breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 47(8):1531-8, 2008
Lee SH et al: Correlation between high resolution dynamic MR features and prognostic factors in breast cancer. Korean J Radiol. 2008 Jan-Feb;9(1):10-8. doi: 10. 3348/kjr. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2627175, 2008
Rakha EA et al: Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 26(19):3153-8, 2008
Schrading S et al: Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology. 246(1):58-70, 2008
Kuhl C: The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology. 244(2):356-78, 2007
Kuhl CK: Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. Radiology. 244(3):672-91, 2007
Bartella L et al: Nonpalpable mammographically occult invasive breast cancers detected by MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 186(3):865-70, 2006
Jinguji M et al: Rim enhancement of breast cancers on contrast-enhanced MR imaging: relationship with prognostic factors. Breast Cancer. 13(1):64-73, 2006
Smith-Bindman R et al: Does utilization of screening mammography explain racial and ethnic differences in breast cancer? Ann Intern Med. 144(8):541-53, 2006
Rosenberg J et al: The effect of age, race, tumor size, tumor grade, and disease stage on invasive ductal breast cancer survival in the U.S. SEER database. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 89(1):47-54, 2005
Rotstein AH et al: Ultrasound characteristics of histologically proven grade 3 invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Australas Radiol. 49(6):476-9, 2005
Elston CW et al: Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 41(3A):154-61, 2002
McIlhenny C et al: Optimum number of core biopsies for accurate assessment of histological grade in breast cancer. Br J Surg. 89(1):84-5, 2002
Lamb PM et al: Correlation between ultrasound characteristics, mammographic findings and histological grade in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol. 55(1):40-4, 2000
Kuhl CK et al: Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology. 211:101-10, 1999
Pinder SE et al: The importance of the histologic grade of invasive breast carcinoma and response to chemotherapy. Cancer. 83(8):1529-39, 1998
Nixon AJ et al: Relationship of tumor grade to other pathologic features and to treatment outcome of patients with early stage breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer. 78(7):1426-31, 1996
Stavros AT et al: Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology. 196(1):123-34, 1995
Lampejo OT et al: Evaluation of infiltrating ductal carcinomas with a DCIS component: correlation of the histologic type of the in situ component with grade of the infiltrating component. Semin Diagn Pathol. 11(3):215-22, 1994
Elston CW et al: Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 19(5):403-10, 1991
Bloom HJ et al: Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer; a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer. 11(3):359-77, 1957
Related Anatomy
Loading...
Related Differential Diagnoses
Loading...
References
Tables
Tables
KEY FACTS
Terminology
Imaging
Pathology
Clinical Issues
TERMINOLOGY
Abbreviations
Invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC), no special type (NST)
Synonyms
Infiltrating ductal carcinoma
Definitions
Grading
Grade 1: Well differentiated
Grade 2: Moderately differentiated
Grade 3: Poorly differentiated
Invasive (infiltrating): Extension of tumor cells through duct basement membrane
"Ductal" implies tumors derived from ductal epithelium vs. "lobular" carcinomas from lobules
E-cadherin retained in ductal lesions, lost in lobular lesions
IDC NST does not meet criteria for special type
Special types of IDC: Medullary, mucinous, tubular, invasive micropapillary
Microinvasion: Invasive carcinoma with no focus measuring > 0.1 cm, typically in association with DCIS
IMAGING
General Features
Mammographic Findings
Ultrasonographic Findings
MR Findings
Nuclear Medicine Findings
Image-Guided Biopsy
Imaging Recommendations
DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS
PATHOLOGY
General Features
Staging, Grading, & Classification
Gross Pathologic & Surgical Features
CLINICAL ISSUES
Presentation
Demographics
Natural History & Prognosis
Treatment
DIAGNOSTIC CHECKLIST
Consider
Selected References
Amin MB et al: AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. American College of Surgeons, 2018
Lee SJ et al: Correlation of tumor uptake on breast-specific gamma imaging and fluorodeoxyglucose PET/CT with molecular subtypes of breast cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 97(43):e12840, 2018
Narayanan D and Berg WA: Dedicated Breast Gamma Camera Imaging and Breast PET: Current Status and Future Directions. PET Clin. 13(3):363-381, 2018
Parikh U et al: Ductal Carcinoma In Situ: The Whole Truth. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 210(2):246-255, 2018
Patel BK et al: Initial Experience of Tomosynthesis-Guided Vacuum-Assisted Biopsies of Tomosynthesis-Detected (2D Mammography and Ultrasound Occult) Architectural Distortions. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 210(6):1395-1400, 2018
