Atilla Soran1, Tolga Ozmen2, Arsalan Salamat3, Gürsel Soybir4, Ronald Johnson1. 1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Magee-Womens Hospital of UPMC, Pittsburgh, USA. 2. Department of General Surgery, University of Miami, Miami, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Southern Illinois University, Illinois, USA. 4. Department of Surgery, Memorial Etiler Medical Centre, İstanbul, Turkey.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Axillary lymph node status is an important prognostic factor in breast cancer (BC). Residual nodal disease burden after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is one of the important prognostic factors to determine the prognosis and in the treatment of BC. Lymph node ratio (LNR) defined as the ratio of the number of positive lymph nodes to total excised axillary lymph nodes, may be a stronger determinant of prognosis than pN in axillary nodal staging, although there is very limited data evaluating its prognostic value in the setting of NAC. In this cohort of patients, we studied the utility of LNR in predicting recurrence and overall survival (OS) after NAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Institutional cancer registry was queried from 2009 to 2014 for women with axillary node-positive BC with no evidence of distant metastasis, and who received NAC followed by surgery for loco-regional treatment (axillary dissection with breast conserving surgery or total mastectomy). Patients with axillary complete response were excluded. Locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant recurrence (DR) and overall survival (OS) rates were reviewed regarding pN and LNR. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients were analyzed. Median follow up time was 24 [25%, 75%: 13-42] months. Patients with pN1 in comparison to pN2 and pN3 had lower rate of LRR (9% vs. 15% and 14%, respectively; p=0.41), lower rate of DR (14% vs. 25% and 27%, respectively, p=0.16) and increased rate of OS (89% vs. 79% and 78%, respectively, p=0.04). In comparison to patients with LNR >20%, patients with LNR ≤20% had lower LRR (9% vs. 14%, p=0.25), lower DR (13% vs. 27%, p=0.01) and improved OS (89% vs. 79%, p=0.02) rates. In the pN1 group, patients who had a LNR >20% had higher DR (22% vs. 14%, p=0.48) rates in comparison to patients with LNR ≤20%. In ER/PR (+) patients who had LNR ≤20% DR was 6% compared with 23% in patient who had LNR >20% (p=0.02), and in triple negative patients' OS rate was significantly better compared the LNR less/equal or more than 20% (71% vs 33%, p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that LNR adds valuable information for the prognosis after NAC and this additional information should be considered when deciding further treatment and follow-up for patients who had residual tumor burden on the axilla. This observation should be tested in a larger study.
OBJECTIVE: Axillary lymph node status is an important prognostic factor in breast cancer (BC). Residual nodal disease burden after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is one of the important prognostic factors to determine the prognosis and in the treatment of BC. Lymph node ratio (LNR) defined as the ratio of the number of positive lymph nodes to total excised axillary lymph nodes, may be a stronger determinant of prognosis than pN in axillary nodal staging, although there is very limited data evaluating its prognostic value in the setting of NAC. In this cohort of patients, we studied the utility of LNR in predicting recurrence and overall survival (OS) after NAC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An Institutional cancer registry was queried from 2009 to 2014 for women with axillary node-positive BC with no evidence of distant metastasis, and who received NAC followed by surgery for loco-regional treatment (axillary dissection with breast conserving surgery or total mastectomy). Patients with axillary complete response were excluded. Locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant recurrence (DR) and overall survival (OS) rates were reviewed regarding pN and LNR. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients were analyzed. Median follow up time was 24 [25%, 75%: 13-42] months. Patients with pN1 in comparison to pN2 and pN3 had lower rate of LRR (9% vs. 15% and 14%, respectively; p=0.41), lower rate of DR (14% vs. 25% and 27%, respectively, p=0.16) and increased rate of OS (89% vs. 79% and 78%, respectively, p=0.04). In comparison to patients with LNR >20%, patients with LNR ≤20% had lower LRR (9% vs. 14%, p=0.25), lower DR (13% vs. 27%, p=0.01) and improved OS (89% vs. 79%, p=0.02) rates. In the pN1 group, patients who had a LNR >20% had higher DR (22% vs. 14%, p=0.48) rates in comparison to patients with LNR ≤20%. In ER/PR (+) patients who had LNR ≤20% DR was 6% compared with 23% in patient who had LNR >20% (p=0.02), and in triple negative patients' OS rate was significantly better compared the LNR less/equal or more than 20% (71% vs 33%, p=0.001). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that LNR adds valuable information for the prognosis after NAC and this additional information should be considered when deciding further treatment and follow-up for patients who had residual tumor burden on the axilla. This observation should be tested in a larger study.
Authors: Vincent Vinh-Hung; Nam P Nguyen; Gábor Cserni; Pauline Truong; Wendy Woodward; Helena M Verkooijen; Donald Promish; Naoto T Ueno; Patricia Tai; Yago Nieto; Sue Joseph; Wolfgang Janni; Frank Vicini; Melanie Royce; Guy Storme; Anne-Marie Wallace; Georges Vlastos; Christine Bouchardy; Gabriel N Hortobagyi Journal: Future Oncol Date: 2009-12 Impact factor: 3.404
Authors: Christoph Tausch; Susanne Taucher; Peter Dubsky; Michael Seifert; Roland Reitsamer; Werner Kwasny; Raimund Jakesz; Florian Fitzal; Lidija Filipcic; Michael Fridrik; Richard Greil; Michael Gnant Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2011-12-30 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Sei Hyun Ahn; Hee Jeong Kim; Jong Won Lee; Gyung-Yub Gong; Dong-Yong Noh; Jung Hyun Yang; Sang Seol Jung; Ho Yong Park Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-08-21 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: R V Iyer; A Hanlon; B Fowble; G Freedman; N Nicolaou; P Anderson; J Hoffman; E Sigurdson; M Boraas; M Torosian Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2000-07-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Vincent Vinh-Hung; Claire Verschraegen; Donald I Promish; Gábor Cserni; Jan Van de Steene; Patricia Tai; Georges Vlastos; Mia Voordeckers; Guy Storme; Melanie Royce Journal: Breast Cancer Res Date: 2004-10-06 Impact factor: 6.466
Authors: Vincent Vinh-Hung; Hilde Van Parijs; Olena Gorobets; Christel Fontaine; Nam P Nguyen; Bhumsuk Keam; Dung Minh Nguyen; Mark De Ridder Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 4.379