Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

How Did We Get There? The Progression from Ductal Carcinoma In Situ to Invasive Ductal Carcinoma

  • Translational Research (RL Aft, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Breast Cancer Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose of Review

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-obligate precursor of invasive breast cancer. Despite numerous studies investigating the progression from in situ to invasive disease, there is still controversy as to the mechanisms by which a DCIS comes to become an invasive cancer. Here, we reviewed the state-of-the-art of the pathologic and molecular characterization of DCIS.

Recent Findings

DCIS displays intra-lesion genetic heterogeneity. Single-cell sequencing studies have demonstrated that progression from DCIS to invasive breast cancer is a complex phenomenon, which can vary from lesion to lesion. While in some DCIS, multiple clones have the ability to invade, in others, clonal selection likely takes place.

Summary

The fact that DCIS displays intra-lesion genetic heterogeneity and that progression varies from patient to patient poses formidable challenges for the development of biomarkers to define the risk of progression to invasive breast cancer.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ, Tan PH, van de Vijver MJ. WHO classification of tumors of the breast. 4th Edition ed. IARC Press; 2012.

  2. Solin LJ, Gray R, Baehner FL, Butler SM, Hughes LL, Yoshizawa C, et al. A multigene expression assay to predict local recurrence risk for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2013;105(10):701–10. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djt067.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. • Hernandez L, Wilkerson PM, Lambros MB, Campion-Flora A, Rodrigues DN, Gauthier A, et al. Genomic and mutational profiling of ductal carcinomas in situ and matched adjacent invasive breast cancers reveals intra-tumour genetic heterogeneity and clonal selection. J Pathol. 2012;227(1):42–52. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.3990. They demonstrate that some DCIS and invasive breast carcinomas are composed of mosaics of neoplastic cells that harbor genetic alterations in addition to the founder genetic events, and the selection of populations with specific genomic alterations takes place in the progression from DCIS to invasive breast cancer.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Cowell CF, Weigelt B, Sakr RA, Ng CK, Hicks J, King TA, et al. Progression from ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: revisited. Mol Oncol. 2013;7(5):859–69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molonc.2013.07.005.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. •• Martelotto LG, Baslan T, Kendall J, Geyer FC, Burke KA, Spraggon L, et al. Whole-genome single-cell copy number profiling from formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded samples. Nat Med. 2017;23(3):376–85. https://doi.org/10.1038/nm.4279. Applying single-cell sequencing to FFPE tumor material, they studied the progression from in situ to invasive breast cancer, which revealed that DCIS display intra-tumor genetic heterogeneity at diagnosis and that these lesions may progress to invasive breast cancer through a variety of evolutionary processes.

  6. Casasent AK, Edgerton M, Navin NE. Genome evolution in ductal carcinoma in situ: invasion of the clones. J Pathol. 2017;241(2):208–18. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.4840.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. •• Casasent AK, Schalck A, Gao R, Sei E, Long A, Pangburn W, et al. Multiclonal Invasion in Breast Tumors Identified by Topographic Single Cell Sequencing. Cell. 2018;172(1–2):205–17.e12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2017.12.007. The authors developed a spatially resolved single-cell genome sequencing method. Studying DCIS-IDC, genomic evolution was reported to occur in the DCIS, and invasion was found to entail the co-migration of multiple clones into the adjacent tissues.

