Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Clinical Significance of Extracapsular Invasion at Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer Patients with Sentinel Lymph Node Involvement

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

Abstract

Background

A certain number of patients have extracapsular invasion (ECI) at the sentinel lymph node (SLN), but only a few reports describe its clinical significance. This study aimed to determine the clinical significance of ECI at SLN in breast cancer patients with involved SLN.

Methods

This study evaluated ECI at SLN in 131 consecutive SLN-positive patients who underwent axillary lymph node dissection between 2003 and 2008 at the National Kyushu Cancer Center with regard to their long-term prognosis and non-SLN metastasis.

Results

Of the 131 patients, 46 (35 %) tested positive for ECI at SLN. Of these 46 patients, 61 % (28/46) had non-SLN metastasis compared with 28 % (24/85) in ECI-negative group (χ 2 test; P < 0.001). Multivariate analysis showed that ECI at SLN is significantly predictive for non-SLN metastasis [hazard ratio (HR) 3.2; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 1.4–7.1; P = 0.005]. The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) rates were 71.3 % in the ECI-positive group and 89.9 %in the ECI-negative group (P = 0.001, log-rank test). Cox-regression analysis showed that ECI at SLN independently predicts lower RFS (HR 4.5; 95 % CI 1.8–11.7; P = 0.002).

Conclusions

The findings show that ECI at SLN is an independent predictor of both non-SLN metastasis and poor prognosis for breast cancer patients with involved SLN. The clinical significance of ECI at SLN in operable-stage breast cancer warrants further study.

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
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, et al. Ten-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing radical mastectomy and total mastectomy with or without radiation. N Engl J Med. 1985;312:674–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Fisher B, Jeong JH, Anderson S, Bryant J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N. Twenty-five-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing radical mastectomy, total mastectomy, and total mastectomy followed by irradiation. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:567–75.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sanghani M, Balk EM, Cady B. Impact of axillary lymph node dissection on breast cancer outcome in clinically node negative patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Cancer. 2009;115:1613–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Singletary SE, Allred C, Ashley P, et al. Revision of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:3628–36.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lucci A, McCall LM, Beitsch PD, et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) plus axillary lymph node dissection compared with SLND alone in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0011. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:3657–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:927–33.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kapoor NS, Sim MS, Lin J, Giuliano AE. Long-term outcome of patients managed with sentinel lymph node biopsy alone for node-negative invasive breast cancer. Arch Surg. 2012;147:1047–52.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Werkoff G, Lambaudie E, Fondrinier E, et al. Prospective multicenter comparison of models to predict four or more involved axillary lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer with one to three metastatic sentinel lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:5707–12.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2011;305:569–75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Lyman GH, Temin S, Edge SB, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32:1365–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen AY, Halpern MT, Schrag NM, Stewart A, Leitch M, Ward E. Disparities and trends in sentinel lymph node biopsy among early-stage breast cancer patients (1998–2005). J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:462–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Heneghan HM, Prichard RS, Devaney A, et al. Evolution of breast cancer management in Ireland: a decade of change. BMC Surg. 2009;9:15.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Weaver DL, Ashikaga T, Krag DN, et al. Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364:412–21.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Fujii T, Yanagita Y, Fujisawa T, Hirakata T, Iijima M, Kuwano H. Implication of extracapsular invasion of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer: prediction of nonsentinel lymph node metastasis. World J Surg. 2010;34:544–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. van la Parra RF, Peer PG, de Roos WK, Ernst MF, de Wilt JH, Bosscha K. A simple risk score to predict the presence of non-sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node. World J Surg. 2014;38:1070–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Gooch J, King TA, Eaton A, et al. The extent of extracapsular extension may influence the need for axillary lymph node dissection in patients with t1-t2 breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:2897–903.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Yajima R, Fujii T, Yanagita Y, et al. Prognostic value of extracapsular invasion of axillary lymph nodes combined with peritumoral vascular invasion in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014.

  18. Hetelekidis S, Schnitt SJ, Silver B, et al. The significance of extracapsular extension of axillary lymph node metastases in early-stage breast cancer. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46:31–4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Harris L, Fritsche H, Mennel R, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology 2007 update of recommendations for the use of tumor markers in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:5287–312.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Colzani E, Liljegren A, Johansson AL, et al. Prognosis of patients with breast cancer: causes of death and effects of time since diagnosis, age, and tumor characteristics. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4014–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Luporsi E, Andre F, Spyratos F, et al. Ki-67: level of evidence and methodological considerations for its role in the clinical management of breast cancer: analytical and critical review. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;132:895–915.

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. van de Vijver MJ, He YD, van’t Veer LJ, et al. A gene-expression signature as a predictor of survival in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1999–2009.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Paik S, Shak S, Tang G, et al. A multigene assay to predict recurrence of tamoxifen-treated, node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2817–26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Parker JS, Mullins M, Cheang MC, et al. Supervised risk predictor of breast cancer based on intrinsic subtypes. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1160–7.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Kadoya T, Aogi K, Kiyoto S, Masumoto N, Sugawara Y, Okada M. Role of maximum standardized uptake value in fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography/computed tomography predicts malignancy grade and prognosis of operable breast cancer: a multi-institute study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;141:269–75.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ohara M, Shigematsu H, Tsutani Y, et al. Role of FDG-PET/CT in evaluating surgical outcomes of operable breast cancer: usefulness for malignant grade of triple-negative breast cancer. Breast. 2013;22:958–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Sargent DJ, Conley BA, Allegra C, Collette L. Clinical trial designs for predictive marker validation in cancer treatment trials. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2020–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Simon RM, Paik S, Hayes DF. Use of archived specimens in evaluation of prognostic and predictive biomarkers. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:1446–52.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Donegan WL, Stine SB, Samter TG. Implications of extracapsular nodal metastases for treatment and prognosis of breast cancer. Cancer. 1993;72:778–82.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Ilknur GB, Hilmi A, Tulay C, et al. The importance of extracapsular extension of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer. Tumori. 2004;90:107–11.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Stitzenberg KB, Meyer AA, Stern SL, et al. Extracapsular extension of the sentinel lymph node metastasis: a predictor of nonsentinel node tumor burden. Ann Surg. 2003;237:607–12; discussion 612–603.

    PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Degnim AC, Reynolds C, Pantvaidya G, et al. Nonsentinel node metastasis in breast cancer patients: assessment of an existing and a new predictive nomogram. Am J Surg. 2005;190:543–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Mittendorf EA, Hunt KK, Boughey JC, et al. Incorporation of sentinel lymph node metastasis size into a nomogram predicting nonsentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel lymph node. Ann Surg. 2012;255:109–15.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgical Oncology, Research Institute for Radiation Biology and Medicine, Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

    Hideo Shigematsu MD, PhD

  2. Department of Pathology, National Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan

    Kenichi Taguchi MD, PhD

  3. Department of Breast Oncology, National Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan

    Hiroko Koui MD & Shinji Ohno MD, PhD

Authors
  1. Hideo Shigematsu MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Kenichi Taguchi MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Hiroko Koui MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Shinji Ohno MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hideo Shigematsu MD, PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Shigematsu, H., Taguchi, K., Koui, H. et al. Clinical Significance of Extracapsular Invasion at Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer Patients with Sentinel Lymph Node Involvement. Ann Surg Oncol 22, 2365–2371 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4269-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4269-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation