Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

, Volume 57, Issue 2, pp 221–229 | Cite as

Staging efficacy of breast cancer with sentinel lymphadenectomy

  • Masakuni Noguchi
  • Etsuro Bando
  • Koichiro Tsugawa
  • Koichi Miwa
  • Kunihiko Yokoyama
  • Ken‐ichi Nakajima
  • Takatoshi Michigishi
  • Norihisa Tonami
  • Hiroshi Minato
  • Akitaka Nonomura
Article

Abstract

Seventy‐two patients underwent dye‐guided or dye‐ and gamma probe‐guided sentinel lymphadenectomy (SLND) followed by complete axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). The results of imprint cytology, frozen sections, and permanent sections of the sentinel lymph node (SLN) were compared to each other and to the histologic findings in the nonsentinel nodes. The SLN was identified in 62 (88%) of 72 patients. Evaluation of the SLN on the permanent sections yielded a diagnostic accuracy of 95%, a sensitivity of 89%, and a specificity of 100, although the reliability of SLN diagnosis using frozen sections or imprint cytology is limited. Therefore, it may be concluded that SLND with multiple sectioning and histopathologic examination of the SLNs can predict the presence or absence of axillary‐node metastases in patients with breast cancer. However, further studies will be needed to investigate the value of SLND in respect to the long‐term regional control and any possible detriment or benefit to survival, before it can replace routine ALND as the preferred staging operation for operable breast cancer.