  8. Allegra CJ, Aberle DR, Ganschow P, Hahn SM, Lee CN, Millon-Underwood S, et al. National Institutes of Health state-of-the-science conference statement: diagnosis and Management of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ September 22-24, 2009. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(3):161–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djp485.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wellings SR, Jensen HM. On the origin and progression of ductal carcinoma in the human breast. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1973;50(5):1111–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sanders ME, Schuyler PA, Simpson JF, Page DL, Dupont WD. Continued observation of the natural history of low-grade ductal carcinoma in situ reaffirms proclivity for local recurrence even after more than 30 years of follow-up. Mod Pathol. 2015;28(5):662–9. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2014.141.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Jensen RA, Schuyler PA. Continued local recurrence of carcinoma 15-25 years after a diagnosis of low grade ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast treated only by biopsy. Cancer. 1995;76(7):1197–200.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Collins LC, Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Connolly JL, Colditz GA, Schnitt SJ. Outcome of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ untreated after diagnostic biopsy: results from the Nurses' health study. Cancer. 2005;103(9):1778–84. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.20979.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Reis-Filho JS, Pusztai L. Gene expression profiling in breast cancer: classification, prognostication, and prediction. Lancet. 2011;378(9805):1812–23. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61539-0.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hanby AM. The pathology of breast cancer and the role of the histopathology laboratory. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2005;17(4):234–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Maxwell AJ, Clements K, Hilton B, Dodwell DJ, Evans A, Kearins O, et al. Risk factors for the development of invasive cancer in unresected ductal carcinoma in situ. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(4):429–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2017.12.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bryan BB, Schnitt SJ, Collins LC. Ductal carcinoma in situ with basal-like phenotype: a possible precursor to invasive basal-like breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2006;19(5):617–21. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.3800570.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Meijnen P, Peterse JL, Antonini N, Rutgers EJ, van de Vijver MJ. Immunohistochemical categorisation of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Br J Cancer. 2008;98(1):137–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6604112.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Tamimi RM, Baer HJ, Marotti J, Galan M, Galaburda L, Fu Y, et al. Comparison of molecular phenotypes of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. 2008;10(4):R67. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr2128.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Muggerud AA, Hallett M, Johnsen H, Kleivi K, Zhou W, Tahmasebpoor S, et al. Molecular diversity in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and early invasive breast cancer. Mol Oncol. 2010;4(4):357–68. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molonc.2010.06.007.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Clark SE, Warwick J, Carpenter R, Bowen RL, Duffy SW, Jones JL. Molecular subtyping of DCIS: heterogeneity of breast cancer reflected in pre-invasive disease. Br J Cancer. 2011;104(1):120–7. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6606021.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Fisher ER, Dignam J, Tan-Chiu E, Costantino J, Fisher B, Paik S, et al. Pathologic findings from the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project (NSABP) eight-year update of protocol B-17: intraductal carcinoma. Cancer. 1999;86(3):429–38.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fisher B, Land S, Mamounas E, Dignam J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N. Prevention of invasive breast cancer in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: an update of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and bowel project experience. Semin Oncol. 2001;28(4):400–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Bijker N, Meijnen P, Peterse JL, Bogaerts J, Van Hoorebeeck I, Julien JP, et al. Breast-conserving treatment with or without radiotherapy in ductal carcinoma-in-situ: ten-year results of European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer randomized phase III trial 10853--a study by the EORTC breast Cancer cooperative group and EORTC radiotherapy group. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(21):3381–7. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.06.1366.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Han MS, Khan SA. Clinical trials for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2018;23:293–301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10911-018-9413-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Pinder SE, Duggan C, Ellis IO, Cuzick J, Forbes JF, Bishop H, et al. A new pathological system for grading DCIS with improved prediction of local recurrence: results from the UKCCCR/ANZ DCIS trial. Br J Cancer. 2010;103(1):94–100. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.bjc.6605718.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Fisher B, Dignam J, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, Fisher ER, Mamounas E, et al. Tamoxifen in treatment of intraductal breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and bowel project B-24 randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 1999;353(9169):1993–2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)05036-9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Allred DC, Anderson SJ, Paik S, Wickerham DL, Nagtegaal ID, Swain SM, et al. Adjuvant tamoxifen reduces subsequent breast cancer in women with estrogen receptor-positive ductal carcinoma in situ: a study based on NSABP protocol B-24. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(12):1268–73. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2010.34.0141.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  28. Liang K, Lu Y, Jin W, Ang KK, Milas L, Fan Z. Sensitization of breast cancer cells to radiation by trastuzumab. Mol Cancer Ther. 2003;2(11):1113–20.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Siziopikou KP, Anderson SJ, Cobleigh MA, Julian TB, Arthur DW, Zheng P, et al. Preliminary results of centralized HER2 testing in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): NSABP B-43. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;142(2):415–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2755-z.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Hughes LL, Wang M, Page DL, Gray R, Solin LJ, Davidson NE, et al. Local excision alone without irradiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a trial of the eastern cooperative oncology group. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(32):5319–24. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2009.21.8560.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Solin LJ, Gray R, Hughes LL, Wood WC, Lowen MA, Badve SS, et al. Surgical excision without radiation for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: 12-year results from the ECOG-ACRIN E5194 study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(33):3938–44. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2015.60.8588.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  32. Bremer T, Whitworth PW, Patel R, Savala J, Barry T, Lyle S, et al. A Biological Signature for Breast Ductal Carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;24(23):5895–901. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-0842.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Wärnberg F, Garmo H, Emdin S, Hedberg V, Adwall L, Sandelin K, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ: 20 years follow-up in the randomized SweDCIS trial. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(32):3613–8. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.56.2595.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Ma XJ, Salunga R, Tuggle JT, Gaudet J, Enright E, McQuary P, et al. Gene expression profiles of human breast cancer progression. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2003;100(10):5974–9. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0931261100.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  35. •• Doebar SC, Krol NM, van Marion R, Brouwer RWW, van Ijcken WFJ, Martens JM, et al. Progression of ductal carcinoma in situ to invasive breast cancer: comparative genomic sequencing. Virchows Arch. 2018;474(2):247–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-018-2463-5. The authors found a high genomic concordance between synchronous DCIS and invasive breast cancers. The proportion of tumor cells harboring shared mutations between the DCIS and IDC was higher in the invasive component in a subset of patients. Their findings support the notion that progression of DCIS to invasive carcinoma could be driven by clonal selection.

