BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy examination is the current modality for evaluating the axilla in breast cancer patients. A nomogram has been developed to predict the likelihood of non-SLN metastases after a positive SLN biopsy examination. The purpose of this study was to validate the nomogram in a community breast center. METHODS: A prospective database was used to identify breast cancer patients with a positive SLN biopsy examination who underwent a completion axillary lymph node dissection. The nomogram was used to calculate the probability of having non-SLN involvement, and was compared with the observed numbers. RESULTS: The observed incidence of non-SLN involvement showed excellent correlation with the nomogram predicted probability (chi-square test statistic = 5.87; P = .83). CONCLUSIONS: Predicting the risk of additional nodal metastases allows the surgeon and patient to make an individualized decision regarding the need for completion axillary lymph node dissection.
BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy examination is the current modality for evaluating the axilla in breast cancerpatients. A nomogram has been developed to predict the likelihood of non-SLN metastases after a positive SLN biopsy examination. The purpose of this study was to validate the nomogram in a community breast center. METHODS: A prospective database was used to identify breast cancerpatients with a positive SLN biopsy examination who underwent a completion axillary lymph node dissection. The nomogram was used to calculate the probability of having non-SLN involvement, and was compared with the observed numbers. RESULTS: The observed incidence of non-SLN involvement showed excellent correlation with the nomogram predicted probability (chi-square test statistic = 5.87; P = .83). CONCLUSIONS: Predicting the risk of additional nodal metastases allows the surgeon and patient to make an individualized decision regarding the need for completion axillary lymph node dissection.
Authors: Oldrich Coufal; Tomás Pavlík; Pavel Fabian; Rita Bori; Gábor Boross; István Sejben; Róbert Maráz; Jaroslav Koca; Eva Krejcí; Iva Horáková; Vendula Foltinová; Pavlína Vrtelová; Vojtech Chrenko; Wolde Eliza Tekle; Mária Rajtár; Mihály Svébis; Vuk Fait; Gábor Cserni Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2009-05-15 Impact factor: 3.201
Authors: Antonio Piñero; Manuel Canteras; Arancha Moreno; Francisco Vicente; Julia Giménez; Ana Tocino; Edelmiro Iglesias; Sergi Vidal-Sicart; Luzdivina Santamaría; Miguel Lorenzo; Manuel García; Diego Ramirez Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2012-07-25 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: Holbrook E Kohrt; Richard A Olshen; Honnie R Bermas; William H Goodson; Douglas J Wood; Solomon Henry; Robert V Rouse; Lisa Bailey; Vicki J Philben; Frederick M Dirbas; Jocelyn J Dunn; Denise L Johnson; Irene L Wapnir; Robert W Carlson; Frank E Stockdale; Nora M Hansen; Stefanie S Jeffrey Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2008-03-04 Impact factor: 4.430