axillary dissection breast cancer prognosis sentinel node dissection 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 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 312: 674–681, 1985Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lythgoe JP, Palmer MK: Manchester regional breast study - 5 and 10 years results. Br J Surg 69: 693–696, 1982Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cancer Research Campaign Work Party: Cancer Research Campaign (King's Cambridge) trial for early breast cancer. Lancet 2: 55–60, 1980Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Senofsky GM, Moffat FL Jr, Davis K, et al.: Total axillary lymphadenectomy in the management of breast cancer. Arch Surg 126: 1336–1342, 1991Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Donegan WL: Surgical clinical trials. Cancer 53: 691–699, 1984Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fentiman IS, Mansel RE: The axilla: not a no-go zone. Lancet 337: 221–223, 1991Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Noguchi M, Miwa K, Michigishi T, et al.: The role of axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer management. Breast Cancer 4: 143–153, 1997Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kissin MW, Querci della Rovere G, Easton D, et al.: Risk of lymphedema following the treatment of breast cancer. Br J Surg 73: 580–584, 1986Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wazer DE, Erban JK, Robert NJ, et al.: Breast conservation in early women for clinically negative axillary lymph nodes without axillary dissection. Cancer 74: 878–883, 1994Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Feigelson BJ, Acosta JA, Feigelson HS, et al.: T1 breast carcinoma in women 70 years of agc and older may not require axillary lymph node dissecton. Am J Surg 172: 487–490, 1996Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Silverstein MJ, Gierson ED, Waisman JR, et al.: Axillary lymph node dissection for T1a breast carcinoma: Is it indicated? Cancer 73: 664–667, 1994Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cady B: The need to reexamine axillary lymph node dissection in invasive breast cancer. Cancer 73: 505–508, 1994Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Chadha M, Chabon AB, Friedmann P, et al.: Predictors of axillary lymph node metastases in patients with T1 breast cancer. Cancer 73: 350–353, 1994Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Greco M, Agresti R, Raselli R, et al.: Axillary dissection can be avoided in selected breast cancer patients: Analysis of 401 cases. Anticancer Res 16: 3913–3918, 1996Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Noguchi M, Katev N, Miyazaki I: Diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastases in patients with breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 40: 283–293, 1996Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL: Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lyinphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 220: 391–401, 1994Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Krag DN, Weaver DL, Alex C, Fairbank JT: Surgical resection and radiolocalization of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer using a gamma probe. Surg Oncol 2: 335–340, 1993Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Albertini JA, Lyman GH, Cox C, et al.: Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer. JAMA 276: 1818–1822, 1996Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pijpers R, Meijer S, Hoekstra OS, et al.: Impact of lymphoscintigraphy on sentinel node identification with technetium-99m-colloidal albumin in breast cancer. J Nucl Med 38: 366–368, 1997Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Veronesi U, Pagnelli G, Galimberti V, et al.: Sentinel-node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymphnode. Lancet 349: 1864–1867, 1997Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Noguchi M, Kawahara F, Tsugawa K, et al.: Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer: alternative to routine axillary dissection. Breast Cancer 5: 1–7, 1998Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Cox CE, Pendas S, Joseph E, et al.: Guidelines for sentinel node biopsy and lymphatic mapping of patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg 5: 645–653, 1998Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Giuliano AE, Dale PS, Turner RR, et al.: Improved axillary staging of breast cancer with sentinel lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg 222: 394–401, 1995Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    International Union Against Cancer (UICC): Breast tumors (ICD-0 C-50). In: Sobin LH, Wittekind Ch (eds) TNM Classi-fication of Malignant Tumours. 5th edition. Wiley, New York, 1997, pp 123–130Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Noguchi M, Tsugawa K, Kawahara F, et al.: Dye-guided sentinel lymphadenectomy in clinically node-negative or nodepositive breast cancer patients. Breast Cancer 5: 381–387, 1998Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    O'Hea BJ, Hill ADK, El-Shirbiny AM, et al.: Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: Initial experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. J Am Coll Surg 186: 423–427, 1998Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Japan Breast Cancer Society: General rules for clinical and pathological recording of breast cancer. 12th edition. Kanehara, Tokyo, 1996: pp 19–34Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    The World Health Organization: The World Health Organization histological typing of breast tumors. Am J Clin Pathol 78: 806–816, 1982Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Giuliano AE: Sentinel lymphadenectomy in primary breast carcinoma: an alternative to routine axillary dissection. J Surg Oncol 62(2): 75–77, 1996Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Borgstein PJ, Pijpers R, Comans EF, et al.: Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: guidelines and pitfalls of lymphoscintigraphy and gamma probe detection. J Am Coll Surg 186: 275–283, 1998Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Gulec SA, Moffat FL, Carrol RG, Krag DN: Gamma probe guided sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer. GJ Nucl Med 41: 251–261, 1997Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kramer EL: Lymphoscintigraphy: radiopharmaceutical selection and methods. Nucl Med Biol 17: 57–63, 1990Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Turner RR, Ollila DW, Krasne DL, Giuliano AG: Histopathologic validation of the sentinel lymph node hypothesis for breast carcinoma. Ann Surg 226: 271–278, 1997Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Offodile R, Hoh C, Barsky SH, et al.: Minimally invasive breast carcinoma staging using lymphatic mapping with radiolabelled dextran. Cancer 82: 1704–1708, 1998Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Giuliano AE: Sentinel lymphadenectomy: a new axillary staging procedure for primary breast carcinoma. Breast Dis 7: 16–17, 1996Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Hadjiminas DJ, Burke M: Intraoperative assessment of nodal status in the selection of patients with breast cancer for axillary clearance. Br J Surg 81: 1615–1616, 1994Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Fisher CJ, Boyle S, Burke M, Price AB: Intraoperative assessment of nodal status in the selection of patients with breast cancer for axillary clearance. Br J Surg 80: 457–458, 1993Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    McGuire WL: Adjuvant therapy of node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 320: 525–527, 1989Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Mansour EG, Gray R, Shatila AH, et al.: Efficacy of adjuvant chemotherapy in high-risk node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 320: 485–490, 1989Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fisher ER, Swamidoss S, Lee CH, et al.: Detection and significance of occult axillary node metastases in patients with invasive breast cancer. Cancer 42: 2025–2031, 1978Google Scholar
  41. 41.
    Kingsley WB, Peters GN, Check JH: What constitutes adequate study of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer? Ann Surg 201: 311–314, 1985Google Scholar
  42. 42.
    Ilainsworth PJ, Tjandra JJ, Stillwell RG, et al.: Detection and significance of occult metastasis in node-negative breast cancer. Br J Surg 80: 459–463, 1993Google Scholar
  43. 43.
    Noguchi M, Tsugawa K, Taniya T, Miwa K: The role of internal mammary lymph node metastases in the management of breast cancer. Breast Cancer 5: 117–125, 1998Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, et al.: The sentinel node in breast cancer. A multicenter validation study. New Engl J Med 339: 941–946, 1998Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Noguchi M: Comment on "Improved axillary staging of breast cancer with sentinel lymphadenectomy". Ann Surg 225: 126–127, 1997Google Scholar
  46. 46.
    Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Greco M, et al.: Prognosis of breast cancer patients after mastectomy and dissection of internal mammary nodes. Ann Surg 202: 702–707, 1985Google Scholar
  47. 47.
    Cody HS, Urban JA: Internal mammary node status: A major prognosticator in axillary node-negative breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2: 32–37, 1995Google Scholar
  48. 48.
    Cote RJ, Rosen PP, Old LJ, Osborne MP: Detection of bone marrow micrometastases in patients with early-stage breast cancer. Diag Oncol 1: 37–42, 1991Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Dearnaley DP, Ormerod MG, Sloane JP: Micrometastases in breast cancer: Long-term follow-up of the first patient cohort. Eur J Cancer 27(12): 236–239, 1991Google Scholar
  50. 50.
    Mansi JL, Easton D, Berger U, et al.: Bone marrow micrometastases in primary breast cancer: Prognostic significance after 6 years' follow-up. Eur J Cancer 27(12): 1552–1555, 1991Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Diel IJ, Kaufmann M, Goerner R, et al.: Detection of tumor cells in bone marrow of patients primary breat cancer: a prognostic factor for distant metastasis. J Clin Oncol 10(10): 1534–1539, 1992Google Scholar
  52. 52.
    Harbeck N, Untch M, Pache L, Eiermann W: Tumor cell detection in the bone marrow of breast cancer patients at primary therapy: results of a 3-year median follow-up. Br J Cancer 69: 566–571, 1994Google Scholar
  53. 53.
    Molino A, Pelosi G, Turazza M, et al.: Bone marrow micrometastases in 109 breast cancer patients: correlations with clinical and pathological features and prognosis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 42: 23–30, 1997Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masakuni Noguchi
    • 1
  • Etsuro Bando
    • 2
  • Koichiro Tsugawa
    • 2
  • Koichi Miwa
    • 2
  • Kunihiko Yokoyama
    • 2
  • Ken‐ichi Nakajima
    • 3
  • Takatoshi Michigishi
    • 3
  • Norihisa Tonami
    • 3
  • Hiroshi Minato
    • 4
  • Akitaka Nonomura
    • 4
  1. 1.Operation CenterKanazawa University Hospital, School of Medicine, Kanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan
  2. 2.Department of Surgery IIKanazawa University Hospital, School of Medicine, Kanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan
  3. 3.Department of Nuclear MedicineKanazawa University Hospital, School of Medicine, Kanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan
  4. 4.Division of PathologyKanazawa University Hospital, School of Medicine, Kanazawa UniversityKanazawaJapan

Personalised recommendations