  36. •• Pang JB, Savas P, Fellowes AP, Mir Arnau G, Kader T, Vedururu R, et al. Breast ductal carcinoma in situ carry mutational driver events representative of invasive breast cancer. Mod Pathol. 2017;30(7):952–63. https://doi.org/10.1038/modpathol.2017.21. GATA3 mutations in DCIS were found to be a marker of less aggressive behavior. In contrast, TP53 mutations were associated with adverse tumor characteristics.

  37. Corzo C, Corominas JM, Tusquets I, Salido M, Bellet M, Fabregat X, et al. The MYC oncogene in breast cancer progression: from benign epithelium to invasive carcinoma. Cancer Genet Cytogenet. 2006;165(2):151–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cancergencyto.2005.08.013.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Heselmeyer-Haddad K, Berroa Garcia LY, Bradley A, Ortiz-Melendez C, Lee WJ, Christensen R, et al. Single-cell genetic analysis of ductal carcinoma in situ and invasive breast cancer reveals enormous tumor heterogeneity yet conserved genomic imbalances and gain of MYC during progression. Am J Pathol. 2012;181(5):1807–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpath.2012.07.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  39. Pan A, Zhou Y, Mu K, Liu Y, Sun F, Li P, et al. Detection of gene copy number alterations in DCIS and invasive breast cancer by QM-FISH. Am J Transl Res. 2016;8(11):4994–5004.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  40. • Sakr RA, Weigelt B, Chandarlapaty S, Andrade VP, Guerini-Rocco E, Giri D, et al. PI3K pathway activation in high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ--implications for progression to invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20(9):2326–37. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-13-2267. The authors found genetic alterations affecting the PI3K pathway in a subset of pure DCIS and DCIS adjacent to invasive breast cancer. A receptor subtype-matched comparison of pure DCIS and DCIS adjacent to invasive breast cancer revealed that PIK3CA hotspot mutations and pAKT expression were significantly more prevalent in ER-positive /HER2-negative DCIS adjacent to invasive carcinoma. They concluded that molecular alterations affecting the PI3K pathway may play a role in the progression from high-grade DCIS to invasive breast cancer in a subset of ER-positive/ HER2-negative lesions.

