Literature DB >> 17587208

Low locoregional failure rates in selected breast cancer patients with tumor-positive sentinel lymph nodes who do not undergo completion axillary dissection.

Rosa F Hwang1, Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo, Min Yi, Thomas A Buchholz, Funda Meric-Bernstam, Henry M Kuerer, Gildy V Babiera, Welela Tereffe, Diane D Liu, Kelly K Hunt.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The role for completion axillary dissection (CLND) in patients with breast cancer who have tumor-positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) has been questioned. The objective of this study was to examine the long-term safety of avoiding CLND in selected patients with positive SLNs.
METHODS: Patients with invasive breast cancer who underwent SLN biopsy at the authors' institution between 1993 and July 2005 were reviewed. Of 3366 total patients, 750 patients had a positive SLN. There were 196 patients with a positive SLN who did not undergo CLND based on clinician and patient preference. Clinicopathologic variables and treatment patterns were analyzed along with locoregional, distant recurrence, and survival.
RESULTS: Most tumors were infiltrating ductal carcinomas (74%), estrogen receptor-positive tumors (82%), progesterone receptor-positive tumors (70%), HER-2/neu-negative tumors (78.6%), and tumors were classified predominantly as either T1 or T2 (95.4%). The median number of SLNs removed was 3, and the median number of positive SLNs was 1. The median size of the tumor deposit in the SLN was 1.0 mm (range, 0.1-12.9 mm). Most SLNs were positive by on hematoxylin and eosin staining (64.3%), whereas 35.7% of SLNs were positive only by immunohistochemistry. Most patients underwent breast conservation (68.9%), radiation (58.2%), and chemotherapy (neoadjuvant in 14.3%, adjuvant in 55.6%). With a median follow-up of 29.5 months, no patients had an axillary recurrence, 1 patient had a supraclavicular lymph node recurrence, and 3 patients developed distant metastases. The median time to recurrence was 32 months.
CONCLUSIONS: In selected patients who had positive SLNs, the locoregional failure rate was low without CLND. Prospective studies will be valuable to corroborate these results and to refine further the optimal selection criteria for this approach.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17587208     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.22847

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  38 in total

Review 1.  New concepts in axillary management of breast cancer.

Authors:  Can Atalay
Journal:  World J Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-12-10

2.  Axillary lymph node dissection for sentinel lymph node micrometastases may be safely omitted in early-stage breast cancer patients: long-term outcomes of a prospective study.

Authors:  Igor Langer; Ulrich Guller; Carsten T Viehl; Holger Moch; Edward Wight; Felix Harder; Daniel Oertli; Markus Zuber
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-08-07

3.  [Axillary dissection vs. no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: implications for the radiation oncologist].

Authors:  T Fehm; D Wallwiener
Journal:  Strahlenther Onkol       Date:  2012-12       Impact factor: 3.621

Review 4.  Consensus on the regional lymph nodes irradiation in breast cancer.

Authors:  E Bayo; I Herruzo; M Arenas; M Algara
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2013-03-22       Impact factor: 3.405

5.  Questioning the role of axillary node dissection in sentinel node positive early stage breast cancer in the South Eastern Cancer Centre.

Authors:  O O Mohamed; P M Neary; C Fiuza-Castineira; G T O'Donoghue
Journal:  Ir J Med Sci       Date:  2014-03-02       Impact factor: 1.568

6.  American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z0011: impact on surgeon practice patterns.

Authors:  Abigail S Caudle; Kelly K Hunt; Susan L Tucker; Karen Hoffman; Sarah M Gainer; Anthony Lucci; Henry M Kuerer; Funda Meric-Bernstam; Ruchita Shah; Gildy V Babiera; Aysegul A Sahin; Elizabeth A Mittendorf
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2012-07-31       Impact factor: 5.344

7.  Predicting non-sentinel lymph node status after positive sentinel biopsy in breast cancer: what model performs the best in a Czech population?

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

8.  Sentinel node identification rate and nodal involvement in the EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS trial.

Authors:  Marieke E Straver; Philip Meijnen; Geertjan van Tienhoven; Cornelis J H van de Velde; Robert E Mansel; Jan Bogaerts; Nicole Duez; Luigi Cataliotti; Jean H G Klinkenbijl; Helen A Westenberg; Huub van der Mijle; Marko Snoj; Coen Hurkmans; Emiel J T Rutgers
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-03-19       Impact factor: 5.344

9.  Predicting Non-sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in a Chinese Breast Cancer Population with 1-2 Positive Sentinel Nodes: Development and Assessment of a New Predictive Nomogram.

Authors:  Jia-ying Chen; Jia-jian Chen; Jing-yan Xue; Ying Chen; Guang-yu Liu; Qi-xia Han; Wen-tao Yang; Zhen-zhou Shen; Zhi-min Shao; Jiong Wu
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2015-12       Impact factor: 3.352

Review 10.  Completion of axillary dissection for a positive sentinel node: necessary or not?

Authors:  Kathleen M Erb; Thomas B Julian
Journal:  Curr Oncol Rep       Date:  2009-01       Impact factor: 5.075

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.