Plichta JK et al: Anatomy and Breast Cancer Staging: Is It Still Relevant? Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 27(1):51-67, 2018
Rakha EA et al: Impact of breast cancer grade discordance on prediction of outcome. Histopathology. 73(6):904-915, 2018
Wang C et al: Can imaging kinetic parameters of dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging be valuable in predicting clinicopathological prognostic factors of invasive breast cancer? Acta Radiol. 59(7):813-821, 2018
Wilson PC et al: Breast cancer histopathology is predictive of low-risk Oncotype Dx recurrence score. Breast J. 24(6):976-980, 2018
Au FW et al: Histological Grade and Immunohistochemical Biomarkers of Breast Cancer: Correlation to Ultrasound Features. J Ultrasound Med. 36(9):1883-1894, 2017
Bahl M et al: Breast Cancer Characteristics Associated with 2D Digital Mammography versus Digital Breast Tomosynthesis for Screening-detected and Interval Cancers. Radiology. 171148, 2017
Heacock L et al: Feasibility analysis of early temporal kinetics as a surrogate marker for breast tumor type, grade, and aggressiveness. J Magn Reson Imaging. ePub, 2017
Nyante SJ et al: The association between mammographic calcifications and breast cancer prognostic factors in a population-based registry cohort. Cancer. 123(2):219-227, 2017
Robson M et al: Olaparib for Metastatic Breast Cancer in Patients with a Germline BRCA Mutation. N Engl J Med. 377(6):523-533, 2017
Chesebro AL et al: Developing Asymmetries at Mammography: A Multimodality Approach to Assessment and Management. Radiographics. 36(2):322-34, 2016
Doebar SC et al: Extent of ductal carcinoma in situ according to breast cancer subtypes: a population-based cohort study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 158(1):179-87, 2016
Meshkat B et al: A comparison of clinical-pathological characteristics between symptomatic and interval breast cancer. Breast. 24(3):278-82, 2015
Daveau C et al: Histological grade concordance between diagnostic core biopsy and corresponding surgical specimen in HR-positive/HER2-negative breast carcinoma. Br J Cancer. 110(9):2195-200, 2014
Schwartz AM et al: Histologic grade remains a prognostic factor for breast cancer regardless of the number of positive lymph nodes and tumor size: a study of 161 708 cases of breast cancer from the SEER Program. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 138(8):1048-52, 2014
Aguiar FN et al: Comparison of nuclear grade and immunohistochemical features in situ and invasive components of ductal carcinoma of breast. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet. 35(3):97-102, 2013
Aho M et al: Correlation of sonographic features of invasive ductal mammary carcinoma with age, tumor grade, and hormone-receptor status. J Clin Ultrasound. 41(1):10-7, 2013
Cunningham JE et al: Mind the gap: racial differences in breast cancer incidence and biologic phenotype, but not stage, among low-income women participating in a government-funded screening program. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 137(2):589-98, 2013
Irshad A et al: Assessing the role of ultrasound in predicting the biological behavior of breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 200(2):284-90, 2013
SEER Stat Fact Sheets: Breast. http://seer.cancer.gov/statfacts/html/breast.html#incidence-mortality. Accessed February 17, 2013
Sun Y et al: Clinical usefulness of breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality to mammography for diagnosis of breast cancer: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 40(3):450-63, 2013
Zheng J et al: Invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast: correlation between tumor grade determined by ultrasound-guided core biopsy and surgical pathology. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 200(1):W71-4, 2013
Arvold ND et al: Pathologic characteristics of second breast cancers after breast conservation for ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer. 118(24):6022-30, 2012
Blaichman J et al: Sonographic appearance of invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast according to histologic grade. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 199(3):W402-8, 2012
Boisserie-Lacroix M et al: Radiological features of triple-negative breast cancers (73 cases). Diagn Interv Imaging. 93(3):183-90, 2012
Evans A et al: Invasive breast cancer: relationship between shear-wave elastographic findings and histologic prognostic factors. Radiology. 263(3):673-7, 2012
Gokalp G et al: Malignant spiculated breast masses: dynamic contrast enhanced MR (DCE-MR) imaging enhancement characteristics and histopathological correlation. Eur J Radiol. 81(2):203-8, 2012
Gupta S et al: Molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma-in-situ and invasive ductal carcinoma: a comparative study. Indian J Pathol Microbiol. 55(1):43-6, 2012
Mavaddat N et al: Pathology of breast and ovarian cancers among BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers: results from the Consortium of Investigators of Modifiers of BRCA1/2 (CIMBA). Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 21(1):134-47, 2012