  41. Ciriello G, Miller ML, Aksoy BA, Senbabaoglu Y, Schultz N, Sander C. Emerging landscape of oncogenic signatures across human cancers. Nat Genet. 2013;45(10):1127–33. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.2762.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  42. Burkhardt L, Grob TJ, Hermann I, Burandt E, Choschzick M, Jänicke F, et al. Gene amplification in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010;123(3):757–65. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-009-0675-8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Rane SU, Mirza H, Grigoriadis A, Pinder SE. Selection and evolution in the genomic landscape of copy number alterations in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and its progression to invasive carcinoma of ductal/no special type: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2015;153(1):101–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3509-x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Wang Y, Waters J, Leung ML, Unruh A, Roh W, Shi X, et al. Clonal evolution in breast cancer revealed by single nucleus genome sequencing. Nature. 2014;512(7513):155–60. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature13600.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  45. Robanus-Maandag EC, Bosch CA, Kristel PM, Hart AA, Faneyte IF, Nederlof PM, et al. Association of C-MYC amplification with progression from the in situ to the invasive stage in C-MYC-amplified breast carcinomas. J Pathol. 2003;201(1):75–82. https://doi.org/10.1002/path.1385.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Jang M, Kim E, Choi Y, Lee H, Kim Y, Kim J, et al. FGFR1 is amplified during the progression of in situ to invasive breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res. 2012;14(4):R115. https://doi.org/10.1186/bcr3239.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  47. Kitamura M, Nakayama T, Mukaisho KI, Mori T, Umeda T, Moritani S, et al. Progression potential of ductal carcinoma in situ assessed by genomic copy number profiling. Pathobiology. 2018;86:1–10. https://doi.org/10.1159/000492833.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  48. Doebar SC, Sieuwerts AM, de Weerd V, Stoop H, Martens JWM, van Deurzen CHM. Gene expression differences between ductal carcinoma in situ with and without progression to invasive breast Cancer. Am J Pathol. 2017;187(7):1648–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajpath.2017.03.012.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Newburger DE, Kashef-Haghighi D, Weng Z, Salari R, Sweeney RT, Brunner AL, et al. Genome evolution during progression to breast cancer. Genome Res. 2013;23(7):1097–108. https://doi.org/10.1101/gr.151670.112.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  50. Lee JY, Schizas M, Geyer FC, Selenica P, Piscuoglio S, Sakr RA, et al. Lobular carcinomas. Clin Cancer Res. 2018;25:674–86. https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-18-1103.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  51. Abba MC, Gong T, Lu Y, Lee J, Zhong Y, Lacunza E, et al. A molecular portrait of high-grade ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer Res. 2015;75(18):3980–90. https://doi.org/10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-0506.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  52. Nelson AC, Machado HL, Schwertfeger KL. Breaking through to the other side: microenvironment contributions to DCIS initiation and progression. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2018;23(4):207–21. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10911-018-9409-z.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Egeblad M, Werb Z. New functions for the matrix metalloproteinases in cancer progression. Nat Rev Cancer. 2002;2(3):161–74. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrc745.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Hu M, Yao J, Cai L, Bachman KE, van den Brûle F, Velculescu V, et al. Distinct epigenetic changes in the stromal cells of breast cancers. Nat Genet. 2005;37(8):899–905. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng1596.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Park SY, Kwon HJ, Lee HE, Ryu HS, Kim SW, Kim JH, et al. Promoter CpG island hypermethylation during breast cancer progression. Virchows Arch. 2011;458(1):73–84. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00428-010-1013-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Teschendorff AE, Gao Y, Jones A, Ruebner M, Beckmann MW, Wachter DL, et al. DNA methylation outliers in normal breast tissue identify field defects that are enriched in cancer. Nat Commun. 2016;7:10478. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms10478.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  57. Gudjonsson T, Rønnov-Jessen L, Villadsen R, Rank F, Bissell MJ, Petersen OW. Normal and tumor-derived myoepithelial cells differ in their ability to interact with luminal breast epithelial cells for polarity and basement membrane deposition. J Cell Sci. 2002;115(Pt 1:39–50.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Barsky SH, Karlin NJ. Myoepithelial cells: autocrine and paracrine suppressors of breast cancer progression. J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia. 2005;10(3):249–60. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10911-005-9585-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Hu M, Yao J, Carroll DK, Weremowicz S, Chen H, Carrasco D, et al. Regulation of in situ to invasive breast carcinoma transition. Cancer Cell. 2008;13(5):394–406. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2008.03.007.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  60. Lopez-Garcia MA, Geyer FC, Lacroix-Triki M, Marchió C, Reis-Filho JS. Breast cancer precursors revisited: molecular features and progression pathways. Histopathology. 2010;57(2):171–92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2559.2010.03568.x.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Hilson JB, Schnitt SJ, Collins LC. Phenotypic alterations in ductal carcinoma in situ-associated myoepithelial cells: biologic and diagnostic implications. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33(2):227–32. https://doi.org/10.1097/PAS.0b013e318180431d.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Rakha EA, Miligy IM, Gorringe KL, Toss MS, Green AR, Fox SB, et al. Invasion in breast lesions: the role of the epithelial-stroma barrier. Histopathology. 2018;72(7):1075–83. https://doi.org/10.1111/his.13446.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Allinen M, Beroukhim R, Cai L, Brennan C, Lahti-Domenici J, Huang H, et al. Molecular characterization of the tumor microenvironment in breast cancer. Cancer Cell. 2004;6(1):17–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccr.2004.06.010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  64. Dunn GP, Old LJ, Schreiber RD. The three Es of cancer immunoediting. Annu Rev Immunol. 2004;22:329–60. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.immunol.22.012703.104803.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  65. Gil Del Alcazar CR, Huh SJ, Ekram MB, Trinh A, Liu LL, Beca F, et al. Immune escape in breast Cancer during. Cancer Discov. 2017;7(10):1098–115. https://doi.org/10.1158/2159-8290.CD-17-0222.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  66. Kristensen VN, Vaske CJ, Ursini-Siegel J, Van Loo P, Nordgard SH, Sachidanandam R, et al. Integrated molecular profiles of invasive breast tumors and ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) reveal differential vascular and interleukin signaling. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012;109(8):2802–7. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1108781108.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Lal A, Chan L, Devries S, Chin K, Scott GK, Benz CC, et al. FOXP3-positive regulatory T lymphocytes and epithelial FOXP3 expression in synchronous normal, ductal carcinoma in situ, and invasive cancer of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;139(2):381–90. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-013-2556-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Author notes

  1. Kimberly Dessources and Ana Paula Martins Sebastiao contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA

    Kimberly Dessources

  2. Department of Medical Pathology, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Paraná, Brazil

    Ana Paula Martins Sebastiao

  3. Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 1275 York Avenue, New York, NY, 10065, USA

    Ana Paula Martins Sebastiao, Fresia Pareja, Britta Weigelt & Jorge S. Reis-Filho

Authors
  1. Kimberly Dessources
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Ana Paula Martins Sebastiao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Fresia Pareja
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Britta Weigelt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Jorge S. Reis-Filho
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jorge S. Reis-Filho.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Jorge S. Reis-Filho reports personal fees from Belgian Volition, Goldman Sachs, Invicro, Paige.AI, Roche Diagnostics, Grail and Genentech outside the submitted work. Kimberly Dessources, Ana Paula Martins Sebastiao, Fresia Pareja and Britta Weigelt declare no conflicts of interest relevant to this manuscript.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Translational Research

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dessources, K., Sebastiao, A.P.M., Pareja, F. et al. How Did We Get There? The Progression from Ductal Carcinoma In Situ to Invasive Ductal Carcinoma. Curr Breast Cancer Rep 11, 175–184 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12609-019-00318-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12609-019-00318-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation