The aim of this study was to identify a subgroup of breast cancer patients in whom it is possible to avoid axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) when the sentinel lymph node (SLN) is positive.
Methods
A series of 292 patients treated with breast-conserving surgery or mastectomy underwent ALND after positive SLN detection. To correlate SLN metastasis with the chances of finding additional metastasis in non-SLNs we evaluated the main clinicopathological characteristics. No patients received adjuvant radiotherapy to the axillary region.
Results
Fifty-six patients (35.4%) with positive SLNs for macrometastases (n = 158) had additional metastases upon completion ALND compared with 7 patients (5.2%) with micrometastases in the SLN (n = 132). Cases with a higher number of positive axillary lymph nodes tended to have higher pT stage (p = 0.004). In multivariate analysis, pT was confirmed as an independent predictor of non-SLN metastases (OR = 2.40; 95% CI = 1.16-4.99). No patients with micrometastases in SLN and cancer <10 mm had additional positive non-SLNs.
Conclusions
Our results, in agreement with the major published studies, suggest that ALND can be avoided in selected patients without the need for additional treatment to the axillary region.
GiulianoA.E., KirganD.M., GuentherJ.M., MortonD.L.Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg.1994; 220(3): 391–401.
2.
VeronesiU., PaganelliG., GalimbertiV.. Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Lancet.1997; 349(9069): 1864–1867.
3.
KragD., WeaverD., AshikagaT.. The sentinel node in breast cancer—a multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med.1998; 339(14): 941–946.
4.
AlbertiniJ.J., LymanG.H., CoxC.. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer. JAMA.1996; 276(22): 1818–1822.
5.
GiulianoA.E., JonesR.C., BrennanM., StatmanR.Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol.1997; 15(6): 2345–2350.
6.
GiulianoA.E.Sentinel lymphadenectomy in primary breast carcinoma: an alternative to routine axillary dissection. J Surg Oncol.1996; 62(2): 75–77.
7.
PattenD.K., LeffD.R., WaniZ.. Is the presence of small volume disease in the sentinel node an indication for axillary clearance?Breast.2013; 22(1): 70–73.
8.
MeattiniI., LiviL., SaievaC.. Prognostic role of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status in premenopausal early breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen. Clin Breast Cancer.2013; 13(4): 247–253.
9.
MeattiniI., LiviL., FranceschiniD.. Role of radiotherapy boost in women with ductal carcinoma in situ: a single-center experience in a series of 389 patients. Eur J Surg Oncol.2013; 39(6): 613–618.
10.
LiviL., MeattiniI., FranceschiniD.. Radiotherapy boost dose-escalation for invasive breast cancer after breast-conserving surgery: 2093 patients treated with a prospective margin-directed policy. Radiother Oncol.2013; 108(2): 273–278.
11.
KunY., HowL.C., HoonT.P.. Classifying the estrogen receptor status of breast cancers by expression profiles reveals a poor prognosis subpopulation exhibiting high expression of the ERBB2 receptor. Hum Mol Genet.2003; 12(24): 3245–3258.
12.
DeCensiA., Guerrieri-GonzagaA., GandiniS.. Prognostic significance of Ki-67 labeling index after short-term presurgical tamoxifen in women with ER-positive breast cancer. Ann Oncol.2011; 22(3): 582–587.
13.
MunzoneE., BotteriE., SciandivasciA.. Prognostic value of Ki-67 labeling index in patients with node-negative, triple-negative breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat.2012; 134(1): 277–282.
14.
DowsettM., NielsenT.O., A'HernR.; International Ki-67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. J Natl Cancer Inst.2011; 103(22): 1656–1664.
15.
SobinL., GospodarowiczM., WittekindC., eds. TNM Classification of malignant tumors.7th ed.Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 2009.
16.
AbdessalamS.F., ZervosE.E., PrasadM.. Predictors of positive axillary lymph nodes after sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Am J Surg.2001; 182(4): 316–320.
17.
ZervosE.E., BadgwellB.D., AbdessalamS.F.. Selective analysis of the sentinel node in breast cancer. Am J Surg.2001; 182(4): 372–376.
18.
RavdinP.M., De LaurentiisM., VendelyT., ClarkG.M.Prediction of axillary lymph node status in breast cancer patients by use of prognostic indicators. J Natl Cancer Inst.1994; 86(23): 1771–1775.
19.
OlivottoI.A., JacksonJ.S.H., MatesD.. Prediction of axillary lymph node involvement of women with invasive breast carcinoma: a multivariate analysis. Cancer.1998; 83(5): 948–955.
20.
ChadhaM., ChabonA.B., FriedmannP., VikramB.Predictors of axillary lymph node metastases in patients with T1 breast cancer. A multivariate analysis. Cancer.1994; 73(2): 350–353.
21.
GiulianoA.E., HuntK.K., BallmanK.V.. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA.2011; 305(6): 569–575.
22.
GalimbertiV., ColeB.F., ZurridaS.; International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 23-01 investigators. Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with sentinel-node micrometastases (IBCSG 23-01): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol.2013; 14(4): 297–305.
23.
StraverM.E., MeijnenP., van TienhovenG.. Sentinel node identification rate and nodal involvement in the EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS trial. Ann Surg Oncol.2010; 17(7): 1854–1861.
24.
RutgersE.J., DonkerM., StraverM.E.. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer patients: Final analysis of the EORTC AMAROS trial (10981/22023). ASCO Meeting Proceedings. J Clin Oncol.2013; 31(suppl): LBA1001.
25.
CarterC.L., AllenC., HensonD.E.Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer.1989; 63(1): 181–187.
26.
GajdosC., TartterP.I., BleiweissI.J.Lymphatic invasion, tumor size, and age are independent predictors of axillary lymph node metastases in women with T1 breast cancers. Ann Surg.1999; 230(5): 692–696.
27.
CadyB., StoneM.D., SchulerJ.G., ThakurR., WannerM.A., LavinP.T.The new era in breast cancer. Invasion, size, and nodal involvement dramatically decreasing as a result of mammographic screening. Arch Surg.1996; 131(3): 301–308.
28.
DanforthD.N.Jr., FindlayP.A., McDonaldH.D.. Complete axillary lymph node dissection for stage I-II carcinoma of the breast. J Clin Oncol.1986; 4(5): 655–662.
29.
FisherB., WolmarkN., BauerM., RedmondC., GebhardtM.The accuracy of clinical nodal staging and of limited axillary dissection as a determinant of histologic nodal status in carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet.1981; 152(6): 765–772.
30.
LiviL., MeattiniI., SaievaC.. Prognostic value of positive human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status and negative hormone status in patients with T1a/T1b, lymph node-negative breast cancer. Cancer.2012; 118(13): 3236–3243.
31.
RivadeneiraD.E., SimmonsR.M., ChristosP.J., HannaK., DalyJ.M., OsborneM.P.Predictive factors associated with axillary lymph node metastases in T1a and T1b breast carcinomas: analysis in more than 900 patients. J Am Coll Surg.2000; 191(1): 1–8.
32.
Van ZeeK.J., ManassehD.M., BevilacquaJ.L.. A nomogram for predicting the likelihood of additional nodal metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol.2003; 10(10): 1140–1151.
33.
MittendorfE.A., HuntK.K., BougheyJ.C.. Incorporation of sentinel lymph node metastasis size into a nomogram predicting non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel lymph node. Ann Surg.2012; 255(1): 109–115.
34.
ReynoldsC., MickR., DonohueJ.H.. Sentinel lymph node biopsy with metastasis: can axillary dissection be avoided in some patients with breast cancer?J Clin Oncol.1999; 17(6): 1720–1726.
35.
VialeG., MaioranoE., PruneriG.. Predicting the risk for additional axillary metastases in patients with breast carcinoma and positive sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg.2005; 241(2): 319–325.
36.
AlranS., De RyckeY., FourchotteV.; Institut Curie Breast Cancer Study Group. Validation and limitations of use of a breast cancer nomogram predicting the likelihood of non-sentinel node involvement after positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol.2007; 14(8): 2195–2201.
37.
GoyalA., Douglas-JonesA., NewcombeR.G., ManselR.E.; ALMANAC Trialists Group. Predictors of non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Eur J Cancer.2004; 40(11): 1731–1737.
38.
DabbsD.J., FungM., LandsittelD., McManusK., JohnsonR.Sentinel lymph node micrometastasis as a predictor of axillary tumor burden. Breast J.2004; 10(2): 101–105.
39.
FougoJ.L., AfonsoM., Senhorães SenraF.. Predictive factors for non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node: should we consider sentinel node-related factors?Clin Transl Oncol.2009; 11(3): 165–171.
40.
GipponiM., CanaveseG., LionettoR.. The role of axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node micrometastases. Eur J Surg Oncol.2006; 32(2): 143–147.
41.
BarrangerE., CoutantC., FlahaultA., DelpechY., DaraiE., UzanS.An axilla scoring system to predict non-sentinel lymph node status in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node involvement. Breast Cancer Res Treat.2005; 91(2): 113–119.
42.
BolerD.E., UrasC., InceU., CabiogluN.Factors predicting the non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node metastases. Breast.2012; 21(4): 518–523.
43.
YuJ.C., HsuG.C., HsiehC.B., SheuL.F., ChaoT.Y.Prediction of metastasis to non-sentinel nodes by sentinel node status and primary tumor characteristics in primary breast cancer in Taiwan. World J Surg.2005; 29(7): 813–818, discussion 818-819.
SuyoiA., BainsS.K., KothariA.. When is a completion axillary lymph node dissection necessary in the presence of a positive sentinel lymph node?Eur J Cancer.2014; 50(4): 690–697.
