Skip to main content
Oncology Letters logoLink to Oncology Letters
. 2025 Sep 4;30(5):510. doi: 10.3892/ol.2025.15256

Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast with aggressive behavior: A case report and review of the literature

Hanin Lataifeh 1, Fawzi Abuhijla 1,, Lina Wahbeh 1, Ramiz Abuhijlih 1, Wafa Asha 1, Abdullah Alzibdeh 1, Omar Jaber 2, Issa Mohamad 1, Hikmat Abdel-Razeq 3
PMCID: PMC12446906  PMID: 40980145

Abstract

Adenoid cystic carcinoma (AdCC) of the breast is a subtype of triple-negative breast cancer characterized by a distinct indolent behavior, with extremely rare lymphatic involvement and a late onset of distant metastasis occurring several years post-diagnosis. Due to its favorable prognosis, therapeutic guidelines include surgical resection with adjuvant radiotherapy, with no significant benefit of chemotherapy. The present study discusses the case of a 77-year-old female patient who presented with a right-sided breast mass. Biopsy confirmed a grade 2 AdCC transitioning to a higher grade in some areas. The patient underwent a wide local excision and adjuvant radiotherapy was planned; however, during a simulation computed tomography scan performed 6 weeks after surgery, a complex mass at the ipsilateral axillary tail was detected and proved to be disease recurrence on biopsy. Restaging imaging studies showed metastatic involvement of the regional lymph nodes, lungs, liver, bones and brain. The patient received three cycles of palliative chemotherapy, but then clinically deteriorated and passed away 7 months after the initial diagnosis. Notably, the relatively large tumor size (6.4 cm) and the presence of high-grade morphology may have contributed to the poor outcome of the patient. In addition, the current case is one of the unique reported instances in the literature where the interval between treatment and recurrence was <3 months, as well as being one of the few cases that exhibited lymphatic involvement. The present report underscores the importance of further understanding the variable presentations of AdCC.

Keywords: adenoid cystic carcinoma, breast cancer, triple-negative, simulation, aggressive behavior

Introduction

Breast cancer carries a considerable global burden due to its high morbidity and mortality rates (1). Acknowledged as the most common cancer affecting the female population worldwide, its incidence reached an estimated 300,590 new cases, with 43,700 associated deaths (in both sexes), in the United States by the year 2023 (2). In 2019, the Jordanian Cancer Registry revealed that breast cancer represented 38.5% of all cancer cases among female Jordanian patients (3). Histologically, invasive ductal carcinoma of no special type constitutes the predominant subtype, comprising 40–75% of all invasive breast carcinoma cases (4). Otherwise, there are other special subtypes, each characterized by unique architectural, immunohistochemical and prognostic features. One such rare subtype, adenoid cystic carcinoma (AdCC), mimics the histology of salivary gland tumors and is typically found in the salivary glands of the head and neck region (5). Breast cancer was shown to be the second most common site of AdCC following the head and neck in a recent Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results database report (6). This variant represents <0.1% of all breast cancer subtypes (7). AdCC comprises three distinct subtypes: Classic, solid basaloid and high-grade transformation; each exhibiting unique clinical behaviors and prognostic outcomes (8). Although AdCC of the breast shares features with its more aggressive salivary gland counterpart, and typically lacks expression of estrogen receptors (ERs), progesterone receptors (PRs) and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2/neu), AdCC of the breast is nonetheless characterized by an indolent clinical course and a favorable prognosis (6,9). AdCC typically remains localized within the breast region, with extremely rare lymph node involvement and sparse occurrence of hematogenous metastases, primarily to the lungs (10,11). In such cases, recurrence often occurs after an extended period, commonly several years post-resection (12). The present study reports the case of a patient diagnosed with cT3N0M0 triple-negative AdCC of the breast. Notably, the clinical course and tumor spread possessed a unique pattern, with rapid progression over a span of 6 months, with the eventual clinical deterioration and mortality of the patient.

Case report

In March 2022, a 77-year-old female patient (Gravida, 22; Para, 12+10), was referred to the King Hussein Cancer Center (Amman, Jordan) complaining of a painless, gradually enlarging right breast mass associated with left nipple inversion and tenderness for a 6-month duration. Apart from this, the systemic review of symptoms did not yield any significant findings. The patient was known to have a history of hypertension, diabetes mellitus type II, osteoarthritis and chronic kidney disease. The surgical history included an open cholecystectomy and hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oopherectomy performed at the age of 57 years related to post-menopausal bleeding due to non-malignant causes. Menarche occurred at the age of 13 years, and the patient had been in menopause for the past 22 years. There was no family history of malignancies. The patient was a second-hand smoker with no hormonal replacement therapy usage. During physical examination, a mass measuring 4×5 cm was identified in the mid-upper quadrant area of the right breast, situated 5 cm away from the nipple areolar complex. The mass was mobile, without any concurrent skin alterations or retraction of the right nipple. Notably, palpable lymph nodes were observed in the ipsilateral axilla. Otherwise, examination of the left breast, left axilla and bilateral supraclavicular region revealed no notable findings.

A mammogram demonstrated an irregular spiculated hyperdense mass at the mid upper right breast ~9.5 cm away from the nipple (Fig. 1A). Subsequent breast ultrasound (U/S) imaging revealed an irregular, heterogeneous hypoechoic mass with indistinct margins at the mid upper right breast measuring 1.7×1.3×2 cm, with no concerning findings in the left breast (Fig. 1B). Lymph node involvement was notably absent in both axillae. Further staging computed tomography (CT) scans revealed an ill-defined soft-tissue lesion consistent with the previously identified right-sided breast mass (Fig. 1C). Bone scans were free of any active lesions, and there was no evidence of metastases to nearby or distant organs (Fig. 1D). Additionally, CT scans revealed prominent subpectoral and mediastinal lymph nodes on the ipsilateral side, measuring 0.8 cm and 1.2 cm, respectively (Fig. S1). A prior tru-cut biopsy performed outside our center revealed Nottingham histological grade I invasive ductal carcinoma and a ductal carcinoma in situ, characterized by a cribriform pattern with intermediate nuclear grade (13). Repeated diagnostic testing was performed to confirm the histological subtype and staging, to guide the multidisciplinary tumor board management plan.

Figure 1.

Figure 1. (A) Mammogram imaging revealing an irregular hyperdense mass at the mid–upper right breast, located 9.5 cm away from the nipple as indicated by arrow. (B) Breast ultrasound (U / S) imaging r...

