Affordable Access

Access to the full text

Classification of Male Breast Lesions According to the IAC Yokohama System for Reporting Breast Cytopathology

Authors
  • Oosthuizen, Melissa
  • Razack, Rubina
  • Edge, Jenny
  • Schubert, Pawel Tomasz
Type
Published Article
Journal
Acta Cytologica
Publisher
S. Karger AG
Publication Date
Dec 17, 2020
Volume
65
Issue
2
Pages
132–139
Identifiers
DOI: 10.1159/000512041
PMID: 33333512
Source
Karger
Keywords
License
Green
External links

Abstract

Objective: This study aims to determine the diagnostic utility of the International Academy of Cytology (IAC) Yokohama System for reporting breast cytopathology in lesions of the male breast. Study Design: Fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) reports between 2015 and 2019 were retrospectively recategorized according to the 5-tiered IAC Yokohama Reporting System. Our database yielded a total of 1,532 FNAB reports from breast lesions, obtained from 1,350 male patients. The risk of malignancy (ROM) and diagnostic performance of FNAB were determined using follow-up histopathological diagnosis and/or clinical follow-up, where available, for each category. Results: The category distribution were as follows: inadequate, 40%; benign, 57%; atypical, 0.6%; suspicious for malignancy, 0.7%; and malignant, 1.6%. The ROM in each category was nondiagnostic, 11%; benign, 3%; atypical, 28%; suspicious for malignancy, 56%; and malignant, 100%. The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and negative predictive value were recorded as 63, 100, 100, and 84.6% respectively, when only malignant cases were considered as positive tests. Conclusion: This study validates the IAC Yokohama System for reporting male breast cytopathology. In accordance with the aim of the Yokohama System to establish best practice guidelines for reporting breast cytopathology, this comprehensive scheme facilitates comparisons between local and international institutions. The ROM acts as an internal audit for quality assurance within one’s own laboratory and provides guidance for clinical management. It highlights inefficiencies such as high inadequacy rates for category 1 and also features strengths with impressive specificity for categories 4 and 5.

Report this publication

Statistics

Seen <100 times