Song WJ et al: The Risk Factors Influencing between the Early and Late Recurrence in Systemic Recurrent Breast Cancer. J Breast Cancer. 2012 Jun;15(2):218-23. doi: 10. 4048/jbc. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC3395746, 2012
Tadwalkar RV et al: Breast-specific gamma imaging as an adjunct modality for the diagnosis of invasive breast cancer with correlation to tumour size and grade. Br J Radiol. 85(1014):e212-6, 2012
Jiang L et al: Mammographic features are associated with clinicopathological characteristics in invasive breast cancer. Anticancer Res. 31(6):2327-34, 2011
Perez EA et al: Four-year follow-up of trastuzumab plus adjuvant chemotherapy for operable human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer: joint analysis of data from NCCTG N9831 and NSABP B-31. J Clin Oncol. 29(25):3366-73, 2011
Wang CL et al: Positron emission mammography: correlation of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and 18F-FDG. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 197(2):W247-55, 2011
Rakha EA et al: Breast cancer prognostic classification in the molecular era: the role of histological grade. Breast Cancer Res. 12(4):207, 2010
Ildefonso C et al: The mammographic appearance of breast carcinomas of invasive ductal type: relationship with clinicopathological parameters, biological features and prognosis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 136(2):224-31, 2008
Kim SH et al: Correlation of ultrasound findings with histology, tumor grade, and biological markers in breast cancer. Acta Oncol. 47(8):1531-8, 2008
Lee SH et al: Correlation between high resolution dynamic MR features and prognostic factors in breast cancer. Korean J Radiol. 2008 Jan-Feb;9(1):10-8. doi: 10. 3348/kjr. PubMed Central PMCID: PMC2627175, 2008
Rakha EA et al: Prognostic significance of Nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 26(19):3153-8, 2008
Schrading S et al: Mammographic, US, and MR imaging phenotypes of familial breast cancer. Radiology. 246(1):58-70, 2008
Kuhl C: The current status of breast MR imaging. Part I. Choice of technique, image interpretation, diagnostic accuracy, and transfer to clinical practice. Radiology. 244(2):356-78, 2007
Kuhl CK: Current status of breast MR imaging. Part 2. Clinical applications. Radiology. 244(3):672-91, 2007
Bartella L et al: Nonpalpable mammographically occult invasive breast cancers detected by MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 186(3):865-70, 2006
Jinguji M et al: Rim enhancement of breast cancers on contrast-enhanced MR imaging: relationship with prognostic factors. Breast Cancer. 13(1):64-73, 2006
Smith-Bindman R et al: Does utilization of screening mammography explain racial and ethnic differences in breast cancer? Ann Intern Med. 144(8):541-53, 2006
Rosenberg J et al: The effect of age, race, tumor size, tumor grade, and disease stage on invasive ductal breast cancer survival in the U.S. SEER database. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 89(1):47-54, 2005
Rotstein AH et al: Ultrasound characteristics of histologically proven grade 3 invasive ductal breast carcinoma. Australas Radiol. 49(6):476-9, 2005
Elston CW et al: Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 41(3A):154-61, 2002
McIlhenny C et al: Optimum number of core biopsies for accurate assessment of histological grade in breast cancer. Br J Surg. 89(1):84-5, 2002
Lamb PM et al: Correlation between ultrasound characteristics, mammographic findings and histological grade in patients with invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Clin Radiol. 55(1):40-4, 2000
Kuhl CK et al: Dynamic breast MR imaging: are signal intensity time course data useful for differential diagnosis of enhancing lesions? Radiology. 211:101-10, 1999
Pinder SE et al: The importance of the histologic grade of invasive breast carcinoma and response to chemotherapy. Cancer. 83(8):1529-39, 1998
Nixon AJ et al: Relationship of tumor grade to other pathologic features and to treatment outcome of patients with early stage breast carcinoma treated with breast-conserving therapy. Cancer. 78(7):1426-31, 1996
Stavros AT et al: Solid breast nodules: use of sonography to distinguish between benign and malignant lesions. Radiology. 196(1):123-34, 1995
Lampejo OT et al: Evaluation of infiltrating ductal carcinomas with a DCIS component: correlation of the histologic type of the in situ component with grade of the infiltrating component. Semin Diagn Pathol. 11(3):215-22, 1994
Elston CW et al: Pathological prognostic factors in breast cancer. I. The value of histological grade in breast cancer: experience from a large study with long-term follow-up. Histopathology. 19(5):403-10, 1991
Bloom HJ et al: Histological grading and prognosis in breast cancer; a study of 1409 cases of which 359 have been followed for 15 years. Br J Cancer. 11(3):359-77, 1957
STATdx includes over 200,000 searchable images, including x-ray, CT, MR and ultrasound images. To access all images, please log in or subscribe.