| Literature DB >> 31061432 |
Charlotte Vermersch1, Tiphaine Raia-Barjat1,2,3, Céline Chapelle4, Suzanne Lima1, Céline Chauleur5,6,7.
Abstract
Use of both patent blue and a radioisotope to locate, and reduce the risk of sentinel lymph node (SLN) detection failure in breast cancer is recommended, but drawbacks commonly lead to using only a radioisotope. An alternative method would therefore be valuable. This randomized, controlled study in 99 patients compared SLN detection using 99mtechnetium (Tc) alone versus Tc combined with indocyanine green (ICG). The primary endpoint was the SLN identification rate. The primary outcome measure was the number of patients with <2 SLN detected. One SLN was detected in 44.0% of patients in the dual detection group and 40.8% in the 99mTc alone group (RR = 1.08 (95% CI 0.68; 1.72), p = 0.84). A mean (±SD) of 2.14 ± 1.23 SLN were identified in the dual detection group vs. 1.77 ± 0.85 using Tc alone (p = 0.09). Eight-five (78.7%) SLN were both ICG+ and TC+, 15 (13.9%) ICG+ and Tc-, and 7 (6.5%) ICG- and Tc+. SLN detected were ICG-positive in 92.6% of patients and 99mTc-positive in 85.2% with. No adverse event related to ICG injection was recorded. Dual detection of SLN using ICG and radioisotope is reliable and sensitive but was not superior to isotope alone in successfully locating SLN in our pilot randomized trial.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31061432 PMCID: PMC6502840 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-019-43473-3
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Patient and tumor characteristics.
| Combined detection method (N = 50) | Radioisotope detection method alone (N = 49) | Total N = 99 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age (years), mean (SD) | 62.2 (12.0) | 60.2 (12.5) | 61.3 (12.2) | 0.42 | |
| BMI (kg/m²), mean (SD) | 26.8 (4.6) | 25.2 (3.9) | 26.0 (4.3) | 0.08 | |
| Post-menopause, no. (%) | 34 (68) | 30 (62.5) | 64 (65.3) | 0.67 | |
| Tumor diameter (mm), mean (SD) | 16.9 (10.8) | 20.0 (15.5) | 18.4 (13.3) | 0.43 | |
| SBR grade | I | 13 (31) | 17 (37.8) | 30 (34.5) | 0.20 |
| II | 25 (59.5) | 19 (42.2) | 44 (50.6) | ||
| III | 4 (9.5) | 9 (20) | 13 (14.9) | ||
| Histological type | IDC | 31 (63.3) | 33 (67.3) | 64 (65.3) | 0.58 |
| ILC | 7 (14.3) | 4 (8.2%) | 11 (11.2) | ||
| DCIS | 6 (12.2) | 4 (8.2) | 10 (10.2) | ||
| Other | 5 (10.2) | 8 (16.3) | 13 (13.3) | ||
| Hormone receptor-positive, no. (%) | 39 (86.7) | 39 (84.8) | 78 (85.7) | 1.00 | |
| HER2 receptor-positive, no. (%) | 2 (4.7) | 7 (15.2) | 9 (10.1) | 0.16 | |
| Positive sentinel lymph node, no. (%) (micro- or macrometastasis) | 18 (30) | 17 (34.7) | 35 (35.4) | 1.00 | |
| Complete axillary lymph node dissection for macrometastasis, no. (%) | 14 (28) | 11 (22.4) | 25 (25.3) | 0.64 | |
DCIS ductal carcinoma in situ, HER2 human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, IDC infiltrating ductal carcinoma, ILC infiltrating lobular carcinoma, SBR Scarff-Bloom-Richardson.
Number of sentinel lymph nodes identified.
| Combined detection method (N = 50) | Radioisotope detection method alone (N = 49) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 22 (44.0) | 20 (40.8) | 0.84 |
| RR (95% CI) | 1.08 (95% CI 0.68; 1.72) | ||
|
| 108 | 87 | |
|
| |||
|
| 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
|
| 22 (44.0) | 20 (40.8) | |
|
| 9 (18.0) | 23 (46.9) | |
|
| 9 (18.0) | 4 (8.2) | |
|
| 9 (18.0) | 1 (2.0) | |
|
| 1 (2.0) | 1 (2.0) | |
|
| 2.14 (1.23) | 1.77 (0.85) | 0.09 |
| Negative | 84 | 65 | |
| Micrometastasis | 18 | 12 | |
| macrometastasis | 7 | 10 | |
95% CI: 95% confidence interval; RR: relative risk; SLN sentinel lymph node; * one patient in the combined detection method had micro and macrometastasis.
Uptake of indocyanine green and 99mtechnetium by sentinel lymph nodes.
| Tc+ | Tc− | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ICG+, no.(%) | 85 (78.7) | 15 (13.9) | 100 (92.6) |
| ICG−, no. (%) | 7 (6.5) | 1 (0.9) | 8 (7.4) |
| Total, no. (%) | 92 (85.2) | 16 (14.8) | 108 (100) |
ICG indocyanine green, Tc technetium.
Uptake of indocyanine green and 99mtechnetium by metastatic lymph nodes (18 patients with 47 positive sentinel lymph node).
| Tc+ | Tc− | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ICG+ | 35 (74.5%) | 8 (17%) | 43 (91.5%) |
| ICG− | 3 (6.4%) | 1 (2.1%) | 4 (8.5%) |
| Total | 38 (80.9%) | 9 (19.1%) | 47 (100%) |
Adverse events.
| Combined detection method (N = 50) | Radioisotope detection method alone (N = 49) | p | |
|---|---|---|---|
| At least one AE, no. (%) | 18 (36.0%) | 13 (26.5%) | 0.39 |
| RR (95% CI) | 1.36 (0.75; 2.46) | ||
| Allergic reactions, no. (%) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | |
| Seroma, no. (%) | 11 (22.0) | 6 (12.2) | 0.29 |
| Hematoma at the operative site, no. (%) | 5 (10.0) | 7 (14.3) | 0.55 |
| Pain, no. (%) | 2 (4.0) | 2 (4.1) | 1.00 |
RR: relative risk; CI: confidence interval; no.: number of patients; p: p-value.