Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Turkish SentiMAG feasibility trial: preliminary results

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

A Letter to the Editor to this article was published on 03 March 2020

Abstract

Background

Sentinel node biopsy (SNB) is the standard of care for staging of the clinically and radiologically negative axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients. Sentinel node biopsy, with using Technetium-sulphur colloid (99 m Tc) alone or with blue dye is standard technique for evaluating axillary lymph nodes. This technique has drawbacks such as radiation exposure. Superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) can represent a valid option for SNB. In this study; we tried to evaluate feasibility of new magnetic technique in Turkish early breast cancer patients.

Material and methods

The study sample consists of 143 women affected by early breast carcinoma with clinically negative axillary lymph nodes. Sentinel node localization was performed using magnetic technique. Detection rate of magnetic technique was calculated and postoperative complications were assessed.

Results

Results are based on 104 patients. Sentinel node identification rate was 99% (103/104, 95% CI 0.97–1.01) for magnetic technique. A median of two SNs per patient was removed. Major adverse reaction was the permanent skin coloration (7.1%).

Conclusions

The magnetic technique is a feasible method for detecting SN in breast cancer patients with minimal adverse effects. Magnetic technique may be alternative to standard technique especially in breast units, where nuclear medicine unit is not available.

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
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Tez S, Yoldaş Ö, Kılıç YA, Dizen H, Tez M. Artificial neural networks for prediction of lymph node status in breast cancer patients. Med Hypotheses. 2007;68:922–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Houpeau JL, Chauvet MP, Guillemin F, et al. Sentinel lymph node identification using superparamagnetic iron oxide particles versus radioisotope: the French Sentimag feasibility trial. J Surg Oncol. 2016;113:501–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Ghilli M, Carretta E, Di Filippo F, et al. The superparamagnetic iron oxide tracer: a valid alternative in sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer treatment. Eur J Cancer Care. 2017;26:e12385.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Zada A, Peek M, Ahmed M, et al. Meta-analysis of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer using the magnetic technique. Br J Surg. 2016;103:1409–19.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mazouni C, Koual M, De Leeuw F, et al. Prospective evaluation of the limitations of near-infrared imaging in detecting axillary sentinel lymph nodes in primary breast cancer. Breast J. 2018;24:1006–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Teshome M, Wei C, Hunt KK, Thompson A, Rodriguez K, Mittendorf EA. Use of a magnetic tracer for sentinel lymph node detection in early-stage breast cancer patients: a meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23:1508–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Wärnberg, F., Stigberg, E., Obondo, C. et al. Long-term outcome after retro-areolar versus peri-tumoral injection of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIO) for sentinel lymph node detection in breast cancer. Surgery Ann Surg Oncol (2019). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07239-5

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Lyman, G.H., Somerfield, M.R., Bosserman, L.D., Perkins, C.L., Weaver, D.L., Giuliano, A.E. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol (2016).

  9. Douek M, Klaase J, Monypenny I, et al. Sentinel node biopsy using a magnetic tracer versus standard technique: the SentiMAG Multicentre Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:1237–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Thill M, Kurylcio A, Welter R, et al. The Central-European SentiMag study: sentinel lymph node biopsy with superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) vs. radioisotope. The Breast. 2014;23:175–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Rubio I, Diaz-Botero S, Esgueva A, et al. The superparamagnetic iron oxide is equivalent to the Tc99 radiotracer method for identifying the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol (EJSO). 2015;41:46–51.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Karakatsanis A, Christiansen PM, Fischer L, et al. The Nordic SentiMag trial: a comparison of super paramagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) nanoparticles versus Tc 99 and patent blue in the detection of sentinel node (SN) in patients with breast cancer and a meta-analysis of earlier studies. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;157:281–94.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. 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 

  14. Barranger E, Ihrai T. Comment on: sentinel node biopsy using magnetic tracer versus standard technique: the SentiMAG multicentre trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:593.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Goyal A. New technologies for sentinel lymph node detection. Breast Care. 2018;13:349–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Lorek A, Stojčev Z, Zarębski W, Kowalczyk M, Szyluk K. Analysis of postoperative complications after 303 sentinel lymph node identification procedures using the SentiMag® method in breast cancer patients. Med Sci Monit. 2019;25:3154.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Zheng J, Ren W, Chen T, Jin Y, Li A, Yan K, Wu Y, Wu A. Recent advances in superparamagnetic iron oxide based nanoprobes as multifunctional theranostic agents for breast cancer imaging and therapy. Curr Med Chem. 2018;25(25):3001–166. https://doi.org/10.2174/0929867324666170705144642.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Huizing E, Anninga B, Young P, Monypenny I, Hall-Craggs M, Douek M. Analysis of void artefacts in post-operative breast MRI due to residual SPIO after magnetic SLNB in SentiMAG Trial participants. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41:S18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Arslan G, Yılmaz C, Çelik L, Çubuk R, Tasalı N. Unexpected finding on mammography and mri due to accumulation of iron oxide particles used for sentinel lymph node detection. Eur J Breast Health. 2019. https://doi.org/10.5152/ejbh.2019.4410.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Kriege M, Brekelmans CTM, Boetes C, Besnard PE, Zonderland HM, Obdeijn IM, Manoliu RA, Kok T, Peterse H, Tilanus-Linthorst MMA, Muller SH, Meijer S, Oosterwijk JC, Beex LVAM, Tollenaar RAEM, de Koning HJ, Rutgers EJT, Klijn JGM. Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with familial or genetic predisposition. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:427–437. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa031759

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. ICRP, “The 2007 recommendations of the international commission on radiological protection,” Ann. ICRP 37, 1–332 (2007), ICRP publication 103.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of General Surgery, Akdeniz University Hospital, Antalya, Turkey

    Veli Vural

  2. Department of Breast Surgery, İstanbul Oncology Hospital, Istanbul, Turkey

    Osman Cem Yılmaz

Authors
  1. Veli Vural
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Osman Cem Yılmaz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Veli Vural.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Vural, V., Yılmaz, O.C. The Turkish SentiMAG feasibility trial: preliminary results. Breast Cancer 27, 261–265 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-019-01016-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12282-019-01016-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation