BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence suggests that surgical removal of the axillary lymph nodes (axillary dissection, ALD) in early breast cancer yields no advantage in terms of either overall or disease-free survival, even in women with involvement of sentinel nodes. The optimal role of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in neo-adjuvant therapy is currently under discussion. METHOD: This review is based on a selective search in the Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and G.I.N. (Guidelines International Network) databases for relevant articles on the role of axillary dissection in node-positive breast cancer and the role of SNB in neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Although no single study provides adequate evidence, the available literature increasingly casts doubt on the putative therapeutic benefit of ALD as part of a multimodal treatment strategy for breast cancer. It is currently unclear what group of patients, if any, might benefit from ALD. Nor is any definitive judgment possible, from the available evidence, regarding the optimal role of SNB in neo-adjuvant therapy. The most recent evidence indicates that SNB after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in ycN0 patients who had suspect lymph nodes before systemic treatment has a low rate of sensitivity. CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that the radicality of lymph node surgery in the treatment of breast cancer can be reduced, even if the node status is positive.
BACKGROUND: Increasing evidence suggests that surgical removal of the axillary lymph nodes (axillary dissection, ALD) in early breast cancer yields no advantage in terms of either overall or disease-free survival, even in women with involvement of sentinel nodes. The optimal role of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in neo-adjuvant therapy is currently under discussion. METHOD: This review is based on a selective search in the Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, and G.I.N. (Guidelines International Network) databases for relevant articles on the role of axillary dissection in node-positive breast cancer and the role of SNB in neo-adjuvant chemotherapy. RESULTS: Although no single study provides adequate evidence, the available literature increasingly casts doubt on the putative therapeutic benefit of ALD as part of a multimodal treatment strategy for breast cancer. It is currently unclear what group of patients, if any, might benefit from ALD. Nor is any definitive judgment possible, from the available evidence, regarding the optimal role of SNB in neo-adjuvant therapy. The most recent evidence indicates that SNB after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy in ycN0 patients who had suspect lymph nodes before systemic treatment has a low rate of sensitivity. CONCLUSION: Current evidence indicates that the radicality of lymph node surgery in the treatment of breast cancer can be reduced, even if the node status is positive.
Authors: Marjolein L Smidt; Caroline M M Janssen; Deborah M Kuster; Erik D M Bruggink; Luc J A Strobbe Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Thorsten Kuehn; Andreas Bembenek; Thomas Decker; Dieter Ludwig Munz; Marie-Luise Sautter-Bihl; Michael Untch; Diethelm Wallwiener Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Anne Fleissig; Lesley J Fallowfield; Carolyn I Langridge; Leigh Johnson; Robert G Newcombe; J Michael Dixon; Mark Kissin; Robert E Mansel Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2005-09-15 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Viviana Galimberti; Bernard F Cole; Stefano Zurrida; Giuseppe Viale; Alberto Luini; Paolo Veronesi; Paola Baratella; Camelia Chifu; Manuela Sargenti; Mattia Intra; Oreste Gentilini; Mauro G Mastropasqua; Giovanni Mazzarol; Samuele Massarut; Jean-Rémi Garbay; Janez Zgajnar; Hanne Galatius; Angelo Recalcati; David Littlejohn; Monika Bamert; Marco Colleoni; Karen N Price; Meredith M Regan; Aron Goldhirsch; Alan S Coates; Richard D Gelber; Umberto Veronesi Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2013-03-11 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Judy C Boughey; Vera J Suman; Elizabeth A Mittendorf; Gretchen M Ahrendt; Lee G Wilke; Bret Taback; A Marilyn Leitch; Henry M Kuerer; Monet Bowling; Teresa S Flippo-Morton; David R Byrd; David W Ollila; Thomas B Julian; Sarah A McLaughlin; Linda McCall; W Fraser Symmans; Huong T Le-Petross; Bruce G Haffty; Thomas A Buchholz; Heidi Nelson; Kelly K Hunt Journal: JAMA Date: 2013-10-09 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: T Kuehn; F D Vogl; G Helms; S V Pueckler; H Schirrmeister; R Strueber; K Koretz; R Kreienberg Journal: Eur J Surg Oncol Date: 2004-04 Impact factor: 4.424
Authors: Stefan Feiten; Jan Dünnebacke; Jochen Heymanns; Hubert Köppler; Jörg Thomalla; Christoph van Roye; Diana Wey; Rudolf Weide Journal: Dtsch Arztebl Int Date: 2014-08-04 Impact factor: 5.594
Authors: Petronilla Staubach; Anton Scharl; Atanas Ignatov; Olaf Ortmann; Elisabeth C Inwald; Thomas Hildebrandt; Michael Gerken; Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke; Sophia Scharl; Thomas Papathemelis Journal: J Cancer Res Clin Oncol Date: 2020-11-23 Impact factor: 4.553
Authors: Roland G Stein; Roland Fricker; Thomas Rink; Hartmut Fitz; Sebastian Blasius; Joachim Diessner; Sebastian F M Häusler; Tanja N Stüber; Victoria Andreas; Achim Wöckel; Thomas Müller Journal: Breast Care (Basel) Date: 2017-10-20 Impact factor: 2.860
Authors: Thomas Papathemelis; Evi Jablonski; Anton Scharl; Tanja Hauzenberger; Michael Gerken; Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke; Matthias Hipp; Sophia Scharl Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2018-03-26 Impact factor: 3.411
Authors: Andreas Hackethal; Markus Hirschburger; Sven Oliver Eicker; Thomas Mücke; Christoph Lindner; Olaf Buchweitz Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2018-01-22 Impact factor: 2.915