Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 17, Issue 11, pp 2909–2919 | Cite as

Minimal Disease in the Sentinel Lymph Node: How to Best Measure Sentinel Node Micrometastases to Predict Risk of Additional Non-Sentinel Lymph Node Disease

  • Shicha Kumar
  • Matthew Bramlage
  • Lindsay M. Jacks
  • Jessica I. Goldberg
  • Sujata M. Patil
  • Dilip D. Giri
  • Kimberly J. Van Zee
Breast Oncology



Volume of disease in the sentinel lymph node (SLN) is a significant predictor of additional nodal metastasis. This study assesses incidence of residual non-SLN disease in a large cohort of women with minimal SLN metastases and compares three methods of SLN micrometastasis volume measurement to determine which best predicts residual disease on completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND).


A total of 505 patients with invasive breast cancer and minimal SLN metastasis (pN1mi or pN0(i+)) underwent cALND and had complete data. All SLNs were evaluated by three measurement methods for volume of metastasis: (1) method of detection (frozen section, routine hematoxylin and eosin, serial hematoxylin and eosin, immunohistochemistry), (2) American Joint Committee on Cancer’s AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, 7th edition, N category, and (3) number of metastatic cells (1–100, 101–999, ≥1000). Multivariable logistic regression models were used to predict the presence of additional non-SLN disease.


A total of 251 patients (50%) had pN0(i+) and 254 patients (50%) had pN1mi disease. Twelve percent of those with pN0(i+) and 20% with pN1mi had additional non-SLN disease. On multivariate analyses including eight variables, only lymphovascular invasion (odds ratio >2.2, P < 0.01) and volume of nodal metastasis as assessed by any method of measurement (method of detection, AJCC, and cell count) were significantly correlated with additional non-SLN disease (P = 0.04, 0.03, and 0.02, respectively). All three models had similar goodness of fit and discrimination (Akaike information criterion = 442, 442, 441; −2log likelihood = 416, 420, 417; concordance index = 0.680, 0.675, 0.676, respectively).


A significant proportion of women with minimal SLN metastases have additional non-SLN disease at cALND. Assessments of SLN volume of disease by three different methods of measurement are equivalent for prediction of additional non-SLN metastases.


  1. 1.
    Giuliano AE, Jones RC, Brennan M, Statman R. Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2345–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chu KU, Turner RR, Hansen NM, et al. Do all patients with sentinel node metastasis from breast carcinoma need complete axillary node dissection? Ann Surg. 1999;229:536–41.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Reynolds C, Mick R, Donohue JH, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy with metastasis: can axillary dissection be avoided in some patients with breast cancer? J Clin Oncol. 1999;17:1720–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Teng S, Dupont E, McCann C, et al. Do cytokeratin-positive-only sentinel lymph nodes warrant complete axillary lymph node dissection in patients with invasive breast cancer? Am Surg. 2000;66:574–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Turner RR, Chu KU, Qi K, et al. Pathologic features associated with nonsentinel lymph node metastases in patients with metastatic breast carcinoma in a sentinel lymph node. Cancer. 2000;89:574–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Abdessalam SF, Zervos EE, Prasad M, et al. Predictors of positive axillary lymph nodes after sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2001;182:316–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kamath VJ, Giuliano R, Dauway EL, et al. Characteristics of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer predict further involvement of higher-echelon nodes in the axilla: a study to evaluate the need for complete axillary lymph node dissection. Arch Surg. 2001;136:688–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rahusen FD, Torrenga H, van Diest PJ, et al. Predictive factors for metastatic involvement of nonsentinel nodes in patients with breast cancer. Arch Surg. 2001;136:1059–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Viale G, Maiorano E, Mazzarol G, et al. Histologic detection and clinical implications of micrometastases in axillary sentinel lymph nodes for patients with breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2001;92:1378–84.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Weiser MR, Montgomery LL, Tan LK, et al. Lymphovascular invasion enhances the prediction of non-sentinel node metastases in breast cancer patients with positive sentinel nodes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8:145–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sachdev U, Murphy K, Derzie A, et al. Predictors of nonsentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Am J Surg. 2002;183:213–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cox CE, Kiluk JV, Riker AI, et al. Significance of sentinel lymph node micrometastases in human breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 2008;206:261–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Van Zee KJ, Manasseh DM, Bevilacqua JL, et al. A nomogram for predicting the likelihood of additional nodal metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:1140–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hwang RF, Krishnamurthy S, Hunt KK, et al. Clinicopathologic factors predicting involvement of nonsentinel axillary nodes in women with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:248–54.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Saidi RF, Dudrick PS, Remine SG, Mittal VK. Nonsentinel lymph node status after positive sentinel lymph node biopsy in early breast cancer. Am Surg. 2004;70:101–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Barranger E, Coutant C, Flahault A, et al. An axilla scoring system to predict non-sentinel lymph node status in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node involvement. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;91:113–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Viale G, Maiorano E, Pruneri G, et al. Predicting the risk for additional axillary metastases in patients with breast carcinoma and positive sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg. 2005;241:319–25.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Pal A, Provenzano E, Duffy SW, Pinder SE, Purushotham AD. A model for predicting non-sentinel lymph node metastatic disease when the sentinel lymph node is positive. Br J Surg. 2008;95:302–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kohrt HE, Olshen RA, Bermas HR et al (2008) New models and online calculator for predicting non-sentinel lymph node status in sentinel lymph node positive breast cancer patients. BMC Cancer. 8:66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Houvenaeghel G, Nos C, Giard S, et al. A nomogram predictive of non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with a sentinel lymph node micrometastasis. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009;35:690–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. Breast. In: Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al, eds. AJCC cancer staging manual, 6th ed. New York: Springer, 2002:221–40.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wong SL, Edwards MJ, Chao C, et al. Predicting the status of the nonsentinel axillary nodes: a multicenter study. Arch Surg. 2001;136:563–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mignotte H, Treilleux I, Faure C, Nessah K, Bremond A. Axillary lymph-node dissection for positive sentinel nodes in breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2002;28:623–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Jakub JW, Diaz NM, Ebert MD, et al. Completion axillary lymph node dissection minimizes the likelihood of false negatives for patients with invasive breast carcinoma and cytokeratin positive only sentinel lymph nodes. Am J Surg. 2002;184:302–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tan LK, Giri D, Hummer AJ, et al. Occult axillary node metastases in breast cancer are prognostically significant: results in 368 node-negative patients with 20-year follow-up. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:1803–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Meric F, Buchholz TA, Mirza NQ, et al. Long-term complications associated with breast-conservation surgery and radiotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9:543–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Roberts CA, Beitsch PD, Litz CE, et al. Interpretive disparity among pathologists in breast sentinel lymph node evaluation. Am J Surg. 2003;186:324–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cserni G, Amendoeira I, Apostolikas N, et al. Discrepancies in current practice of pathological evaluation of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. Results of a questionnaire based survey by the European Working Group for Breast Screening Pathology. J Clin Pathol. 2004;57:695–701.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cserni G, Bianchi S, Boecker W, et al. Improving the reproducibility of diagnosing micrometastases and isolated tumor cells. Cancer. 2005;103:358–67.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Turner RR, Weaver DL, Cserni G, et al. Nodal stage classification for breast carcinoma: improving interobserver reproducibility through standardized histologic criteria and image-based training. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:258–63.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, et al. AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th ed. New York: Springer, 2010.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology for treatment of cancer by site: breast cancer. 2010. Available at:
  34. 34.
    Park J, Fey JV, Naik AM, et al. A declining rate of completion axillary dissection in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients is associated with the use of a multivariate nomogram. Ann Surg. 2007;245:462–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Hansen NM, et al. Comparison of sentinel lymph node biopsy alone and completion axillary lymph node dissection for node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2946–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cserni G, Gregori D, Merletti F, et al. Meta-analysis of non-sentinel node metastases associated with micrometastatic sentinel nodes in breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1245–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    van Deurzen CH, de Boer M, Monninkhof EM, et al. Non-sentinel lymph node metastases associated with isolated breast cancer cells in the sentinel node. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100:1574–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Cody HS 3rd, Borgen PI. State-of-the-art approaches to sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer: study design, patient selection, technique, and quality control at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Surg Oncol. 1999;8:85–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Smidt ML, Kuster DM, van der Wilt GJ, Thunnissen FB, Van Zee KJ, Strobbe LJ. Can the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center nomogram predict the likelihood of nonsentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients in the Netherlands? Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:1066–72.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Soni NK, Carmalt HL, Gillett DJ, Spillane AJ. Evaluation of a breast cancer nomogram for prediction of non-sentinel lymph node positivity. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005;31:958–64.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Lambert LA, Ayers GD, Hwang RF, et al. Validation of a breast cancer nomogram for predicting nonsentinel lymph node metastases after a positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2006;13:310–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Cripe MH, Beran LC, Liang WC, Sickle-Santanello BJ. The likelihood of additional nodal disease following a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer patients: validation of a nomogram. Am J Surg. 2006;192:484–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Alran S, De Rycke Y, Fourchotte V, et al. Validation and limitations of use of a breast cancer nomogram predicting the likelihood of non-sentinel node involvement after positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2195–201.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Cserni G. Comparison of different validation studies on the use of the Memorial-Sloan Kettering Cancer Center nomogram predicting nonsentinel node involvement in sentinel node–positive breast cancer patients. Am J Surg. 2007;194:699–700.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Dauphine CE, Haukoos JS, Vargas MP, et al. Evaluation of three scoring systems predicting non sentinel node metastasis in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:1014–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Ponzone R, Maggiorotto F, Mariani L, et al. Comparison of two models for the prediction of nonsentinel node metastases in breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2007;193:686–92.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Zgajnar J, Perhavec A, Hocevar M, et al. Low performance of the MSKCC nomogram in preoperatively ultrasonically negative axillary lymph node in breast cancer patients. J Surg Oncol. 2007;96:547–53.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Klar M, Jochmann A, Foeldi M, et al. The MSKCC nomogram for prediction the likelihood of non-sentinel node involvement in a German breast cancer population. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;112:523–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Poirier E, Sideris L, Dube P, Drolet P, Meterissian SH. Analysis of clinical applicability of the breast cancer nomogram for positive sentinel lymph node: the Canadian experience. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:2562–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Unal B, Gur AS, Kayiran O, et al. Models for predicting non-sentinel lymph node positivity in sentinel node positive breast cancer: the importance of scoring system. Int J Clin Pract. 2008;62:1785–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Amanti C, Lombardi A, Maggi S, et al. Is complete axillary dissection necessary for all patients with positive findings on sentinel lymph node biopsy? Validation of a breast cancer nomogram for predicting the likelihood of a non-sentinel lymph node. Tumori. 2009;95:153–5.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Coufal O, Pavlik T, Fabian P, et al. Predicting non-sentinel lymph node status after positive sentinel biopsy in breast cancer: what model performs the best in a Czech population? Pathol Oncol Res. 2009;15:733–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Coutant C, Olivier C, Lambaudie E, et al. Comparison of models to predict nonsentinel lymph node status in breast cancer patients with metastatic sentinel lymph nodes: a prospective multicenter study. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:2800–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Ramjeesingh R, Quan ML, Gardner S, Holloway CM. Prediction of involvement of sentinel and nonsentinel lymph nodes in a Canadian population with breast cancer. Can J Surg. 2009;52:23–30.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    van la Parra RF, Ernst MF, Bevilacqua JL, et al. Validation of a nomogram to predict the risk of nonsentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy: validation of the MSKCC breast nomogram. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:1128–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Dowlatshahi K, Fan M, Bloom KJ, et al. Occult metastases in the sentinel lymph nodes of patients with early stage breast carcinoma: a preliminary study. Cancer. 1999;86:990–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Houvenaeghel G, Nos C, Mignotte H, et al. Micrometastases in sentinel lymph node in a multicentric study: predictive factors of nonsentinel lymph node involvement—Groupe des Chirurgiens de la Federation des Centres de Lutte Contre le Cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:1814–22.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Cody HSI. How do we evaluate sentinel nodes and interpret the findings? Curr Breast Cancer Rep. 2009;1:12–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Cserni G, Bianchi S, Vezzosi V, et al. Variations in sentinel node isolated tumour cells/micrometastasis and non-sentinel node involvement rates according to different interpretations of the TNM definitions. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:2185–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Rockhill B, Spiegelman D, Byrne C, Hunter DJ, Colditz GA. Validation of the Gail et al. model of breast cancer risk prediction and implications for chemoprevention. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2001;93:358–66.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Brennan MF, Kattan MW, Klimstra D, Conlon K. Prognostic nomogram for patients undergoing resection for adenocarcinoma of the pancreas. Ann Surg. 2004;240:293–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Goldstein LJ, Gray R, Badve S, et al. Prognostic utility of the 21-gene assay in hormone receptor-positive operable breast cancer compared with classical clinicopathologic features. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:4063–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kattan MW, Gonen M, Jarnagin WR, et al. A nomogram for predicting disease-specific survival after hepatic resection for metastatic colorectal cancer. Ann Surg. 2008;247:282–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Mook S, Schmidt MK, Rutgers EJ, et al. Calibration and discriminatory accuracy of prognosis calculation for breast cancer with the online Adjuvant! program: a hospital-based retrospective cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2009;10:1070–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Specht MC, Kattan MW, Gonen M, Fey J, Van Zee KJ. Predicting nonsentinel node status after positive sentinel lymph biopsy for breast cancer: clinicians versus nomogram. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:654–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Nos C, Harding-MacKean C, Freneaux P, et al. Prediction of tumour involvement in remaining axillary lymph nodes when the sentinel node in a woman with breast cancer contains metastases. Br J Surg. 2003;90(11):1354–60.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Dabbs DJ, Fung M, Landsittel D, McManus K, Johnson R. Sentinel lymph node micrometastasis as a predictor of axillary tumor burden. Breast J. 2004;10:101–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Fleming FJ, Kavanagh D, Crotty TB, et al. Factors affecting metastases to non-sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer. J Clin Pathol. 2004;57:73–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Menes TS, Tartter PI, Mizrachi H, et al. Breast cancer patients with pN0(i+) and pN1(mi) sentinel nodes have high rate of nonsentinel node metastases. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200:323–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Gipponi M, Canavese G, Lionetto R, et al. The role of axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node micrometastases. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32:143–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Katz A, Niemierko A, Gage I, et al. Can axillary dissection be avoided in patients with sentinel lymph node metastasis? J Surg Oncol. 2006;93:550–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    van Rijk MC, Peterse JL, Nieweg OE, et al. Additional axillary metastases and stage migration in breast cancer patients with micrometastases or submicrometastases in sentinel lymph nodes. Cancer. 2006;107:467–71.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Reed J, Rosman M, Verbanac KM, et al. Prognostic implications of isolated tumor cells and micrometastases in sentinel nodes of patients with invasive breast cancer: 10-year analysis of patients enrolled in the prospective East Carolina University/Anne Arundel Medical Center Sentinel Node Multicenter Study. J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208:333–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;366(9503):2087–106.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Naik AM, Fey J, Gemignani M, et al. The risk of axillary relapse after sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer is comparable with that of axillary lymph node dissection: a follow-up study of 4008 procedures. Ann Surg. 2004;240:462–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Galimberti V. International Breast Cancer Study Group trial of sentinel node biopsy. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:210–1.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Olson JA Jr, McCall LM, Beitsch P, et al. Impact of immediate versus delayed axillary node dissection on surgical outcomes in breast cancer patients with positive sentinel nodes: results from American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trials Z0010 and Z0011. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26:3530–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Rutgers EJ, Meijnen P, Bonnefoi H. Clinical trials update of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Breast Cancer Group. Breast Cancer Res. 2004;6:165–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Shicha Kumar
    • 1
  • Matthew Bramlage
    • 2
  • Lindsay M. Jacks
    • 3
  • Jessica I. Goldberg
    • 1
  • Sujata M. Patil
    • 3
  • Dilip D. Giri
    • 2
  • Kimberly J. Van Zee
    • 1
  1. 1.Breast Service, Department of SurgeryMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  2. 2.Breast Surgical Pathology, Department of PathologyMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA
  3. 3.Department of Epidemiology and BiostatisticsMemorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations