Joshua Herb1, Ugwuji N Maduekwe2, Neha Goel3, Laura H Rosenberger4, Philip M Spanheimer1,5. 1. From the Department of Surgery (Herb, Spanheimer), University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC. 2. the Medical College of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI (Maduekwe). 3. the Department of Surgery, University of Miami Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, Miami, FL (Goel). 4. the Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, NC (Rosenberger). 5. the Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center (Spanheimer), University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Breast angiosarcoma is a rare malignancy classically associated with hematogenous metastases. We sought to determine the prevalence of pathologic nodal involvement in patients with nonmetastatic, resected breast angiosarcoma and its association with overall survival. STUDY DESIGN: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with nonmetastatic angiosarcoma of the breast who underwent surgical resection from 2004 to 2017. The prevalence of regional lymph node operation and nodal positivity was calculated. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate overall survival among node-positive and node-negative patients. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to evaluate the adjusted association of nodal positivity with overall survival. RESULTS: We included 991 patients with angiosarcoma. The median age was 69 years (interquartile range 57 to 78), and the cohort was 99% female. A total of 298 patients (30%) had pathologic regional nodal evaluation. Of those, 15 (5.0%) had positive regional lymph nodes. Node-positive patients had significantly worse survival than patients with negative regional lymph nodes. After adjusting for patient, tumor, and treatment factors, a positive regional lymph node was associated with worse overall survival compared with patients with no nodal evaluation (hazard ratio 3.20; 95% CI 1.75 to 5.86; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with nonmetastatic angiosarcoma of the breast have a 5% regional lymph node positivity rate, which is at a common threshold to consider evaluation, and identifies patients with poor survival. A prospective study to determine performance characteristics of sentinel lymph node biopsy is warranted.
BACKGROUND: Breast angiosarcoma is a rare malignancy classically associated with hematogenous metastases. We sought to determine the prevalence of pathologic nodal involvement in patients with nonmetastatic, resected breast angiosarcoma and its association with overall survival. STUDY DESIGN: The National Cancer Database was used to identify patients with nonmetastatic angiosarcoma of the breast who underwent surgical resection from 2004 to 2017. The prevalence of regional lymph node operation and nodal positivity was calculated. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to evaluate overall survival among node-positive and node-negative patients. Cox proportional hazard modeling was used to evaluate the adjusted association of nodal positivity with overall survival. RESULTS: We included 991 patients with angiosarcoma. The median age was 69 years (interquartile range 57 to 78), and the cohort was 99% female. A total of 298 patients (30%) had pathologic regional nodal evaluation. Of those, 15 (5.0%) had positive regional lymph nodes. Node-positive patients had significantly worse survival than patients with negative regional lymph nodes. After adjusting for patient, tumor, and treatment factors, a positive regional lymph node was associated with worse overall survival compared with patients with no nodal evaluation (hazard ratio 3.20; 95% CI 1.75 to 5.86; p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Patients with nonmetastatic angiosarcoma of the breast have a 5% regional lymph node positivity rate, which is at a common threshold to consider evaluation, and identifies patients with poor survival. A prospective study to determine performance characteristics of sentinel lymph node biopsy is warranted.
Authors: Katherine Mallin; Amanda Browner; Bryan Palis; Greer Gay; Ryan McCabe; Leticia Nogueira; Robin Yabroff; Lawrence Shulman; Matthew Facktor; David P Winchester; Heidi Nelson Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2019-02-08 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Stephan A Vorburger; Yan Xing; Kelly K Hunt; Gregory E Lakin; Robert S Benjamin; Barry W Feig; Peter W T Pisters; Matthew T Ballo; Lei Chen; Jonathan Trent; Michael Burgess; Shreyaskumar Patel; Raphael E Pollock; Janice N Cormier Journal: Cancer Date: 2005-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Ann-Kristin U Friedrich; Emily S Reisenbichler; Danielle R Heller; Justin M LeBlanc; Tristen S Park; Brigid K Killelea; Donald R Lannin Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2021-02-18 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Rebecca A Gladdy; Li-Xuan Qin; Nicole Moraco; Mark A Edgar; Cristina R Antonescu; Kaled M Alektiar; Murray F Brennan; Samuel Singer Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-03-22 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Keila E Torres; Vinod Ravi; Katherine Kin; Min Yi; B Ashleigh Guadagnolo; Caitlin D May; Banu K Arun; Kelly K Hunt; Ryan Lam; Guy Lahat; Aviad Hoffman; Janice N Cormier; Barry W Feig; Alexander J Lazar; Dina Lev; Raphael E Pollock Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2012-12-06 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: L Zelek; A Llombart-Cussac; P Terrier; X Pivot; J M Guinebretiere; C Le Pechoux; T Tursz; F Rochard; M Spielmann; A Le Cesne Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Corrie A Painter; Esha Jain; Brett N Tomson; Michael Dunphy; Rachel E Stoddard; Beena S Thomas; Alyssa L Damon; Shahrayz Shah; Dewey Kim; Jorge Gómez Tejeda Zañudo; Jason L Hornick; Yen-Lin Chen; Priscilla Merriam; Chandrajit P Raut; George D Demetri; Brian A Van Tine; Eric S Lander; Todd R Golub; Nikhil Wagle Journal: Nat Med Date: 2020-02-10 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Joshua P Kronenfeld; Jessica S Crystal; Emily L Ryon; Sina Yadegarynia; Celeste Chitters; Raphael Yechieli; Gina D'Amato; Andrew E Rosenberg; Susan B Kesmodel; Jonathan C Trent; Neha Goel Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-07-29 Impact factor: 6.639