Amy E Cyr1, Natalia Tucker2, Foluso Ademuyiwa3, Julie A Margenthaler2, Rebecca L Aft2, Timothy J Eberlein2, Catherine M Appleton4, Imran Zoberi5, Maria A Thomas5, Feng Gao6, William E Gillanders2. 1. Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO. Electronic address: cyra@wudosis.wustl.edu. 2. Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO. 3. Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO. 4. Department of Radiology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO. 5. Department of Radiation Oncology, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO. 6. Department of Surgery, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO; Division of Biostatistics, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Axillary surgery is not considered therapeutic in patients with clinical T1-T2 N0 breast cancer. The importance of axillary staging is eroding in an era in which tumor biology, as defined by biomarker and gene expression profile, is increasingly important in medical decision making. We hypothesized that axillary ultrasound (AUS) is a noninvasive alternative to sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), and AUS could replace SLNB without compromising patient care. STUDY DESIGN:Patients with clinical T1-T2 N0 breast cancer and normal AUS were eligible for enrollment. Subjects were randomized to no further axillary staging (arm 1) vs SLNB (arm 2). Descriptive statistics were used to describe the results of the pilot phase of the randomized controlled trial. RESULTS:Sixty-eight subjects were enrolled in the pilot phase of the trial (34 subjects in arm 1, no further staging; 32 subjects in arm 2, SLNB; and 2 subjects voluntarily withdrew from the trial). The median age was 61 years (range 40 to 80 years) in arm 1 and 59 years (range 31 to 81 years) in arm 2, and there were no significant clinical or pathologic differences between the arms. Median follow-up was 17 months (range 1 to 32 months). The negative predictive value (NPV) of AUS for identification of clinically significant axillary disease (>2.0 mm) was 96.9%. No axillary recurrences have been observed in either arm. CONCLUSIONS: Successful completion of the pilot phase of the randomized controlled trial confirms the feasibility of the study design, and provides prospective evidence supporting the ability of AUS to exclude clinically significant disease in the axilla. The results provide strong support for a phase 2 randomized controlled trial.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Axillary surgery is not considered therapeutic in patients with clinical T1-T2 N0 breast cancer. The importance of axillary staging is eroding in an era in which tumor biology, as defined by biomarker and gene expression profile, is increasingly important in medical decision making. We hypothesized that axillary ultrasound (AUS) is a noninvasive alternative to sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), and AUS could replace SLNB without compromising patient care. STUDY DESIGN:Patients with clinical T1-T2 N0 breast cancer and normal AUS were eligible for enrollment. Subjects were randomized to no further axillary staging (arm 1) vs SLNB (arm 2). Descriptive statistics were used to describe the results of the pilot phase of the randomized controlled trial. RESULTS: Sixty-eight subjects were enrolled in the pilot phase of the trial (34 subjects in arm 1, no further staging; 32 subjects in arm 2, SLNB; and 2 subjects voluntarily withdrew from the trial). The median age was 61 years (range 40 to 80 years) in arm 1 and 59 years (range 31 to 81 years) in arm 2, and there were no significant clinical or pathologic differences between the arms. Median follow-up was 17 months (range 1 to 32 months). The negative predictive value (NPV) of AUS for identification of clinically significant axillary disease (>2.0 mm) was 96.9%. No axillary recurrences have been observed in either arm. CONCLUSIONS: Successful completion of the pilot phase of the randomized controlled trial confirms the feasibility of the study design, and provides prospective evidence supporting the ability of AUS to exclude clinically significant disease in the axilla. The results provide strong support for a phase 2 randomized controlled trial.
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: Donald L Weaver; Takamaru Ashikaga; David N Krag; Joan M Skelly; Stewart J Anderson; Seth P Harlow; Thomas B Julian; Eleftherios P Mamounas; Norman Wolmark Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-01-19 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: E E Deurloo; P J Tanis; K G A Gilhuijs; S H Muller; R Kröger; J L Peterse; E J Th Rutgers; R Valdés Olmos; L J Schultze Kool Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2003-05 Impact factor: 9.162
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: Anthony Lucci; Linda Mackie McCall; Peter D Beitsch; Patrick W Whitworth; Douglas S Reintgen; Peter W Blumencranz; A Marilyn Leitch; Sukumal Saha; Kelly K Hunt; Armando E Giuliano Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-05-07 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Scott D Ramsey; William E Barlow; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo; Sean Tunis; Laurence Baker; John Crowley; Patricia Deverka; David Veenstra; Gabriel N Hortobagyi Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2012-09-18 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Lee Gravatt Wilke; Linda M McCall; Katherine E Posther; Pat W Whitworth; Douglas S Reintgen; A Marilyn Leitch; Sheryl G A Gabram; Anthony Lucci; Charles E Cox; Kelly K Hunt; James E Herndon; Armando E Giuliano Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-03-02 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Maaike de Boer; Carolien H M van Deurzen; Jos A A M van Dijck; George F Borm; Paul J van Diest; Eddy M M Adang; Johan W R Nortier; Emiel J T Rutgers; Caroline Seynaeve; Marian B E Menke-Pluymers; Peter Bult; Vivianne C G Tjan-Heijnen Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-08-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Matthew G Davey; Éanna J Ryan; Daniel Burke; Kevin McKevitt; Peter F McAnena; Michael J Kerin; Aoife J Lowery Journal: Breast Cancer (Auckl) Date: 2021-06-14