Literature DB >> 19228534

Predictive probability of four different breast cancer nomograms for nonsentinel axillary lymph node metastasis in positive sentinel node biopsy.

Akif S Gur1, Bulent Unal, Ronald Johnson, Gretchen Ahrendt, Marguerite Bonaventura, Patricia Gordon, Atilla Soran.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although completion axillary lymph node dissection (CALND) is the gold standard for evaluating axillary status after identification of a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) in breast cancer, almost 40% to 70% of SLN-positive patients will have negative non-SLNs. To predict non-SLN metastases (NSLNM) in patients with a positive SLN biopsy, four different nomograms have been created. The aim of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of four different nomograms in our SLN-positive breast cancer patients. STUDY
DESIGN: We identified 319 patients who had a positive SLN biopsy and CALND at our hospital during an 8-year period. Breast cancer nomograms developed by Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Tenon Hospital, Cambridge University, and Stanford University were used to calculate the probability of NSLNM. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve was calculated for each nomogram, and values greater than 0.70 were accepted as demonstrating considerable discrimination.
RESULTS: One hundred seven of 319 patients (33.5%) had positive axillary NSLNM. The mean number of SLNs was 2.01 (range, 1 to 11 nodes), and the mean number of positive SLNs was 1.44 (range, 1 to 9 nodes). The area under the curve values were 0.70, 0.69, 0.69, and 0.64 for the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Tenon, Cambridge, and Stanford models, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: We found that the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center nomogram was more predictive than the other nomograms, but the Cambridge model and the Tenon model reached borderline values for accurate prediction. Nomograms developed at other institutions should be used with caution when counseling patients about the risk of additional nodal disease.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 19228534     DOI: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2008.10.029

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Am Coll Surg        ISSN: 1072-7515            Impact factor:   6.113


  13 in total

1.  Validation of online calculators to predict the non-sentinel lymph node status in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Satoru Tanaka; Nayuko Sato; Hiroya Fujioka; Yuko Takahashi; Kosei Kimura; Mitsuhiko Iwamoto
Journal:  Surg Today       Date:  2012-06-22       Impact factor: 2.549

2.  Beware the node: the more we know, the less aggressive we are.

Authors:  A Piñero
Journal:  Clin Transl Oncol       Date:  2009-03       Impact factor: 3.405

Review 3.  Nomograms in oncology: more than meets the eye.

Authors:  Vinod P Balachandran; Mithat Gonen; J Joshua Smith; Ronald P DeMatteo
Journal:  Lancet Oncol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 41.316

4.  Comparison of two models for predicting non-sentinel lymph node metastases in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients.

Authors:  Giovanni D'Eredita'; Vito Leopoldo Troilo; Fernando Fischetti; Giuseppe Rubini; Tommaso Berardi
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2011-05-31

5.  Factors Influencing Non-sentinel Node Involvement in Sentinel Node Positive Patients and Validation of MSKCC Nomogram in Indian Breast Cancer Population.

Authors:  Naveen Padmanabhan; Muhamed Faizal Ayub; Khadher Hussain; Ann Kurien; Selvi Radhakrishna
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2015-12-05

6.  Role of Combined Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Axillary Node Sampling in Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer.

Authors:  K J Edwards; M A Dordea; R French; V Kurup
Journal:  Indian J Surg       Date:  2015-06-24       Impact factor: 0.656

7.  Sentinel lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy predicts pathological axillary lymph node status in breast cancer patients with clinically positive axillary lymph nodes at presentation.

Authors:  Hiroyuki Takei; Takashi Yoshida; Masafumi Kurosumi; Kenichi Inoue; Hiroshi Matsumoto; Yuji Hayashi; Toru Higuchi; Sayaka Uchida; Jun Ninomiya; Kazuyuki Kubo; Hanako Oba; Shigenori Nagai; Toshio Tabei
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-05-16       Impact factor: 3.402

8.  Multicenter validation of two nomograms to predict non-sentinel node involvement in breast cancer.

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

9.  Clinicopathologic subtypes and compromise of lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer.

Authors:  B Jaime Jans; M Nicolás Escudero; B Dahiana Pulgar; C Francisco Acevedo; R César Sánchez; A Mauricio Camus
Journal:  Ecancermedicalscience       Date:  2014-07-23

10.  Patterns of care with a positive sentinel node: echoes of an opportunity missed.

Authors:  Monica Morrow
Journal:  Ann Surg Oncol       Date:  2009-07-08       Impact factor: 5.344

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.