Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Microstaging of Breast Cancer Patients Using Cytokeratin Staining of the Sentinel Lymph Node

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

Abstract

Background: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping is an effective and accurate method of axillary nodal evaluation for metastatic disease. Cytokeratin (CK) immunohistochemical (IHC) staining of the SLN has found micrometastatic disease previously undetected by routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stains. The purpose of this study is to determine the number of patients who were upstaged or microstaged, i.e., detected to have micrometastatic disease only by combined lymphatic mapping with CK IHC.

Methods: Two hundred and ten patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer underwent intraoperative lymphatic mapping using a combination of vital blue dye and technetium-labeled sulfur colloid. The excised sentinel lymph nodes were examined grossly, by imprint cytology, by standard H&E histology, and by IHC stains for CK. SLNs that were only CK positive were confirmed to be malignant by histologic examination.

Results: CK IHC staining was performed on 381 SLNs in 210 breast cancer patients. Forty-seven of 210 patients (22.4%) had positive nodes. Thirty of these 47 patients (63.8%) had both H&E- and CK-positive SLNs, and an additional 17 of the 47 positive patients (36.2%) had only CK-positive SLNs. Seventeen of the 180 patients (9.4%) who were negative on H&E staining were upstaged by CK IHC staining of malignant cells in the SLN. Comparison of tumor size with the total number of node-positive patients demonstrated that 16 of 30 node-positive T0 and T1 patients (53.5%) and 22 of 39 nodes (56.4%) were upstaged by CK IHC staining. T2 and T3 patients were less frequently upstaged by cytokeratin analysis of lymph nodes. Only one of 17 node-positive patients (5.9%) and seven of 34 nodes (20.6%) in patients with T2 and T3 tumors were upstaged.

Conclusion: CK IHC staining of SLNs shifted 9.4% of patients from stage I to stage II. There was a significant upstaging influence noted in patients with tumor sizes under 2 cm. This microstaging shift or upstaging may account for the significant proportion of stage I breast cancer treatment failures. Microstaging of the SLNs using more sensitive assays may help identify a subgroup of patients with invasive breast cancer who would benefit from systemic adjuvant treatment, while sparing a disease-free subset of patients the additional risks of toxic adjuvant chemotherapy.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Cox CE, Pendas S, Cox JE, Reintgen DS, et al. Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of breast cancer patients. Ann Surg 1998;227(5):645–53.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Cox CE, Bass SS, Ku NN, Berman C, Shons A, Yeatman T, Reintgen D. Sentinel lymphadenectomy: a safe answer to less axillary surgery. In the Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Adjuvant Therapy of Primary Breast Cancer, St. Gallen, Switzerland, February 25–28, 1998.

  3. Dowlatshahi K, Fan M, Snider HC. Lymph node micrometastases from breast carcinoma: reviewing the dilemma. Cancer 1997;80(7):1188–97.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Gershenwald JE, Colomi MI, Thompson W, et al. Multiinstitutional melanoma lymphatic mapping experience: problems of failure in 423 stage I & II melanoma patients after successful lymphatic mapping and negative SLN biopsy. J Clin Oncol (in press).

  5. Redding WH, Coombes RC. Detection of micrometastases in patients with primary breast cancer. Lancet 1983;2:1271–4.

    Google Scholar 

  6. International (Ludwig) Breast Cancer Study Group. Prognostic importance of occult axillary lymph node micrometastases from breast cancers. Lancet 1990;335:1565–8.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Shoenfeld A, Lugamani Y, Smith D, et al. Detection of breast cancer micro-metastases in axillary lymph nodes by using polymerase chain reaction. Cancer Res 1994;54:2986–90.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Noguchi S, Aihara T, Motomura K, et al. Detection of breast cancer micro-metastases in axillary lymph nodes by means of reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Am J Pathol 1996;2:649–56.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Noguchi S, Aihara T, Motomura K, et al. Histologic characteristics of breast cancers with occult lymph node metastases detected by keratin 19 mRNA reverse transcriptase-polymerase chain reaction. Cancer 1996;78:1235–40.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Turner RR, Ollila DW, Krasne DL, Giuliano AE. Histopathological validation of the sentinel lymph node hypothesis for breast carcinoma. Ann Surg 1997;226:271–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Albertini JJ, Lyman GH, Cox CE, Reintgen DS, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer. JAMA 1996;276:1818–22.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Cox CE, Ku NN, Reintgen DS, et al. Touch preparation cytology of breast lumpectomy margins with histologic correlation. Arch Surg 1991;126:490–3.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Ku NK, Ahmad N, Smith PV, Cox CE, Reintgen DS, Nicosia SV. Intraoperative imprint cytology of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Acta Cytol 1997;41(5):1606–7.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Anderson BO, Austin-Seymour M, Gralow J, Moe RR, Byrd DR. A multidisciplinary approach to locoregional management of the axilla for primary operable breast cancer. Cancer Control 1997J;14(6):491–499.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Copeland EM III. Is axillary dissection necessary for T1 carcinoma of the breast? J Am Coll Surg 1997;184(4):397–8.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ruffin WK, Stacey-Clear A, Younger J, Hoover HC. Rational for routine axillary dissection in carcinoma of the breast. J Am Coll Surg 1995;180:245–51.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Giuliano AE, Dale PS, Turner RR, Morton DL, et al. Improved axillary staging of breast cancer with sentinel lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg 1995;222:394–99.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Graversen HP, Blichert-Toft M, Andersen JA, Zedeler K. Breast cancer: risk of axillary recurrence in node negative patients following partial dissection of the axilla. Eur J Surg Oncol 1988;14:407–12.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Cady B. Is axillary lymph node dissection necessary in routine management of breast cancer? No. Important Adv Oncol 1996:251–65.

  20. Haffty BG, Ward B, Pathare P. Reappraisal of the role of axillary lymph node dissection in conservative treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997;15(2):691–700.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Noguchi M. Node negative breast cancer patients exposed to unnecessary perioperative risk and increased long-term morbidity (letter). Ann Surg 1997;225:126–36.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 1994;220:391–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Giuliano AE. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer (letter). JAMA 1997;277:791–2.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Giuliano AE, Jones RC, Brennan M, Statman RR. Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997;15:2345–50.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Surgery, Tampa, Florida

    Robert H. Schreiber MD, Douglas S. Reintgen MD, Alan R. Shons MD, PhD & Charles E. Cox MD

  2. Departments of Pathology, Tampa, Florida

    Ni Ni Ku MD

  3. Departments of Radiology, University of South Florida, Tampa, Florida

    Claudia Berman MD

  4. Biostatistics Core, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, Florida

    David Boulware MS

  5. Department of Surgery, Maimonides Medical Center, Brooklyn, New York

    Solange Pendas MD

  6. Comprehensive Breast Cancer Program, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, 12902 Magnolia Dr., Suite 2190, Tampa, FL, 33612

    Charles E. Cox MD

Authors
  1. Robert H. Schreiber MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Solange Pendas MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ni Ni Ku MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Douglas S. Reintgen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Alan R. Shons MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Claudia Berman MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. David Boulware MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Charles E. Cox MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles E. Cox MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Schreiber, R.H., Pendas, S., Ku, N.N. et al. Microstaging of Breast Cancer Patients Using Cytokeratin Staining of the Sentinel Lymph Node. Ann Surg Oncol 6, 95–101 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-999-0095-3

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10434-999-0095-3

Key Words

Search

Navigation