References

1. Sloane JP, National Co-ordinating Group for Breast Screening Pathology. Consistency of histopathological reporting of breast lesions detected by screening: findings of the UK National External Quality Assessment (EQA) Scheme. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30: 1414-1419.
2. Sloane JP, European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology. Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists in categorizing ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast using five classifications. Hum Pathol 1998; 29: 1056-1062.
3. Sloane JP, European Commission Working Group on Breast Screening Pathology. Consistency achieved by 23 European pathologists for 12 countries in diagnosing breast disease and reporting prognostic features of carcinomas. Virchows Arch (A) Pathol Anat 1999; 434: 3-10.
4. Elston CW, Ellis IO. Systemic Pathology 3E The Breast; vol 13. London: Churchill Livingstone, 1998.
5. Elston CW. Breast Cancer Screening. In: Anthony PP, ed. Diagnostic Pitfalls in Histopathology and Cytopathology Practice. London: Greenwich Medical Media, 1998: vol, 39-53. 
6. European Commission. European Guidelines for Quality Assurance in Mammography Screening. de Wolf CJM, Perry NM, eds. 2nd ed; Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, 1996. 
7. Royal College of Pathologists Working Group for Breast Screening Pathology. Pathology Reporting in Breast Cancer Screening. 2nd ed; NHS BSP Publications No 3, 1995. 
8. Royal College of Pathologists Working Group for Breast Screening Pathology. Guidelines for Pathologists. 2nd ed; NHS BSP Publications No 3, 1997. 
9. Spencer NJB, Evans AJ, Galea M, et al. Pathological-radiological correlations in benign lesions excised during a breast screening programme. Clin Radiol 1994; 49: 853-856.
10. Dahlstrom JE, Jain S, Sutton T, Sutton S. Diagnostic accuracy of stereotactic core biopsy in a mammographic breast cancer screening programme. Histopathol 1996; 28: 421-427.
11. Nguyen M, McCombs ME, Ghandehari S, et al. An update on core needle biopsy for radiologically detected breast lesions. Cancer 1996; 78: 2340-2345.
12. Litherland JC, Evans AJ, Wilson ARM. The impact of core biopsy on pre-operative diagnosis rate of screen detected cancers. Clin Radiol 1996; 51: 562-565.
13. Sloane JP, Mayers MM. Carcinoma and atypical hyperplasia in radial scars and complex sclerosing lesions: importance of lesion size and patient age. Histopathol 1993; 23: 225-231.
14. Simpson JF, Page DL, Dupont WD. Apocrine adenosis - a mimic of mammary carcinoma. Am J Surg Pathol 1990;3:289-299.
15. Resbridge SA, Millis RR. Carcinoma in situ involving sclerosing adenosis: a mimic of invasive breast carcinoma. Histopatho 1995; 27: 269-273.
16. Eusebi V, Foschini MP, Betts CM, et al. Microglandlar adenosis, apocrine adenosis and tubular carcinoma of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol 1993; 17: 99-109.
17. Millis RR, Eusebi V. Microglandular adenosis of the breast. Adv in Anat Pathol 1995; 2: 10-18.
18. Carter D, Orr SL, Merino MJ. Intracystic papillary carcinoma of the breast. After mastectomy, radiotherapy or excisional biopsy alone. Cancer 1983; 52: 14-19.
19. Lakhani SR, Collins N, Stratton MR, Sloane JP. Atypical ductal hyperplasia of the breast: clonal proliferation with loss of heterozygosity on chromosomes 16q and 17p. J Clin Pathol 1995; 48: 611-615.
20. Lakhani SR, Slack DN, Hamoudi RA, et al. Detection of allelic imbalance indicates that a proportion of mammary hyperplasia of usual type are clonal neoplastic proliferations. Lab Invest 1996; 74: 129-135.
21. Stratton MR, Collins N, Lakhani SR, Sloane JP. Loss of heterozygosity in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Pathol 1995; 175: 195-201.
22. Lakhani SR. The transition from hyperplasia to invasive carcinoma of the breast. J Pathol 1999; 187: 272-278.
23. Page DL, Dupont WD, Rogers LW, Rados MS. Atypical hyperplastic lesions of the female breast. A long-term follow-up study. Cancer 1985; 55: 2698-2708.
24. Page DL, Rogers LW. Combined histologic and cytologic criteria for the diagnosis of mammary atypical hyperplasia. Hum Pathol 1992; 23: 1095-1097.
25. Rosai J. Borderline epithelial lesions of the breast. Am J Surg Pathol 1991; 15: 209-221.
26. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Tavassoli FA, et al. Interobserver reproducibility in the diagnosis of ductal proliferative breast lesions using standardised criteria. Am J Surg Pathol 1992; 16: 1133-1143.
27. Liberman L, Cohen MA, Dershaw DD, et al. Atypical ductal hyperplasia diagnosed at stereotaxic core biopsy of breast lesions: an indication for surgical biopsy. Ajr Am J Roentgenol 1995; 164: 1111-1113.
28. Holland R, Peterse JL, Millis RR, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ: a proposal for a new classification. Semin Diagn Pathol 1994; 11: 167-207.
29. Poller DN, Silverstein MJ, Galea M, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. A proposal for a new simplified histological classification. Association between cellular proliferation and c-erbB-2 protein expression. Mod Pathol 1994; 7: 257-262.
30. Silverstein MJ, Poller DN, Waisman JR, et al. Prognostic classification of breast ductal carcinoma-in-situ. Lancet 1995; 345: 1154-1157.
31. Rajan PB, Cranor ML, Rosen PP. Cystosarcoma phyllodes in adolescents and young women: a study of 45 cases. Mod Pathol 1997; 10: 24A.
32. Moffat CJC, Pinder SE, Dixon AR, et al. Phyllodes tumours of the breast: a clinicopathological review of 32 cases. Histopathol 1995; 27: 205-218.
33. Pietruska M, Barnes L. Cystosarcoma phyllodes. A clinico-pathologic analysis of 42 cases. Cancer 1978; 41: 1974-1983.
34. Ward RM, Evans HL. Cystosarcoma phyllodes. A clinicopathologic study of 26 cases. Cancer 1986; 58: 2282-2289.
35. Girling AC, Hanby AM, Millis RR. Radiation and other pathological changes in breast tissue after conservation treatment for carcinoma. J Clin Pathol 1990; 43: 152-156.
36. Schnitt SJ, Connolly JL, Harris JR, Cohen RB. Radiation-induced changes in the breast. Hum Pathol 1984; 15: 545-550.
37. Filomena CA, Jordan AG, Ehya H. Needle aspiration cytology of the irradiated breast. Diagn Cytopathol 1992; 8: 327-332.
38. Kennedy S, Merino MJ, Swain SM, Lippman ME. The effects of hormonal and chemotherapy on tumoral and non neoplastic breast tissue. Hum Pathol 1990; 21: 192 - 198.
39. Rasbridge SA, Gillett CE, Syemour AM, et al. The effects of chemotherapy on morphology, cellular proliferation, apoptosis and oncoprotein expression in primary breast carcinoma. Br J Cancer 1994; 70: 335-341.
40. Brifford M, Spyratos F, et al. Sequential cytopunctures during preoperative chemotherapy for primary breast carcinoma. Cytomorphologic changes, initial tumor ploidy, and tumor regression. Cancer 1989; 63: 631-637.
41. Malberger E, Edoute Y, Toledano O, Sapir D. Fine-needle aspiration and cytologic findings of surgical scar lesion in women with breast cancer. Cancer 1992; 69: 148-152.
42. Solin LJ, Fowble BL, Troupin RH, Goodman RL. Biopsy results of new calcifications in the postirradiated breast. Cancer 1989; 63: 1956-1961.
43. Clark GM. Do we really need prognostic factors for breast cancer? Br Cancer Res Treat 1994; 30: 117-126.
44. Galea MH, Blamey RW, Elston CW, et al. The Nottingham Prognostic Index in primary breast cancer. Br Cancer Res Treat 1992; 22: 207-219.
45. Connolly JL, Fechner RE, Kempson RL, et al. Recommendations for the reporting of breast carcinoma. Hum Pathol 1996; 27: 220-224.
46. Dalton LW, Page DL, Dupont WD. Histologic grading of breast carcinoma: a reproducibility study. Cancer 1994; 73: 2765-2770.
47. Frierson HF, Wolber RA, Berean KW, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of the Nottingham modification of the Bloom and Richardson histological grading scheme for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. Am J Clin Pathol 1995; 105: 195-198.
48. Robbins P, Pinder S, de Klerk N, et al. Histological grading of breast carcinomas. A study of interobserver agreement. Hum Pathol 1995; 26: 873-879.
49. Lee AHS, Ellis IO, Pinder SE, et al. Pathological assessment of sentinel lymph node biopsies in patients with breast cancer. Virchows Arch (A) Pathol Anat 2000;436: 97-101.