Journal of Clinical Pathology and Laboratory Medicine

All submissions of the EM system will be redirected to Online Manuscript Submission System. Authors are requested to submit articles directly to Online Manuscript Submission System of respective journal.
Reach Us +1 (202) 780-3397

Commentary - Journal of Clinical Pathology and Laboratory Medicine (2025) Volume 7, Issue 2

Histopathological variations in breast carcinoma: A retrospective analysis.

Ainslie Donald*

Department of pathology and Laboratory Medicine, University of Texas, USA.

*Corresponding Author:
Ainslie Donald
Department of pathology and Laboratory Medicine
University of Texas, USA.
E-mail: anis_nald.li@ca

Received: 10-Jun-2025, Manuscript No. AACPLM- 25-166889; Editor assigned: 11-Jun-2025, Pre QC No. AACPLM- 25-166889 (PQ); Reviewed: 20-Jun-2025, QC No. AACPLM- 25-166889; Revised: 21-Jun-2025, Manuscript No. AACPLM- 25-166889 (R); Published: 28-Jun-2025, DOI: 10.35841/ aacplm-7.2.260

Citation: Donald A. Histopathological variations in breast carcinoma: A retrospective analysis. J Clin Path Lab Med.2025;(7)2:260

Introduction

Breast carcinoma is a heterogeneous disease characterized by diverse histopathological features that influence diagnosis, prognosis, and treatment strategies. This retrospective analysis explores the histopathological variations observed in breast carcinoma, emphasizing their clinical significance based on data from patient cohorts.Breast cancer is broadly classified into in situ and invasive carcinomas. Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) and lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) represent non-invasive forms, with DCIS being more common and often detected via mammography due to microcalcifications. Invasive Ductal Carcinoma (IDC), accounting for approximately 70-80% of cases, presents as a solid mass with variable differentiation, while Invasive Lobular Carcinoma (ILC) constitutes 10-15% and is characterized by single-file infiltration patterns. [1].

Less common subtypes include mucinous, tubular, and medullary carcinomas, each with distinct histological features. Mucinous carcinomas, for instance, are defined by extracellular mucin pools, associated with favorable prognosis, while medullary carcinomas, despite aggressive histology, often have better outcomes due to immune infiltration. Retrospective analyses of breast carcinoma cohorts emphasize the importance of integrating histopathological and molecular data. Advances in digital pathology and artificial intelligence enhance diagnostic precision by quantifying features like mitotic figures and TILs. These tools improve reproducibility and prognostic accuracy, addressing inter-observer variability in traditional microscopy.[2].

Histopathological grading, typically using the Nottingham system, assesses tubule formation, nuclear pleomorphism, and mitotic count to categorize tumors into grades with higher grades indicating poorer differentiation and worse prognosis. Molecular profiling further refines classification, identifying subtypes like luminal A, luminal B, HER2-enriched, and triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). TNBC, lacking estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), and HER2 expression, exhibits aggressive behavior and limited therapeutic options. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is pivotal in determining ER, PR, and HER2 status, guiding targeted therapies like tamoxifen or trastuzumab. [3]

Tumor microenvironment analysis reveals additional variations. Stromal composition, lymphocytic infiltration, and necrosis influence tumor behavior. For example, high Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes (TILs) in TNBC correlate with better response to immunotherapy. Tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, and lymph node involvement are critical for staging and prognosis. Retrospective studies highlight that IDC with high-grade features and lymphovascular invasion is associated with increased metastatic potential compared to low-grade ILC.[4].

Rare histopathological variants, such as metaplastic carcinoma, exhibit mesenchymal or squamous differentiation, posing diagnostic challenges due to their rarity and aggressive nature. These variants require specialized IHC panels for accurate identification. Additionally, intratumor heterogeneity, where different regions of the same tumor display varied histological and molecular profiles, complicates treatment decisions. Multiregion sequencing studies have demonstrated this heterogeneity, underscoring the need for comprehensive sampling.[5].

Conclusion

histopathological variations in breast carcinoma significantly impact clinical management. Understanding these variations through retrospective analyses informs personalized treatment strategies, improving patient outcomes. Future research should focus on integrating histopathological, molecular, and computational approaches to further unravel the complexity of breast cancer.

References

  1. Lakatos PL. Recent trends in the epidemiology of inflammatory bowel diseases: up or down?.World J Gastroenterol. 2006;12(38):6102.

    2. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  2. Huang BL, Chandra S, Shih DQ. Skin manifestations of inflammatory bowel disease.Front physiol. 2012:13.

    3. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  3. Bager P, Simonsen J, Nielsen NM, et al. Cesarean section and offspring's risk of inflammatory bowel disease: a national cohort study.Inflamm Bowel Dis. 2012;18(5):857-62.

    4. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  4. Hviid A, Svanström H, Frisch M. Antibiotic use and inflammatory bowel diseases in childhood.Gut. 2011;60(1):49-54.

    5. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

  5. Bamias G, Corridoni D, Pizarro TT, et al. New insights into the dichotomous role of innate cytokines in gut homeostasis and inflammation.Cytokine. 2012;59(3):451-9.

    6. Indexed at, Google Scholar, Crossref

Get the App