Comparative Evaluation of Cytomorphological Robinson’s Grading with Elston and Ellis’ Nottingham Modified Bloom-Richardson Histopathological Grading of Breast Carcinoma: A Hospital-Based Study of 52 Cases

Authors

  • Jupita Deka Department of Pathology, Gauhati Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati, Assam, India
  • Naima Aziz Department of Pathology, Gauhati Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati, Assam, India
  • Mili Basumatary Department of Pathology, Gauhati Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati, Assam, India
  • Manjula Choudhury Department of Pathology, Gauhati Medical College and Hospital, Guwahati, Assam, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.21276/apalm.3484

Keywords:

Fine Needle Aspiration Cytology, Breast carcinoma, Bloom Richardson's grading, Robinson's grading

Abstract

Background: Breast carcinoma is one of the most common cancers in women. Fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) is routinely used as an initial investigation of choice in the rapid diagnosis of breast carcinoma. Among various cytological grading systems, Robinson’s grading is most commonly used for breast carcinoma. It provides information about prognosis and also helps in selecting therapy. The aim of this study is to correlate Robinson’s cytological grading with Bloom Richardson histological grading.

Materials and Methods: In the present study, 52 cases of FNAC smears of breast carcinoma were graded according to the Robinson’s cytological grading system. Corresponding histology sections were graded according to the Elston and Ellis’ Nottingham modification of the Bloom Richardson method. Correlation between cytological and histological grading was done.

Results: The maximum number of cases were in the age group of 41 to 50 years. Cytologically, 53.85% of cases were grade II, 38.46% were grade I, and 7.69% were grade III. Histologically, 50.00%, 44.23%, and 5.77% of cases were grade II, I, and III, respectively. The concordance rate between grade II tumors in cytology and histology was 71%; for grade I tumors, it was 70%; and for grade III tumors, it was 50%. The absolute concordance rate was 69.2%.

Conclusion: Cytological grading of breast carcinoma is simple, feasible, and provides valuable prognostic information. The cytological grading method is comparable with the histologic grading system. It might provide information about the aggressiveness of the tumor and is a useful parameter in selecting neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast carcinoma.

References

1. Pradhan SP, Dash A, Choudhury S, Mishra DP. Robinson’s cytological grading on aspirates of breast carcinoma and correlation with Bloom-Richardson’s histological grading. J Evid Based Med Healthc. 2017 Jan 5;4(2):86–91.

2. Ahuja S, Malviya A. Categorization of breast fine needle aspirates using the International Academy of Cytology Yokohama system along with assessment of risk of malignancy and diagnostic accuracy in a tertiary care centre. J Cytol. 2021 Aug;38(3):158.

3. Gandhi H, Maru A, Shah N, Mansuriya RK, Rathod G, Parmar P. Correlation of Robinson’s cytological grading with Elston and Ellis’ Nottingham modification of Bloom Richardson score of histopathology for breast carcinoma. Maedica. 2023 Mar;18(1):55.

4. Khan N, Afroz N, Rana F, Khan MA. Role of cytologic grading in prognostication of invasive breast carcinoma. J Cytol. 2009 Jun;26(2):65.

5. Patil VS, Hippargi SB, Dwarampudi RS, Rodrigues L. Correlation of various cytological grading systems with histopathological grading in breast carcinoma. Ann Pathol Lab Med. 2018 Apr;5(4):A322–8.

6. Pandya AN, Shah NP. Comparative evaluation of Robinson’s cytological grading with Elston and Ellis’ Nottingham modification of Bloom Richardson histopathology grading for breast carcinoma. Natl J Community Med. 2012 Sep;3(3):491–5.

7. Rosa M, Mohammadi A, Masood S. The value of fine needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis and prognostic assessment of palpable breast lesions. Diagn Cytopathol. 2012 Jan;40(1):26–34.

8. Phukan JP, Sinha A, Deka JP. Cytological grading of breast carcinoma on fine needle aspirates and its relation with histological grading. South Asian J Cancer. 2015 Mar;4(1):32.

9. Sinha SK, Sinha N, Bandyopadhyay R, Mondal SK. Robinson’s cytological grading on aspirates of breast carcinoma: correlation with Bloom Richardson’s histological grading. J Cytol. 2009 Dec;26(4):140.

10. Hoda RS, Hoda SA. Fine-needle aspiration cytology: Author: Svante R. Orell, Gregory F. Sterrett, and Darrel Whitaker, Churchill Livingstone, Philadelphia, 2005. Diagn Cytopathol. 2006;34(6):452.

11. Khadka D, Karki S, Agrawal M, Agrawal R. Cytological grading of breast carcinoma and its correlation with histological grading. Eur J Med Health Sci. 2024 Jul;6(4):28–32.

12. Jivani T, Bhatt M, Shukla A, Godhani S. Robinson’s cytological grading of breast carcinoma: it’s prognostic implications and correlation with Bloom Richardson’s histological grading of breast cancer. Int J Res Med Sci. 2024 Jan;12(2):445–50.

13. Devi PU, Prasad U, Lakshmi AB, Rao GS. A study of correlation of expression of ER, PR and HER2/neu receptor status with clinico-pathological parameters in breast carcinoma at a tertiary care centre. Int J Res Med Sci. 2015;3(1):165–73.

14. Sood N, Nigam JS, Yadav P, Rewri S, Sharma A, Omhare A, et al. Comparative study of cytomorphological Robinson’s grading for breast carcinoma with modified Bloom-Richardson histopathological grading. Pathol Res Int. 2013;2013:146542.

15. Wani FA, Bhardwaj S, Kumar D, Katoch P. Cytological grading of breast cancers and comparative evaluation of two grading systems. J Cytol. 2010 Apr;27(2):55–8.

16. Dash A, Mohanty R, Mallik R, Dash K. Aspiration smear pattern as a predictor of biological behaviour in breast carcinoma. J Cytol. 2005 Mar;22(1):19.

17. Robles-Frías A, González-Cámpora R, Martínez-Parra D, Robles-Frías MJ, Vázquez-Cerezuela T, Otal-Salaverri C, et al. Robinson cytologic grading of invasive ductal breast carcinoma: correlation with histologic grading and regional lymph node metastasis. Acta Cytol. 2005;49(2):149–53.

18. Lingegowda JB, MuddeGowda PH, Ramakantha CK, Chandrasekar HR. Cytohistological correlation of grading in breast carcinoma. Diagn Cytopathol. 2011 Apr;39(4):251–7.

19. Das AK, Kapila K, Dinda AK, Verma K. Comparative evaluation of grading of breast carcinomas in fine needle aspirates by two methods. Indian J Med Res. 2003 Dec;118:247–50.

20. Chhabra S, Singh PK, Agarwal A, Bhagoliwal A, Singh SN. Cytological grading of breast carcinoma – a multivariate regression analysis. J Cytol. 2005;22:62–5.

21. Saha K, Raychaudhuri G, Chattopadhyay BK, Das I. Comparative evaluation of six cytological grading systems in breast carcinoma. J Cytol. 2013 Jun;30(2):87.

22. Rekha TS, Nandini NM, Dhar M. Validity of different cytological grading systems of breast carcinoma: a hospital-based study in South India. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 2011;12(11):3013–6.

23. Dalton LW, Page DL, Dupont WD. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma: a reproducibility study. Cancer. 1994 Jun 1;73(11):2765–70.

24. Landis JR, Koch GG. The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977 Mar;33(1):159–74.

Downloads

Published

31-05-2025

How to Cite

1.
Deka J, Aziz N, Basumatary M, Choudhury M. Comparative Evaluation of Cytomorphological Robinson’s Grading with Elston and Ellis’ Nottingham Modified Bloom-Richardson Histopathological Grading of Breast Carcinoma: A Hospital-Based Study of 52 Cases. Ann of Pathol and Lab Med [Internet]. 2025 May 31 [cited 2025 Jul. 30];12(5):A97-104. Available from: https://pacificejournals.com/journal/index.php/apalm/article/view/3484

Issue

Section

Original Article