(A) Mammogram imaging revealing an irregular hyperdense mass at the mid-upper right breast, located 9.5 cm away from the nipple as indicated by arrow. (B) Breast ultrasound (U/S) imaging revealed an irregular, heterogeneous hypoechoic mass with indistinct margins at the mid-upper right breast measuring 1.7×1.3×2 cm, with no concerning findings in the left breast as indicated by arrow. (C) Staging computed tomography scan revealing an ill-defined soft-tissue lesion as indicated by arrow. (D) Bone scan showing a lack of active lesions, with no evidence of metastases.

In May 2022, the patient underwent a wide local excision along with additional excision of deep margins and a biopsy of the sentinel lymph nodes. The procedure was carried out successfully and there were no observed immediate or delayed post-operative complications. Subsequent surgical pathology reports revealed a 6.4-cm-diameter tumor composed of basaloid epithelial cells arranged in solid sheets, nests and tubules. Formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue specimens were prepared by fixing in 10% neutral buffered formalin for 24 h at room temperature, followed by paraffin embedding. Sections of 4-µm thickness were cut, placed in an oven at 60°C for 15 min, stained with H&E (hematoxylin for 8 min and eosin for 2 min at room temperature), and examined using a light microscope. In some areas, the tumor showed a lower grade component with evident myxoid stroma (Fig. 2A), whereas in other areas, the tumor showed a higher nuclear grade with numerous mitotic figures (Fig. 2B). The surgical margins were free of tumor with the closest margin being the superior margin at 0.3 cm. Perineural invasion was not observed. The tumor was positive for c-Kit (Fig. 2C), negative for S100 (Fig. S2) and tumor protein p63 (p63) (Fig. S3), and negative for chromogranin (Fig. S4), synaptophysin (Fig. S5), ER (Fig. S6) and HER2/neu (Fig. S7), immunostaining (procedure details described in Table SI). The solid areas represented >30% of the tumor. The diagnosis was consistent with solid-basaloid AdCC of the breast, Nottingham grade II (13). Ductal carcinoma in situ cribriform, intermediate grade was also observed. The tumor was staged as pT3N0, per the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition staging system (14), indicating a large primary tumor size with no extension to adjacent viscera or nearby lymph nodes.

Figure 2.

Figure 2. (A) AdCC of the breast exhibiting solid and basaloid architecture with the absence of cribriform and tubular structures, which implies a higher grade tumor via H&E staining (magnification, x...

(A) AdCC of the breast exhibiting solid and basaloid architecture with the absence of cribriform and tubular structures, which implies a higher grade tumor via H&E staining (magnification, ×100; Table SI). (B) AdCC of the breast exhibiting a higher nuclear grade and numerous mitotic figures via H&E staining (magnification, ×400). (C) Positive staining for c-Kit (magnification, ×200). AdCC, adenoid cystic carcinoma.

The case was discussed at the multidisciplinary tumor board meeting, and adjuvant radiation therapy was planned. At 1.5 months post-resection, upon evaluation at the Radiation Oncology Clinic at King Hussein Cancer Center for a CT simulation scan, a suspected lesion was detected in the axillary region, with a slightly atypical appearance (Fig. 3A). A U/S scan was requested, which revealed the presence of a new complex mass at the right axillary tail. Subsequently, a U/S-guided biopsy was performed, which confirmed the recurrence of known primary AdCC. Immunohistochemistry (IHC) analysis, carried out as aforementioned, of the axillary lesion revealed negative ER, weakly positive (2%) PR and negative HER2/neu expression, a proliferation index (Ki-67) of 50%, a limited number of cells staining positive for p63 and focal positivity for cytokeratin 8/18 (data not shown).

Figure 3.

Figure 3. (A) CT simulation scan detecting a suspicious lesion in the right axillary region 6 weeks post–resection (indicated by arrow). (B) Bone scan revealing new active lesions in the right iliac b...

(A) CT simulation scan detecting a suspicious lesion in the right axillary region 6 weeks post-resection (indicated by arrow). (B) Bone scan revealing new active lesions in the right iliac bone, as indicated by the arrow. Staging CT scan revealing new innumerable metastatic pulmonary nodules in (C) both lungs, new minimal right pleural effusion and thickening suggestive of metastatic deposits and (D) new liver metastases, new right axillary metastatic lymph nodes, where arrow indicates one of the liver lesions. CT, computed tomography.

Given the unexpected findings, new staging work up was performed including bone scan revealed new multiple active lesions in the right iliac bone and ribs (Fig. 3B) and CT scan which shown significant disease progression manifested by new innumerable metastatic pulmonary nodules in both lungs, new liver metastases, new right axillary metastatic lymph nodes, new minimal right pleural effusion and thickening suggestive of metastatic deposits (Fig. 3C and D).

Prompted by the discovery of the new findings, the treatment plan included the initiation of chemotherapy sessions using weekly paclitaxel (144 mg) with a 20% dose reduction from the first cycle due to the age of the patient. The patient completed a total of three cycles. However, a multitude of complications occurred due to factors relating to the advanced age of the patient, comorbid conditions, side effects of chemotherapeutic agents and tumor infiltration. The patient presented to the Emergency Department on six occasions complaining of severe lower back pain, an episode of falling down and recurrent urinary tract infections. A CT scan revealed a non-displaced fracture in the right superior iliac crest and an inferior iliac crest fracture. Despite being on oral Tramal 100 mg twice daily, Tramal 50 mg every 8 h as needed, paracetamol 1,000 mg every 6 h, and gabapentin 300 mg three times daily, the patient continued to experience significant pain. Consequently, the patient required multiple admissions and palliative pain interventions, including haloperidol 1 mg IV every 4 h as needed, a continuous morphine sulfate infusion at 0.2 mg/h, and morphine 2 mg/2 ml IV every 2 h as needed for breakthrough pain. She also received multiple courses of intravenous antibiotics, with the most recent being meropenem 1 g diluted in 100 ml of 0.9% sodium chloride, infused over 30 min every 8 h. Unfortunately, chemotherapy sessions were postponed and subsequently discontinued due to a worsening clinical condition until stabilization was achieved. Over a span of 2 months, the patient suffered from neurological symptoms, manifesting as a decreased level of consciousness and seizures. Subsequent brain magnetic resonance imaging findings confirmed the presence of small bilateral hemispheric lesions suggestive of metastatic deposits (Fig. 4A and B). Concurrently, the urinary tract infections of the patient exhibited resistance to treatment. A final CT scan performed before clinical deterioration revealed no local recurrence of the right-sided breast cancer, with a partial response of the right axillary lymph node, a mild increase in right-sided pleural effusion and a new large lytic bone metastasis in the right iliac bone, with a non-displaced fracture of the right pubic bone (Fig. S8).

