Definition and research guide
This page combines a MeSH definition, publication statistics and selected research abstracts. It is a starting point for reading the literature, not a medical textbook or a systematic evidence review.
Content available: 4 complete abstracts (695 words), 10 references. Full article text is not stored or reproduced here; follow the PMID, DOI or PMC links to read the original sources and their access terms.
Definition
A type of connective tissue neoplasm typically arising from intralobular stroma of the breast. It is characterized by the rapid enlargement of an asymmetric firm mobile mass. Histologically, its leaf-like stromal clefts are lined by epithelial cells. Rare phyllodes tumor of the prostate is also known.
Definition: NLM Medical Subject Headings (MeSH) scope note (Public domain (U.S. National Library of Medicine); attribution requested). View the MeSH record.
Also known as: Phyllodes Tumors; Tumor, Phyllodes; Tumors, Phyllodes; Cystosarcoma Phyllodes; Cystosarcoma Phylloides; Malignant Cystosarcoma Phyllodes; Cystosarcoma Phyllodes, Malignant.
Where it fits in the MeSH classification
- Broader topics
- Sarcoma
Related concepts
- Epithelial Cells
Research landscape
PubMed indexes 2,243 records tagged with the MeSH heading “Phyllodes Tumor” (counts retrieved 2026-10-29). 412 of them (18.4%) were published from 2020 onward, and the busiest period so far is through 1999 with 870 records.
Reviews account for 238 records (10.6%) and meta-analyses for 7. Randomized controlled trials number 2 (0.1%) as a share of all records on the topic. Randomized trials make up only a small share of this literature, so much of what is known comes from laboratory, observational or descriptive work.
Show the data
| Period | Records |
|---|---|
| through 1999 | 870 |
| 2000-2009 | 406 |
| 2010-2019 | 555 |
| 2020 onward | 412 |
Publication-type chart data
| Type | Records | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Reviews | 238 | 10.6% |
| Meta-analyses | 7 | 0.3% |
| Randomized controlled trials | 2 | 0.1% |
Method: PubMed query "Phyllodes Tumor"[MeSH Terms] with publication-type and date filters, retrieved 2026-10-29.
Reading the evidence in cancer and oncology
Cancer research spans very different kinds of evidence. Laboratory studies in cell lines and animal models reveal mechanisms but often do not translate to patients. Early-phase trials mainly test safety and dosing, while phase 3 randomized trials and their meta-analyses are the usual basis for treatment conclusions. Outcomes also differ in meaning: tumour shrinkage, progression-free survival and overall survival are not interchangeable, and screening studies can be distorted by lead-time and overdiagnosis. When reading a result, check the cancer type and stage studied, the comparison treatment, and which outcome was measured.
Evidence from open-access studies
These open-access studies come from PubMed’s best-match results for this heading (papers whose main topic it is), ranked here by citation count, with one recent addition. Each abstract is reproduced in full under its recorded open licence so that you can read the authors’ own words. They illustrate the literature; they are not a systematic summary of it. Citation counts measure attention, not reliability or clinical benefit.
| Study / authors | Year | Source label / design | Europe PMC citations | Licence / source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| First International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions) | 2016 | Research article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 104 | cc by PMID 27522516 · DOI · PMC5012144 |
| Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy for patients with breast phyllodes tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis | 2019 | Meta-analysis Design not recorded in structured metadata | 70 | cc by PMID 31014268 · DOI · PMC6480723 |
| Third International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions) | 2023 | Review article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 65 | cc by PMID 37330436 · DOI · PMC10326140 |
| Molecular pathology of phyllodes tumours of the breast-much more than MED12 | 2026 | Review article Design not recorded in structured metadata | 2 | cc by PMID 41611646 · DOI · PMC13051455 |
First International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions) [1]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- The purpose of this study is to obtain a consensus for the therapy of B3 lesions.
- Closing excerpt
- Minimally invasive management of selected B3 lesions with therapeutic VAB is acceptable as an alternative to first-line surgical excision.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (184 words)
The purpose of this study is to obtain a consensus for the therapy of B3 lesions. The first International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions) including atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), flat epithelial atypia (FEA), classical lobular neoplasia (LN), papillary lesions (PL), benign phyllodes tumors (PT), and radial scars (RS) took place in January 2016 in Zurich, Switzerland organized by the International Breast Ultrasound School and the Swiss Minimally Invasive Breast Biopsy group-a subgroup of the Swiss Society of Senology. Consensus recommendations for the management and follow-up surveillance of these B3 lesions were developed and areas of research priorities were identified. The consensus recommendation for FEA, LN, PL, and RS diagnosed on core needle biopsy or vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB) is to therapeutically excise the lesion seen on imaging by VAB and no longer by open surgery, with follow-up surveillance imaging for 5 years. The consensus recommendation for ADH and PT is, with some exceptions, therapeutic first-line open surgical excision. Minimally invasive management of selected B3 lesions with therapeutic VAB is acceptable as an alternative to first-line surgical excision.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 27522516 · DOI · PMC5012144
Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy for patients with breast phyllodes tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis [2]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- BackgroundAs the efficacy of radiotherapy and chemotherapy for treatment of phyllodes tumors (PTs) remains unclear, this study aimed to review all available data and evaluate the roles of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in PT treatment.
- Closing excerpt
- 6% (p ConclusionOur findings suggest that radiotherapy is effective in achieving local disease control and preventing metastasis.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (126 words)
BackgroundAs the efficacy of radiotherapy and chemotherapy for treatment of phyllodes tumors (PTs) remains unclear, this study aimed to review all available data and evaluate the roles of radiotherapy and chemotherapy in PT treatment.MethodsWe performed a comprehensive search of databases, including PubMed, Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. The outcomes of interest included the local recurrence (LR) rate, metastasis rate, disease-free survival rate and overall survival rate.ResultsSeventeen studies enrolling 696 patients were included in this random effect meta-analysis. Subgroup analysis and meta-regression were also conducted to determine study heterogeneity. A pooled local recurrence rate of 8% (95% CI: 1-22%) was observed with a statistical heterogeneity of I2 = 86.6% (p ConclusionOur findings suggest that radiotherapy is effective in achieving local disease control and preventing metastasis.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 31014268 · DOI · PMC6480723
Third International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions) [3]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- The heterogeneous group of B3 lesions in the breast harbors lesions with different malignant potential and progression risk.
- Closing excerpt
- Due to the higher risk of upgrade into malignancy, OE remains the preferred approach after the diagnosis of ADH.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (265 words)
The heterogeneous group of B3 lesions in the breast harbors lesions with different malignant potential and progression risk. As several studies about B3 lesions have been published since the last Consensus in 2018, the 3rd International Consensus Conference discussed the six most relevant B3 lesions (atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH), flat epithelial atypia (FEA), classical lobular neoplasia (LN), radial scar (RS), papillary lesions (PL) without atypia, and phyllodes tumors (PT)) and made recommendations for diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. Following a presentation of current data of each B3 lesion, the international and interdisciplinary panel of 33 specialists and key opinion leaders voted on the recommendations for further management after core-needle biopsy (CNB) and vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB). In case of B3 lesion diagnosis on CNB, OE was recommended in ADH and PT, whereas in the other B3 lesions, vacuum-assisted excision was considered an equivalent alternative to OE. In ADH, most panelists (76%) recommended an open excision (OE) after diagnosis on VAB, whereas observation after a complete VAB-removal on imaging was accepted by 34%. In LN, the majority of the panel (90%) preferred observation following complete VAB-removal. Results were similar in RS (82%), PL (100%), and FEA (100%). In benign PT, a slim majority (55%) also recommended an observation after a complete VAB-removal. VAB with subsequent active surveillance can replace an open surgical intervention for most B3 lesions (RS, FEA, PL, PT, and LN). Compared to previous recommendations, there is an increasing trend to a de-escalating strategy in classical LN. Due to the higher risk of upgrade into malignancy, OE remains the preferred approach after the diagnosis of ADH.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 37330436 · DOI · PMC10326140
Molecular pathology of phyllodes tumours of the breast-much more than MED12 [4]
Abstract reading summary — source excerpts
- Opening excerpt
- Phyllodes tumours of the breast present challenges in their diagnosis, classification and management.
- Closing excerpt
- This review summarizes the molecular pathology of phyllodes tumours, the use of these data in developing a model of phyllodes tumour pathogenesis, and how molecular pathology might be applied to aid diagnosis and guide treatment in this rare tumour type.
- Interpretation limits
- Verbatim excerpts from the authors’ abstract; the closing excerpt may describe a finding, limitation or recommendation. Design, population, effect size and uncertainty have not been independently extracted or appraised. Read the complete abstract and linked paper before interpreting the findings.
Read complete abstract (120 words)
Phyllodes tumours of the breast present challenges in their diagnosis, classification and management. Further understanding of the molecular changes underpinning these tumours may lead to more precise classification and potential treatment options. Similar to fibroadenomas, MED12 is the most frequently mutated gene in phyllodes tumour. However, in addition, there is a spectrum of molecular alterations from benign to malignant phyllodes tumours with increasing genomic complexity, high level copy number alterations and aberrations of cancer driver genes in malignant phyllodes tumours. This review summarizes the molecular pathology of phyllodes tumours, the use of these data in developing a model of phyllodes tumour pathogenesis, and how molecular pathology might be applied to aid diagnosis and guide treatment in this rare tumour type.
Abstract reproduced from the open-access article under the recorded cc by licence; © the authors. PMID 41611646 · DOI · PMC13051455
Key reviews and meta-analyses
The most cited review-type papers among PubMed’s best-match results for this heading, listed with bibliographic details only. Follow the links for the full text and access terms.
- Research article Phyllodes tumours of the breast: a consensus review [5]
- Research article Phyllodes tumours [6]
- Research article Phyllodes Tumor of the Breast: Histopathologic Features, Differential Diagnosis, and Molecular/Genetic Updates [7]
- Research article Phyllodes tumours of the breast: a clinicopathological review of thirty-two cases [8]
- Research article Breast phyllodes tumor: a review of literature and a single center retrospective series analysis [9]
- Research article Local Recurrence of Benign, Borderline, and Malignant Phyllodes Tumors of the Breast: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis [10]
References
- Rageth CJ, O'Flynn EA, Comstock C, Kurtz C, Kubik R, Madjar H, et al.. First International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions). . 2016. PMID 27522516 · DOI · PMC5012144
- Chao X, Chen K, Zeng J, Bi Z, Guo M, Chen Y, et al.. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy for patients with breast phyllodes tumors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. . 2019. PMID 31014268 · DOI · PMC6480723
- Elfgen C, Leo C, Kubik-Huch RA, Muenst S, Schmidt N, Quinn C, et al.. Third International Consensus Conference on lesions of uncertain malignant potential in the breast (B3 lesions). . 2023. PMID 37330436 · DOI · PMC10326140
- Pang JB, Gorringe KL, Tan PH, Fox SB. Molecular pathology of phyllodes tumours of the breast-much more than MED12. . 2026. PMID 41611646 · DOI · PMC13051455
- Tan BY, Acs G, Apple SK, Badve S, Bleiweiss IJ, Brogi E, et al.. Phyllodes tumours of the breast: a consensus review. Histopathology. 2016. PMID 26768026 · DOI · PMC5027876
- Parker SJ, Harries SA. Phyllodes tumours. Postgrad Med J. 2001. PMID 11423590 · DOI · PMC1760996
- Zhang Y, Kleer CG. Phyllodes Tumor of the Breast: Histopathologic Features, Differential Diagnosis, and Molecular/Genetic Updates. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2016. PMID 27362571 · DOI
- Moffat CJ, Pinder SE, Dixon AR, Elston CW, Blamey RW, Ellis IO. Phyllodes tumours of the breast: a clinicopathological review of thirty-two cases. Histopathology. 1995. PMID 8522284 · DOI
- Spitaleri G, Toesca A, Botteri E, Bottiglieri L, Rotmensz N, Boselli S, et al.. Breast phyllodes tumor: a review of literature and a single center retrospective series analysis. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2013. PMID 23871531 · DOI
- Lu Y, Chen Y, Zhu L, Cartwright P, Song E, Jacobs L, et al.. Local Recurrence of Benign, Borderline, and Malignant Phyllodes Tumors of the Breast: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019. PMID 30617873 · DOI
About this article
- Sources
- NLM Medical Subject Headings (definition, synonyms); NCBI PubMed (counts, identifiers); Europe PMC (open-access abstracts and citation counts).
- Verification
- Every reference was resolved against PubMed on 2026-10-31; title, year and DOI matched.
- Review state
- automated source verified; no human expert review has been recorded yet.
- Version
- 1, last updated 2026-10-29.
See how EvidenceLib is built. Spotted an error? Email support@evidencehelix.com.
Evidence strength
EvidenceHelix's computed view of the study designs behind this topic: how common meta-analyses, randomized trials and reviews are, how recent the literature is, and a plain-language reading. It describes the design mix of the literature. It is not a quality appraisal of any study, and it is not medical advice.