Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Impact of Residual Nodal Disease Burden on Technical Outcomes of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Node-Positive (cN1) Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Recent trials have demonstrated the feasibility of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for cN1 breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). This study evaluated the technical outcomes of SLNB by residual nodal disease volume.

Methods

From a prospective database, cT1-3 cN1 patients receiving NAC and surgery from 2016 to 2017 were identified. Performance measures of post-NAC physical exam and imaging-based axillary assessment were compared. For the patients who converted to cN0 and underwent SLNB, adequate mapping (defined as ≥ 3 SLN) and the false-negative rate (FNR) of intraoperative SLN evaluation were assessed by residual nodal disease volume (ypN1-3 vs ypN0[i+]/ypN1mi vs ypN0).

Results

Of 156 cT1-3 cN1 patients, 96 converted to cN0 and underwent SLNB. Adequate mapping was achieved for 64 patients (66.7%) and was not associated with nodal volume (p = 0.12). The FNR of the intraoperative SLN evaluation was 37.8%, and smaller nodal volume was associated with FNR (p < 0.01). Of 36 patients (37.5%) who achieved an axillary pathologic complete response, 24 (66.7%) had three or more negative SLNs and were safely spared axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). The positive predictive values of physical exam versus imaging-based post-NAC nodal assessment were respectively 88% and 69.8%.

Conclusions

This study showed SLNB to be an effective tool for minimizing axillary surgery in cN1 patients treated with NAC. However, important technical limitations exist, such as inability to identify three SLNs in more than two-thirds of patients and high-false negative rates for intraoperative SLN evaluation, particularly for patients with small residual nodal volumes. Preoperative counseling should include realistic assessment of the potential need for ALND in this population.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Cortazar P, Zhang L, Untch M, et al. Pathological complete response and long-term clinical benefit in breast cancer: the CTNeoBC pooled analysis. Lancet. 2014;384:164–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alvarado R, Yi M, Le-Petross H, et al. The role for sentinel lymph node dissection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients who present with node-positive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3177–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, et al. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. JAMA. 2013;310:1455–61.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Mamtani A, Barrio AV, King TA, et al. How often does neoadjuvant chemotherapy avoid axillary dissection in patients with histologically confirmed nodal metastases? Results of a prospective study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:3467–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Dominici LS, Negron Gonzalez VM, Buzdar AU, et al. Cytologically proven axillary lymph node metastases are eradicated in patients receiving preoperative chemotherapy with concurrent trastuzumab for HER2-positive breast cancer. Cancer. 2010;116:2884–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Fisher B, Bryant J, Wolmark N, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on the outcome of women with operable breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16:2672–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Bear HD, Anderson S, Smith RE, et al. Sequential preoperative or postoperative docetaxel added to preoperative doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide for operable breast cancer: National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project Protocol B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:2019–27.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Boileau JF, Poirier B, Basik M, et al. Sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer: the SN FNAC study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:258–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuehn T, Bauerfeind I, Fehm T, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective, multicentre cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:609–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chang JM, Kosiorek HE, Wasif N, et al. The success of sentinel lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant therapy: a single-institution review. Am J Surg. 2017;214:1096–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Galimberti V, Ribeiro Fontana SK, Maisonneuve P, et al. Sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant treatment in breast cancer: five-year follow-up of patients with clinically node-negative or node-positive disease before treatment. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016;42:361–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Kang YJ, Han W, Park S, et al. Outcome following sentinel lymph node biopsy-guided decisions in breast cancer patients with conversion from positive to negative axillary lymph nodes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2017;166:473–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Nguyen TT, Hoskin TL, Day CN, Degnim AC, Jakub JW, Hieken TJ, Boughey JC. Decreasing use of axillary dissection in node-positive breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25:2596–602.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. King TA, Morrow M. Surgical issues in patients with breast cancer receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2015;12:335–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Technical outcomes of sentinel lymph node resection and conventional axillary lymph node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:881–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Liu LC, Lang JE, Lu Y, et al. Intraoperative frozen section analysis of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis and single-institution experience. Cancer. 2011;117:250–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Lancet. 1997;349:1864–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Chao C, Wong SL, Ackermann D, et al. Utility of intraoperative frozen section analysis of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2001;182:609–15.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Weiser MR, Montgomery LL, Susnik B, Tan LK, Borgen PI, Cody HS. Is routine intraoperative frozen-section examination of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer worthwhile? Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7:651–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Comparison of axillary lymph node dissection with axillary radiation for patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with chemotherapy (ALLIANCE A011202) www.clinicaltrials.gov. Retrieved 22 February 2019 at https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01901094.

  21. Boughey JC, Ballman KV, Hunt KK, et al. Axillary ultrasound after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and its impact on sentinel lymph node surgery: results from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1071 trial (Alliance). J Clin Oncol. 2015;33:3386–93.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Alison Laws MD

  2. Department of Medical Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA

    Melissa E. Hughes MSc

  3. Breast Oncology Program, Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center, Boston, MA, USA

    Melissa E. Hughes MSc, Laura Dominici MD, Faina Nakhlis MD, Thanh Barbie MD, Margaret Duggan MD, Anna Weiss MD, Esther Rhei MD, Katharine Carter MD, Suniti Nimbkar MD & Tari A. King MD

  4. Department of Data Sciences, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, MA, USA

    Jiani Hu MPH & William T. Barry PhD

  5. Division of Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Laura Dominici MD, Faina Nakhlis MD, Thanh Barbie MD, Margaret Duggan MD, Anna Weiss MD, Esther Rhei MD, Katharine Carter MD, Suniti Nimbkar MD & Tari A. King MD

  6. Department of Pathology, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, Boston, MA, USA

    Stuart J. Schnitt MD

Authors
  1. Alison Laws MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Melissa E. Hughes MSc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jiani Hu MPH
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. William T. Barry PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Laura Dominici MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Faina Nakhlis MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Thanh Barbie MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Margaret Duggan MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Anna Weiss MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Esther Rhei MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Katharine Carter MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Suniti Nimbkar MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Stuart J. Schnitt MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Tari A. King MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tari A. King MD.

Ethics declarations

Disclosure

There are no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 17 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Laws, A., Hughes, M.E., Hu, J. et al. Impact of Residual Nodal Disease Burden on Technical Outcomes of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Node-Positive (cN1) Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 26, 3846–3855 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07515-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07515-4

Search

Navigation