Figure 4.

Figure 4. Brain magnetic resonance imaging detected (A) small right and (B) small left hemispheric lesion suggestive of metastatic deposits.

Brain magnetic resonance imaging detected (A) small right and (B) small left hemispheric lesion suggestive of metastatic deposits.

At 7 months after the initial diagnosis, the patient presented with a decreased level of consciousness. Clinical and diagnostic evaluation detected urosepsis, concomitant aspiration pneumonia and an acute-on-chronic kidney disease, with resultant metabolic acidosis and poor Glasgow Coma Scale (6/15) (15). After discussion with the family, the code status of the patient was changed to ‘do not resuscitate’ and the patient was administered comfort measures until they passed away 2 weeks later. The patient timeline of events is summarized in Fig. 5.

Figure 5.

Figure 5. Patient timeline of events starting from diagnosis until mortality. U / S, ultrasound; CT, computed tomography; ER, Emergency Room; DNR, do not resuscitate.

Patient timeline of events starting from diagnosis until mortality. U/S, ultrasound; CT, computed tomography; ER, Emergency Room; DNR, do not resuscitate.

Discussion

It is considered that AdCC was first described as a ‘tumeur heteradenique’ by Robin and Laboulbene in 1853 (16). Subsequently, it was referred to as a ‘cylindroma’ due to the presence of cylindrical-shaped cells in a hyaline stroma (17). In 1953, the term AdCC was introduced by Foote and Frazell (18) to describe a distinct category primarily arising in the minor salivary, parotid and submandibular glands, comprising 3–5% of head and neck malignancies (18,19). AdCC also manifests as a rare subtype of primary breast carcinomas, which was first described by Geschickter and Copeland (20) in 1945. AdCC accounts for <0.1% of all breast cancer cases and 0.058% of total AdCC cases (7,9,21).

In a comprehensive cohort covering a 30-year interval, the age-adjusted incidence ratio was calculated to be 0.92 per 1 million person-years, predominantly affecting the female population, with a median age of onset falling between 50 and 60 years (11). Jang et al (22) reported lower overall survival (OS) rates in head and neck AdCC cases in age groups >70 years old compared with those in groups <45 years old. Zhang et al (23) supported the aforementioned association; however, conflicting opinions exist, with studies indicating lower OS in both age extremes (<45 and >60 years) (24,25). Notably, the age of the patient in the present study at symptom onset exceeded the average age documented in the aforementioned reports (24,25).

The clinical presentation and imaging findings of breast AdCC are non-specific, typically manifesting as a well-circumscribed, palpable mass, with no predilection for the left or right breast or specific quadrants (23). However, some studies have demonstrated a preference for the submastoid and upper outer quadrant region, while others have shown a 50% tendency for the subareolar region (10,23,26,27). Pain and tenderness upon palpation may be present, possibly due to the perineural invasion of the lesion (28). In the present case, the latter findings were not observed, as the histological assessment of the resected mass revealed no evidence of perineural invasion. The tumor usually ranges in size between 2 and 3 cm and exhibits a slow growth pattern (29,30).

Imaging modalities are able to detect AdCC; however, the efficacy of mammography in accurately distinguishing AdCC from its benign differentials remains uncertain. Typically, AdCC manifests as irregular masses with spiculated margins (7,31,32). In the present case, mammography revealed an irregular spiculated hyperdense mass, with a prior biopsy-proven confirmation of malignancy. Breast U/S and staging CT scans supported these findings; however, it is important to note the role that the post-resection CT simulation scan played in the early detection of recurrence. In the present case, CT simulation imaging was able to detect a suspected atypical lesion in the axillary tail at 1.5 months post-resection, aligning with existing studies of the paramount diagnostic value of the imaging technique in detecting new lesions and planning therapeutic strategies (3335).

Histologically, AdCC diagnosis relies on identifying a dual cell population of myoepithelial and epithelial cells, presenting true duct-like structures with microvilli-projecting epithelial cells and pseudo-cyst structures lined by myoepithelial cells (11,36,37). AdCC is categorized according to the predominant growth structure into one or a combination of three groups, namely, cribriform, tubular and solid, with histological subdivisions holding prognostic value (38). Ro et al (39) proposed a classification for breast AdCC. Grade I is characterized by the absence of solid components, grade II exhibits <30% solid components and grade III exhibits >30% solid components. The 2019 World Health Organization classification of Tumors of the Breast highlights that the classic form of AdCC with predominant cribriform and tubular differentiation is more prognostically favorable, and such cases are recommended to undergo conservative treatment, in contrast to solid-basaloid AdCC and high-grade AdCC, which exhibit elevated rates of both local and distant recurrence (40,41). A comprehensive analysis by Slodkowska et al (42) involving 108 AdCC cases revealed a significantly higher incidence of distant metastasis in basaloid AdCC compared with that in classic AdCC (40 vs. 8%; P<0.0004). In a study by Marco et al (43), high-grade transformation of AdCC presented with skin and lung involvement in one patient, and lung, colon and brain involvement in a second patient, both of whom eventually died of disease. Examination of previously published case reports with distant metastases (Table I) (9,24,27,39,4459), reveals a prevailing incidence of solid-basaloid AdCC and high-grade AdCC.

Table I.

Literature review of cases of breast adenoid cystic carcinoma with aggressive behavior.

First author/s, year Age, years Sex Size (grade/stage) Genetic alternations Site of metastasis Lymph node involvement Surgical intervention Adjuvant therapies Time until recurrence from primary surgery Outcome (Refs.)
Vasudevan et al, 2023 ~60 Female 4.5×4×4 cm, 3×2.5×2 cm (high grade cribriform-solid); Ki-67, 70–80% NR Lung None Mastectomy R 11 Y NR (44)
Ji et al, 2022 50 Female 1.5 cm (solid-basaloid) (+) MYB rearrangement Lung None Lumpectomy C + R 2.5 Y Alive (24)
59 Female 4.0 cm (solid-basaloid) (−) MYB rearrangement Liver None Mastectomy C 1.5 Y Alive
Collins et al, 2020 49 Female (High grade, >30% solid components) NR Skin (multiple sites) NR Lumpectomy NR 1.3 Y post initial diagnosis NR (45)
Sołek et al, 2020 52 Female Stage IIA (T2N0Mx) (high grade solid-basaloid) NR Lung None Mastectomy R 1 M Alive (46)
41 Female Stage IA (T1N0Mx) (high grade solid-basaloid) NR Lung, liver, brain NR Lumpectomy C + R 1 Y Alive
Mhamdi et al, 2017 65 Female 8.0 cm (−) MYB rearrangement Lung, liver, brain, kidney None Mastectomy R 4 Y Alive (47)
Miyai et al, 2014 83 Female 3.0 cm (grade I) (stage IV) NR Lung None Lumpectomy None 7 Y Alive (9)
Kim et al, 33 Female (pT2N0M0) NR Lung None Quadrantectomy C + R 2.6 Y Alive (27)
2014 58 Female (pT2N0M0) NR Lung, liver, bone None Mastectomy C 6.25 Y Alive
D'Alfonso et al, 2014 25 Female 6.5 cm (grade II, cribriform-solid) (−) MYB rearrangement Lung, liver, brain NR Mastectomy None 5 Y Dead (48)
55 Female 2.0 cm (grade III, solid-basaloid) (−) MYB rearrangement Lung None Mastectomy None 4.58 Y post initial diagnosis Alive
Silva et al, 2011 37 Female 3 cm (solid-basaloid) (T2N1Mx) NR Lung, liver, bone, brain Yes Mastectomy None 2 Y Dead (49)
Vranić et al, 2007 76 Female 1.8 cm (pT1cN0MxR0, cribriform-solid) (+) PIK-3CA and PTEN mutations Kidney None Mastectomy None 5 Y NR (50)
Millar et al, 2004 53 Male 4.0 cm NR Bone, brain Yes Mastectomy R 10 Y Dead (51)
Herzberg et al, 1991 57 Female 1.5 cm (cribriform) NR Lung, kidney None Mastectomy None 6 Y Alive (52)
Ro et al, 1987 53 Female 2.5 cm (grade II) NR Lung, thigh, skull None Mastectomy None 9 Y Dead (39)
68 Female 0.7 cm (grade II) NR Lung None Mastectomy R 5 Y Alive
64 Female 6.0 cm (grade III) NR Liver, brain Yes Mastectomy None 1 Y Dead
Koller et al, 1986 49 Female NR NR Lung, brain None Mastectomy None 1 Y local recurrence; 8 Y distant metastasis Alive (53)
Peters and Wolff, 1983 73 Female 1.0 cm NR Lung, liver None Mastectomy None 10 Y Alive (54)
Lim et al, 1979 48 Female NR NR Lung None Mastectomy None 9 Y NR (55)
Verani and Van der Bel-Kahn, 1973 63 Female 2.0 cm NR Lung, vertebrae Yes Mastectomy None 14 Y Dead (56)
78 Male 3.5×3×2 cm NR Lung, liver None Mastectomy None 6 M Dead
Elsner, 1970 44 Female NR NR Lung NR Mastectomy None 7 Y NR (57)
Wilson and Spell, 1967 54 Female 2.8 cm NR Ribs Yes Mastectomy None 6 Y NR (76)
O'Kell, 1964 73 Female NR NR Lung, inferior vena cava NR Mastectomy None 3 Y Dead (58)
Nayer, 1957 39 Female NR NR Lung None Mastectomy None 8 Y Dead (59)
Present study 77 Female 6.4 cm (grade II) (Nottingham 6/9) (pT3N0) NR Lung, liver, bone, brain Yes Lumpectomy R planned 1.5 M Dead -

C, chemotherapy; R, radiotherapy; Y, years; M, months; PIK3CA, phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit α; NR, not reported or not applicable.

Following the American Joint Committee on Cancer guidelines (60), the utilization of the Nottingham score was endorsed in the present study, where scores exceeding 5 represent a higher grade and poorer outcome. The present case had a total score of 6/9 (tubular differentiation, 2/3; nuclear pleomorphism, 2/3; and mitotic activity, 2/3) (13). Despite the favorable score, the observed tumor size was 6.4 cm, surpassing the median size reported in prior studies (7,61). This notable size difference may have contributed as a factor to the subsequent aggressive behavior of the tumor in the patient, despite absence of initial extension to adjacent structures or lymph nodes (30). Factors affecting prognosis in AdCC of the breast include a solid growth pattern (>30%), basaloid morphology, lymphovascular invasion, perineural invasion, necrosis, lymph node involvement, positive margins and high Nottingham grade (12,40). In the present case, a few factors may have contributed to the worse prognosis, including the presence of significant solid and basaloid components, the large tumor size and the higher tumor grade, along with the increased mitotic activity and Ki-67 value, which eventually resulted in distant generalized metastasis.

IHC, genomic investigations and the distinct polarity of cellular structures are pivotal in achieving an accurate diagnosis of AdCC. This arises from the inherent challenge in distinguishing the solid-basaloid variant of AdCC from the more aggressive triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) with basal-like features, where both entities share characteristics in terms of negativity for ER, PR and HER2/neu receptors. Additionally, they exhibit reactivity for basal high molecular weight CKs, including CK5/6, CK14, CK17 and luminal progenitors CK8/18 (62). Specifically, the luminal cells in AdCC exhibit positivity for CK7, CK8/18, epithelial membrane antigen and c-KIT, while myoepithelial cells exhibit positivity for CK5, CK5/6, CK14, CK17, p63, actin, calponin, S100, vimentin and epidermal growth factor receptor (63,64). A key difference between TNBC and AdCC lies in the loss of myoepithelium, and the loss of reactivity to p63 and calponin in TNBC (24). In the present case, IHC analysis of the recurrent lesion revealed triple-negative expression for ER, PR and HER2/neu, limited positivity for p63 and focal positivity for CK8/18. Notably, the Ki-67 value was markedly elevated at 50%, which is uncharacteristic of the proliferative activity associated with low-grade AdCC. Wetterskog et al (65) reported a low Ki-67 index in 69% of AdCC cases, with a moderate index in the remaining cases (66). This observation is particularly important, as Ki-67 has been established as a valuable marker of cellular proliferation, with higher levels being associated with increased tumor aggressiveness and poor clinical outcomes (67). High Ki-67 expression was associated with advanced histological grade and recurrence in a retrospective study (68). Another study found that Ki-67 immunoreactivity increased proportionally with tumor grade, averaging 27.12% in grade I, 34.43% in grade II and 38.45% in grade III tumors (69).

The majority of cases of AdCC of the breast harbor the transcriptional activator Myb:: nuclear factor IB (MYB::NFIB) fusion gene [t(6;9)(q22-23;p23-24)], which is considered a molecular hallmark of the diagnosis (48). The gene fusion can be detected by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) or PCR (65,70). In the absence of molecular testing, diffuse and strong MYB protein expression detected by IHC is often used as a surrogate, particularly in conventional AdCC. However, this surrogate is less reliable for solid variants. Massé et al (71) reported that only 19% of solid-type AdCCs exhibited MYB gene rearrangements based on FISH, suggesting that this variant may be a distinct molecular entity enriched for CREB-binding protein and neurogenic locus notch homolog protein pathway mutations. We acknowledge the absence of MYB::NFIB testing in the present case due to institutional limitations. This represents a diagnostic limitation, as molecular confirmation would have further strengthened the diagnosis in the present study, particularly given the aggressive clinical course and high-grade histological features.

Breast AdCC is renowned for its indolent nature and favorable prognosis, distinguishing itself from its salivary gland counterpart and other forms of TNBC (54). Axillary lymph node involvement is rare, with Arpino et al (72) documenting lymph node metastasis in only 1 of 23 cases studied. Distant metastasis is also uncommon, following a hematogenous route and silent progression, and often emerging several years after the initial presentation. The lung is the most frequently affected organ, along with the occasional involvement of the liver, bones and brain (73). Consequently, various reports have argued against routine axillary lymph node dissection during surgery and underscored the importance of prolonged follow-up during remission (47,74,75). In the present study, to the best of our knowledge, all the previously reported cases of breast AdCC with confirmed recurrence and distant metastasis have been compiled and presented in Table I (9,24,27,39,4459). The present case, alongside the case reported by Sołek et al (46) represent, to the best of our knowledge, the only two reported instances in the literature where the interval between resection and the detection of the first metastatic lesion was <3 months. While Sołek et al (46) exclusively reported lung involvement, the present case reported a broad spectrum of metastases, including those of the lungs, pleura, liver, bones and brain, culminating in a fatal outcome. Additionally, the discussed case is among the limited reports revealing axillary lymph node involvement, joining the case reports by Silva et al (49) Verani and Van der Bel-Kahn (56), Wilson and Spell (76), and Ro et al (39) in mentioning this uncommon manifestation.

Management strategies for AdCC of the breast vary across different clinical recommendations, particularly concerning the adoption of an aggressive surgical approach despite the recognized indolent nature of the tumor (77). Ro et al (39) proposed a treatment strategy involving local excision for grade I tumors, simple mastectomy for grade II tumors and mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection for grade III tumors. Hodgson et al (78) suggested a more comprehensive approach due to the reported instances of positive margins post-excision, irrespective of the year of surgery or local practice patterns, but perhaps due to the silent and microscopic infiltration of the tumor into breast tissue. This mechanism may have contributed to the outcome of the present patient, as the treatment plan involved a wide local excision surgery coupled with radiotherapy sessions, which were halted by the discovery of local and distant recurrence of the disease, and then the commencing of chemotherapy. There is a consensus on the efficacy of lumpectomy or mastectomy with adjuvant radiotherapy in achieving remission and preventing recurrence, with no significant impact of adjuvant chemotherapy on OS (11,51,79,80). This was supported by a retrospective study of 488 AdCC cases conducted by Gomez-Seoane et al (81), which demonstrated an increased OS rate in the post-resection adjuvant radiation therapy group compared with that in those subjected to surgery alone.

National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines consider AdCC a favorable histology and only recommend adjuvant chemotherapy for pathological node positive disease (82). Furthermore, limited responses to neoadjuvant chemotherapy have been documented in solid-basaloid variants, with a complete pathological response remaining rare (83). However, evolving evidence has raised the need to reconsider whether adjuvant chemotherapy should be added for high-risk subtypes, particularly solid-basaloid and high-grade AdCC. Such variants have shown to be associated with more aggressive clinical behavior, higher rates of nodal involvement and early distant metastasis (42).

There are several potential limitations to the present study. First, its retrospective design may introduce bias and limit the ability to establish causal relationships. Second, the advanced age of the patient and their comorbidities presented significant challenges in administering various therapeutic options. Additionally, despite early surgical intervention, the aggressive nature of the solid-basaloid subtype of AdCC resulted in rapid metastasis and disease progression, underscoring the limitations of current treatment strategies in managing high-risk cases. In addition, the suitability of this tumor to represent a high-grade metaplastic, triple-negative, matrix-producing carcinoma is high. The case was subject to intradepartmental discussion and a consensus diagnosis was made based on the available histology, hormonal studies, immunohistochemical stains and clinical presentation at the time of first diagnosis. The gold standard for diagnosis is detecting MYB::NFIB gene fusion by molecular methods or detecting upregulation of MYB expression by IHC; however, neither tests were available at King Hussein Cancer Center. In summary, despite its indolent nature, certain subtypes of AdCC of the breast carry aggressive behavior manifested by short-term locoregional and systemic spread. The present report highlights the importance of a further understanding of AdCC of the breast, and the challenges that can arise in achieving control of this pathology.

Supplementary Material

Supporting Data
Supporting Data
Supplementary_Data2.pdf (251.2KB, pdf)

Acknowledgements

Not applicable.

Funding Statement

Funding: No funding was received.

Availability of data and materials

The data generated in the present study may be requested from the corresponding author.

Authors' contributions

HL, FA and HAR designed the overall concept and outline of the manuscript. HL and FA confirm the authenticity of all the raw data. HL, FA, LW, RA, WA, AA, OJ, IM and HAR have contributed to methodology, data collection and the review of the literature. HL, FA, LW, RA, WA, AA, OJ, IM and HAR contributed to writing and editing of the manuscript. All authors have read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The requirement for consent for participation was waived by the Institutional Review Board at King Hussein Cancer Center (Amman, Jordan) due to the study nature and no added risk to the participant.

Patient consent for publication

Consent for publication could not be obtained as the patient passed away prior to the time of writing this report. However, the Institutional Review Board at King Hussein Cancer Center (Amman, Jordan) issued a determination waiving the requirement for consent, as this case qualifies as non-human subject research. All patient data have been fully anonymized in compliance with ethical standards and publication guidelines.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

References

  • 1.Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, Bray F. Global cancer statistics 2020: GLOBOCAN estimates of incidence and mortality worldwide for 36 cancers in 185 countries. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71:209–249. doi: 10.3322/caac.21660. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Siegel RL, Miller KD, Wagle NS, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73:17–48. doi: 10.3322/caac.21763. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Jordan Ministry of Health, Non-Communicable Diseases Directorate, Jordan Cancer Registry, Cancer Incidence in Jordan, corp-author. 2019 [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Masood S. Breast cancer subtypes: Morphologic and biologic characterization. Womens Health (Lond) 2016;12:103. doi: 10.2217/whe.15.99. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bradley PJ. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck: A review. Curr Opin Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2004;12:127–132. doi: 10.1097/00020840-200404000-00013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Rahouma M, Khairallah S, Baudo M, Al-Thani S, Dabsha A, Shenouda D, Mohamed A, Dimagli A, El Sherbiny M, Kamal M, et al. Epidemiological study of adenoid cystic carcinoma and its outcomes: insights from the surveillance, epidemiology, and end results (SEER) database. Cancers (Basel) 2024;16:3383. doi: 10.3390/cancers16193383. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Glazebrook KN, Reynolds C, Smith RL, Gimenez EI, Boughey JC. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010;194:1391–1396. doi: 10.2214/AJR.09.3545. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Seethala RR. An update on grading of salivary gland carcinomas. Head Neck Pathol. 2009;3:69–77. doi: 10.1007/s12105-009-0102-9. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Miyai K, Schwartz MR, Divatia MK, Anton RC, Park YW, Ayala AG, Ro JY. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of breast: Recent advances. World J Clin Cases. 2014;2:732–741. doi: 10.12998/wjcc.v2.i12.732. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Kulkarni N, Pezzi CM, Greif JM, Suzanne Klimberg V, Bailey L, Korourian S, Zuraek M. Rare breast cancer: 933 Adenoid cystic carcinomas from the national cancer data base. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:2236–2241. doi: 10.1245/s10434-013-2911-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Ghabach B, Anderson WF, Curtis RE, Huycke MM, Lavigne JA, Dores GM. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast in the United States (1977 to 2006): A population-based cohort study. Breast Cancer Res. 2010;12:R54. doi: 10.1186/bcr2613. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Khoury T, Rosa M, Nayak A, Karabakhtsian R, Fadare O, Li Z, Turner B, Fang Y, Kumarapeli A, Li X, et al. Clinicopathologic predictors of clinical outcomes in mammary adenoid cystic carcinoma: A multi-institutional study. Mod Pathol. 2023;36:100006. doi: 10.1016/j.modpat.2022.100006. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Rakha EA, El-Sayed ME, Lee AHS, Elston CW, Grainge MJ, Hodi Z, Blamey RW, Ellis IO. Prognostic significance of nottingham histologic grade in invasive breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3153–3158. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.5986. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Giuliano AE, Edge SB, Hortobagyi GN. Eighth edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: Breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:1783–1785. doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-6486-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Teasdale G, Jennett B. Assessment of coma and impaired consciousness. A practical scale. Lancet. 1974;2:81–84. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(74)91639-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Otto RA. Tumours of the upper jaw. By Donald Harrison and Valerie J. Lund, Churchill Livingstone, New York, 1993, 351 pp, $150.00. Head Neck, 1995;17:275–275. doi: 10.1002/hed.2880170319. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Andreasen S. Molecular features of adenoid cystic carcinoma with an emphasis on microRNA expression. APMIS. 2018;126((Suppl 140)):S7–S57. doi: 10.1111/apm.12828. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Foote FW, Jr, Frazell EL. Tumors of the major salivary glands. Cancer. 1953;6:1065–1133. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(195311)6:6&#x0003c;1065::AID-CNCR2820060602&#x0003e;3.0.CO;2-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Ellington CL, Goodman M, Kono SA, Grist W, Wadsworth T, Chen AY, Owonikoko T, Ramalingam S, Shin DM, Khuri FR, et al. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck: Incidence and survival trends based on 1973–2007 surveillance, epidemiology, and end results data. Cancer. 2012;118:4444–4451. doi: 10.1002/cncr.27408. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Geschickter CF, Copeland MM. J B Lippincott; Philadelphia: 1945. Diseases of the breast: Diagnosis, pathology, treatment. [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Rosen PP. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. A morphologically heterogeneous neoplasm. Pathol Annu. 1989;24:237–254. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Jang S, Patel PN, Kimple RJ, McCulloch TM. Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck. Anticancer Res. 2017;37:3045–3052. doi: 10.21873/anticanres.11659. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Zhang W, Fang Y, Zhang Z, Wang J. Management of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: A single-institution study. Front Oncol. 2021;11:621012. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2021.621012. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Ji J, Zhang F, Duan F, Yang H, Hou J, Liu Y, Dai J, Liao Q, Chen X, Liu Q. Distinct clinicopathological and genomic features in solid and basaloid adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Sci Rep. 2022;12:8504. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-12583-w. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Choi Y, Kim SB, Yoon DH, Kim JY, Lee SW, Cho KJ. Clinical characteristics and prognostic factors of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the head and neck. Laryngoscope. 2013;123:1430–1438. doi: 10.1002/lary.23976. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Thomas DN, Asarian A, Xiao P. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. J Surg Case Rep. 2019;2019:rjy355. doi: 10.1093/jscr/rjy355. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Kim M, Lee DW, Im J, Suh KJ, Keam B, Moon HG, Im SA, Han W, Park IA, Noh DY. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: A case series of six patients and literature review. Cancer Res Treat. 2014;46:93–97. doi: 10.4143/crt.2014.46.1.93. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.McClenathan JH, de la Roza G. Adenoid cystic breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2002;183:646–649. doi: 10.1016/S0002-9610(02)00858-9. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Boujelbene N, Khabir A, Boujelbene N, Jeanneret Sozzi W, Mirimanoff RO, Khanfir K. Clinical review-breast adenoid cystic carcinoma. Breast. 2012;21:124–127. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2011.11.006. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Liu Z, Wang M, Wang Y, Shen X, Li C. Diagnosis of adenoid cystic carcinoma in the breast: A case report and literature review. Arch Med Sci. 2022;18:279–283. doi: 10.5114/aoms/144321. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Sheen-Chen SM, Eng HL, Chen WJ, Cheng YF, Ko SF. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: Truly uncommon or easily overlooked? Anticancer Res. 2005;25:455–458. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Santamaría G, Velasco M, Zanón G, Farrús B, Molina R, Solé M, Fernández PL. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: Mammographic appearance and pathologic correlation. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1998;171:1679–1683. doi: 10.2214/ajr.171.6.9843312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.Murakami R, Kumita SI, Yoshida T, Ishihara K, Kiriyama T, Hakozaki K, Yanagihara K, Iida S, Tsuchiya S. FDG-PET/CT in the diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer. Acta Radiol. 2012;53:12–16. doi: 10.1258/ar.2011.110245. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Yu Y, Schöder H, Zakeri K, Chen L, Kang JJ, McBride SM, Tsai CJ, Gelblum DY, Boyle JO, Cracchiolo JR, et al. Post-operative PET/CT improves the detection of early recurrence of squamous cell carcinomas of the oral cavity. Oral Oncol. 2023;141:106400. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2023.106400. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Kim B, Kim YC, Noh OK, Heo J, Lee HW, Kim JH, Lee JH, Kim JK, Cho O, Oh YT, Chun M. Diagnostic evaluation of simulation CT images for adjuvant radiotherapy in pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Br J Radiol. 2017;90:20170225. doi: 10.1259/bjr.20170225. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Koss LG, Brannan CD, Ashikari R. Histologic and ultrastructural features of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Cancer. 1970;26:1271–1279. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(197012)26:6&#x0003c;1271::AID-CNCR2820260614&#x0003e;3.0.CO;2-L. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Anthony PP, James PD. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: Prevalence, diagnostic criteria, and histogenesis. J Clin Pathol. 1975;28:647–655. doi: 10.1136/jcp.28.8.647. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.da Cruz Perez DE, de Abreu Alves F, Nobuko Nishimoto I, de Almeida OP, Kowalski LP. Prognostic factors in head and neck adenoid cystic carcinoma. Oral Oncol. 2006;42:139–146. doi: 10.1016/j.oraloncology.2005.06.024. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Ro JY, Silva EG, Stephen Gallager H. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Hum Pathol. 1987;18:1276–1281. doi: 10.1016/S0046-8177(87)80413-6. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 40.Shin SJ, Rosen PP. Solid variant of mammary adenoid cystic carcinoma with basaloid features: A study of nine cases. Am J Surg Pathol. 2002;26:413–420. doi: 10.1097/00000478-200204000-00002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 41.Tan PH, Ellis I, Allison K, Brogi E, Fox SB, Lakhani S, Lazar AJ, Morris EA, Sahin A, Salgado R, et al. The 2019 World Health Organization classification of tumours of the breast. Histopathology. 2020;77:181–185. doi: 10.1111/his.14091. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 42.Slodkowska E, Xu B, Kos Z, Bane A, Barnard M, Zubovits J, Iyengar P, Faragalla H, Turbin D, Williams P, et al. Predictors of outcome in mammary adenoid cystic carcinoma: A multi-institutional study. Am J Surg Pathol. 2020;44:214–223. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001378. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 43.Marco V, Garcia F, Rubio IT, Soler T, Ferrazza L, Roig I, Mendez I, Andreu X, Mínguez CG, Tresserra F. Adenoid cystic carcinoma and basaloid carcinoma of the breast: A clinicopathological study. Rev Esp Patol. 2021;54:242–249. doi: 10.1016/j.patol.2020.09.005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 44.Vasudevan G, John AM, D K V, Vallonthaiel AG. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast with late recurrence and high-grade transformation. BMJ Case Rep. 2023;16:e252336. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2022-252336. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 45.Collins K, Prieto VG, Aung PP. Unusual presentations of primary and metastatic adenoid cystic carcinoma involving the skin. Am J Dermatopathol. 2020;42:967–971. doi: 10.1097/DAD.0000000000001730. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 46.Sołek JM, Braun M, Kalwas M, Jesionek-Kupnicka D, Romańska HM. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast-an uncommon malignancy with unpredictable clinical behaviour. A case series of three patients. Contemp Oncol (Pozn) 2020;24:263–265. doi: 10.5114/wo.2020.99025. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 47.Mhamdi HA, Kourie HR, Jungels C, Aftimos P, Belbaraka R, Piccart-Gebhart M. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast-an aggressive presentation with pulmonary, kidney, and brain metastases: A case report. J Med Case Rep. 2017;11:303. doi: 10.1186/s13256-017-1459-0. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 48.D'Alfonso TM, Mosquera JM, Macdonald TY, Padilla J, Liu YF, Rubin MA, Shin SJ. MYB-NFIB gene fusion in adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast with special focus paid to the solid variant with basaloid features. Hum Pathol. 2014;45:2270–2280. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2014.07.013. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 49.Silva I, Tome V, Oliveira J. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast with cerebral metastisation: A clinical novelty. BMJ Case Rep. 2011;2011:bcr0820114692. doi: 10.1136/bcr.08.2011.4692. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 50.Vranić S, Bilalović N, Lee LMJ, Krušlin B, Lilleberg SL, Gatalica Z. PIK3CA and PTEN mutations in adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast metastatic to kidney. Hum Pathol. 2007;38:1425–1431. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2007.03.021. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 51.Millar BAM, Kerba M, Youngson B, Lockwood GA, Liu FF. The potential role of breast conservation surgery and adjuvant breast radiation for adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2004;87:225–232. doi: 10.1007/s10549-004-8693-z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 52.Herzberg AJ, Bossen EH, Walther PJ. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast metastatic to the kidney. A clinically symptomatic lesion requiring surgical management. Cancer. 1991;68:1015–1020. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19910901)68:5&#x0003c;1015::AID-CNCR2820680518&#x0003e;3.0.CO;2-Z. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 53.Koller M, Ram Z, Findler G, Lipshitz M. Brain metastasis: A rare manifestation of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Surg Neurol. 1986;26:470–472. doi: 10.1016/0090-3019(86)90260-0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 54.Peters GN, Wolff M. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast report of 11 new cases: Review of the literature and discussion of biological behavior. Cancer. 1983;52:680–686. doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19830815)52:4&#x0003c;680::AID-CNCR2820520420&#x0003e;3.0.CO;2-E. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 55.Lim SK, Kovi JK, Warner OG. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of breast with metastasis: A case report and review of the literature. J Natl Med Assoc. 1979;71:329–330. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 56.Verani RR, Van der Bel-Kahn J. Mammary adenoid cystic carcinoma with unusual features. Am J Clin Pathol. 1973;59:653–658. doi: 10.1093/ajcp/59.5.653. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 57.Elsner B. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Review of the literature and clinico-pathologic study of seven patients. Pathol Eur. 1970;5:357–364. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 58.O'Kell RT. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast. Mo Med. 1964;61:855–858. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 59.Nayer HR. Case report section; cylindroma of the breast with pulmonary metastases. Dis Chest. 1957;31:324–327. doi: 10.1378/chest.31.3.324. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 60.Zhu H, Doğan BE. American joint committee on cancer's staging system for breast cancer, eighth edition: Summary for clinicians. Eur J Breast Health. 2021;17:234–238. doi: 10.4274/ejbh.galenos.2021.2021-4-3. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 61.Canyilmaz E, Uslu GH, Memiş Y, Bahat Z, Yildiz K, Yoney A. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: A case report and literature review. Oncol Lett. 2014;7:1599–1601. doi: 10.3892/ol.2014.1945. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 62.Vranic S, Bender R, Palazzo J, Gatalica Z. A review of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast with emphasis on its molecular and genetic characteristics. Hum Pathol. 2013;44:301–309. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2012.01.002. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 63.Badve S, Dabbs DJ, Schnitt SJ, Baehner FL, Decker T, Eusebi V, Fox SB, Ichihara S, Jacquemier J, Lakhani SR, et al. Basal-like and triple-negative breast cancers: A critical review with an emphasis on the implications for pathologists and oncologists. Mod Pathol. 2011;24:157–167. doi: 10.1038/modpathol.2010.200. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 64.Nielsen TO, Hsu FD, Jensen K, Cheang M, Karaca G, Hu Z, Hernandez-Boussard T, Livasy C, Cowan D, Dressler L, et al. Immunohistochemical and clinical characterization of the basal-like subtype of invasive breast carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:5367–5374. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-0220. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 65.Wetterskog D, Lopez-Garcia MA, Lambros MB, A'Hern R, Geyer FC, Milanezi F, Cabral MC, Natrajan R, Gauthier A, Shiu KK, et al. Adenoid cystic carcinomas constitute a genomically distinct subgroup of triple-negative and basal-like breast cancers. J Pathol. 2012;226:84–96. doi: 10.1002/path.2974. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 66.Kilickap S, Kaya Y, Yucel B, Tuncer E, Babacan NA, Elagoz S. Higher Ki67 expression is associates with unfavorable prognostic factors and shorter survival in breast cancer. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2014;15:1381–1385. doi: 10.7314/APJCP.2014.15.3.1381. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 67.Davey MG, Hynes SO, Kerin MJ, Miller N, Lowery AJ. Ki-67 as a prognostic biomarker in invasive breast cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2021;13:4455. doi: 10.3390/cancers13174455. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 68.Al Zubidi M, Abdulhussain MM, Mohsin AS. Assessment of the relationship between Ki-67 expression and different clinicopathological factors of adenoid cystic carcinoma: A retrospective immunohistochemical study. Int J Biomed. 2025;15:141–145. [Google Scholar]
  • 69.Bussari S, Jeergal PA, Sarode M, Namazi NA, Kulkarni PG, Deshmukh A, Kulkarni D. Evaluation of proliferative marker Ki-67 in adenoid cystic carcinoma: A retrospective study. J Contemp Dent Pract. 2019;20:211–215. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10024-2499. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 70.Persson M, Andrén Y, Mark J, Horlings HM, Persson F, Stenman G. Recurrent fusion of MYB and NFIB transcription factor genes in carcinomas of the breast and head and neck. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2009;106:18740–18744. doi: 10.1073/pnas.0909114106. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 71.Massé J, Truntzer C, Boidot R, Khalifa E, Pérot G, Velasco V, Mayeur L, Billerey-Larmonier C, Blanchard L, Charitansky H, et al. Solid-type adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast, a distinct molecular entity enriched in NOTCH and CREBBP mutations. Mod Pathol. 2020;33:1041–1055. doi: 10.1038/s41379-019-0425-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 72.Arpino G, Clark GM, Mohsin S, Bardou VJ, Elledge RM. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: Molecular markers, treatment, and clinical outcome. Cancer. 2002;94:2119–2127. doi: 10.1002/cncr.10455. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 73.Marchiò C, Weigelt B, Reis-Filho JS. Adenoid cystic carcinomas of the breast and salivary glands (or ‘The strange case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde’ of exocrine gland carcinomas) J Clin Pathol. 2010;63:220–228. doi: 10.1136/jcp.2009.073908. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 74.Cantù G. Adenoid cystic carcinoma. An indolent but aggressive tumour. Part A: From aetiopathogenesis to diagnosis. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2021;41:206–214. doi: 10.14639/0392-100X-N1379. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 75.Page DL. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of breast, a special histopathologic type with excellent prognosis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;93:189–190. doi: 10.1007/s10549-005-5198-3. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 76.Wilson WB, Spell JP. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of breast: A case with recurrence and regional metastasis. Ann Surg. 1967;166:861–864. doi: 10.1097/00000658-196711000-00021. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 77.Wang S, Ji X, Wei Y, Yu Z, Li N. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: Review of the literature and report of two cases. Oncol Lett. 2012;4:701–704. doi: 10.3892/ol.2012.886. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 78.Hodgson NC, Lytwyn A, Bacopulos S, Elavathil L. Adenoid cystic breast carcinoma: High rates of margin positivity after breast conserving surgery. Am J Clin Oncol. 2010;33:28–31. doi: 10.1097/COC.0b013e31819fdfc8. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 79.Khanfir K, Kallel A, Villette S, Belkacémi Y, Vautravers C, Nguyen T, Miller R, Li YX, Taghian AG, Boersma L, et al. Management of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: A rare cancer network study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2012;82:2118–2124. doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2010.12.008. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 80.Li L, Zhang D, Ma F. Adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast may be exempt from adjuvant chemotherapy. J Clin Med. 2022;11:4477. doi: 10.3390/jcm11154477. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 81.Gomez-Seoane A, Davis A, Oyasiji T. Treatment of adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: Is postoperative radiation getting its due credit? Breast. 2021;59:358–366. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2021.08.001. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 82.Gradishar WJ, Moran MS, Abraham J, Abramson V, Aft R, Agnese D, Allison KH, Anderson B, Bailey J, Burstein HJ, et al. Breast Cancer, Version 3.2024, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2024;22:331–357. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2024.0035. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 83.Schulz-Costello K, Fan F, Schmolze D, Arias-Stella JA, III, Taylor L, Tseng J, Afkhami M, Rand JG, Jones V, Farmah P, Han M. Solid basaloid adenoid cystic carcinoma of the breast: A high-grade triple negative breast carcinoma which rarely responds to neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Hum Pathol. 2025;157:105760. doi: 10.1016/j.humpath.2025.105760. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

Supporting Data
Supporting Data
Supplementary_Data2.pdf (251.2KB, pdf)

Data Availability Statement

The data generated in the present study may be requested from the corresponding author.


Articles from Oncology Letters are provided here courtesy of Spandidos Publications

RESOURCES