BACKGROUND: Recent results from the ACOSOG Z0011 trial question the use of intraoperative frozen section (FS) during sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy and the role of axillary dissection (ALND) for SLN-positive breast cancer patients. Here we present a 10-year trend analysis of SLN-FS and ALND in our practice. METHODS: We reviewed our prospective SLN database over 10 years (1997-2006, 7509 SLN procedures) for time trends and variation between surgeons in the use of SLN-FS and ALND in patients with cN0 invasive breast cancer. RESULTS: Use of SLN-FS decreased from 100% to 62% (P < 0.0001) and varied widely by surgeon (66% to 95%). There were no statistically significant trends in the performance of ALND for patients with SLN metastases detected by FS (n = 1370, 99-99%) or routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) (n = 333; 69-77%), but only for those detected by serial section H&E with or without immunohistochemistry (n = 438; 73-48%; P = 0.0054) or immunohistochemistry only (n = 294; 48-28%; P < 0.0001). These trends coincided with an increase in the proportion of completion versus immediate ALND (30-40%; P = 0.0710). CONCLUSIONS: Over 10 years, we have observed a diminishing rate of SLN-FS and, for patients with low-volume SLN metastases, fewer ALND, trends that suggest a more nuanced approach to axillary management. If the Z0011 selection criteria had been applied to our cohort, 66% of SLN-FS (4159 of 6327) and 48% of ALND (939 of 1953) would have been avoided, sparing 13% of all patients the morbidity of ALND.
BACKGROUND: Recent results from the ACOSOG Z0011 trial question the use of intraoperative frozen section (FS) during sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy and the role of axillary dissection (ALND) for SLN-positive breast cancerpatients. Here we present a 10-year trend analysis of SLN-FS and ALND in our practice. METHODS: We reviewed our prospective SLN database over 10 years (1997-2006, 7509 SLN procedures) for time trends and variation between surgeons in the use of SLN-FS and ALND in patients with cN0 invasive breast cancer. RESULTS: Use of SLN-FS decreased from 100% to 62% (P < 0.0001) and varied widely by surgeon (66% to 95%). There were no statistically significant trends in the performance of ALND for patients with SLN metastases detected by FS (n = 1370, 99-99%) or routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) (n = 333; 69-77%), but only for those detected by serial section H&E with or without immunohistochemistry (n = 438; 73-48%; P = 0.0054) or immunohistochemistry only (n = 294; 48-28%; P < 0.0001). These trends coincided with an increase in the proportion of completion versus immediate ALND (30-40%; P = 0.0710). CONCLUSIONS: Over 10 years, we have observed a diminishing rate of SLN-FS and, for patients with low-volume SLN metastases, fewer ALND, trends that suggest a more nuanced approach to axillary management. If the Z0011 selection criteria had been applied to our cohort, 66% of SLN-FS (4159 of 6327) and 48% of ALND (939 of 1953) would have been avoided, sparing 13% of all patients the morbidity of ALND.
Authors: Julia Park; Jane V Fey; Arpana M Naik; Patrick I Borgen; Kimberly J Van Zee; Hiram S Cody Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Sarah A McLaughlin; Lisa M Ochoa-Frongia; Sujata M Patil; Hiram S Cody; Lisa M Sclafani Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 2007-10-18 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: B J O'Hea; A D Hill; A M El-Shirbiny; S D Yeh; P P Rosen; D G Coit; P I Borgen; H S Cody Journal: J Am Coll Surg Date: 1998-04 Impact factor: 6.113
Authors: Robert E Mansel; Lesley Fallowfield; Mark Kissin; Amit Goyal; Robert G Newcombe; J Michael Dixon; Constantinos Yiangou; Kieran Horgan; Nigel Bundred; Ian Monypenny; David England; Mark Sibbering; Tholkifl I Abdullah; Lester Barr; Utheshtra Chetty; Dudley H Sinnett; Anne Fleissig; Dayalan Clarke; Peter J Ell Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2006-05-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Armando E Giuliano; Kelly K Hunt; Karla V Ballman; Peter D Beitsch; Pat W Whitworth; Peter W Blumencranz; A Marilyn Leitch; Sukamal Saha; Linda M McCall; Monica Morrow Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-02-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Sharon Wing-wai Chan; Katherine A LaVigne; Elisa R Port; Jane V Fey; Edi Brogi; Patrick I Borgen; Hiram S Cody Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2008-01 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: David N Krag; Stewart J Anderson; Thomas B Julian; Ann M Brown; Seth P Harlow; Takamaru Ashikaga; Donald L Weaver; Barbara J Miller; Lynne M Jalovec; Thomas G Frazier; R Dirk Noyes; André Robidoux; Hugh M C Scarth; Denise M Mammolito; David R McCready; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Joseph P Costantino; Norman Wolmark Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2007-10 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Justin S Poling; Theodore N Tsangaris; Pedram Argani; Ashley Cimino-Mathews Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-10-16 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Catherine E Loveland-Jones; Karen Ruth; Elin R Sigurdson; Brian L Egleston; Marcia Boraas; Richard J Bleicher Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2014-01-19 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Lynn T Dengel; Kimberly J Van Zee; Tari A King; Michelle Stempel; Hiram S Cody; Mahmoud El-Tamer; Mary L Gemignani; Lisa M Sclafani; Virgilio S Sacchini; Alexandra S Heerdt; George Plitas; Manuela Junqueira; Deborah Capko; Sujata Patil; Monica Morrow Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2013-08-22 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Eduardo Camargo Millen; Francisco Pimentel Cavalcante; Felipe Zerwes; Guilherme Novita; Alessandra Borba Anton de Souza; João Henrique Penna Reis; Helio Rubens de Oliveira Filho; Luciana Naíra de B L Limongi; Barbara Pace Silva de Assis Carvalho; Adriana Magalhães de Oliveira Freitas; Monica Travassos Jourdan; Vilmar Marques de Oliveira; Ruffo Freitas-Junior Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-09-27 Impact factor: 5.344