Sentinel Node and Recurrent Breast Cancer (SNARB): Results of a Nationwide Registration Study
- 821 Downloads
Knowledge of regional lymph node involvement is important in patients with recurrent breast cancer for obtaining better locoregional control and predicting prognosis. To determine technical feasibility, validity, aberrant drainage rates, and clinical consequences of performing repeat sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in patients with locally recurrent breast cancer we conducted the “Sentinel Node and Recurrent Breast Cancer (SNARB)” study.
A total of 150 patients with locally recurrent breast cancer underwent lymphatic mapping and SNB. In case of an intact axillary lymph node basin, ipsilateral axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was performed subsequently.
A total of 41 patients previously underwent breast conserving therapy (BCT) with SNB, 82 patients BCT with ALND, and 21 patients a mastectomy, of which 9 with SNB and 12 with ALND. In 95 patients (63.3 %) a sentinel node was identified and in 78 patients (52 %) the sentinel node was successfully removed. In 18 patients (22.8 %) a (micro)metastasis was found on pathologic examination. Confirmation ALND in 18 patients showed no axillary lymph node metastases. Aberrant drainage pathways were visualized in 58.9 % of the patients, significantly more frequently after a previous ALND (79.3 %) than after a previous SNB (25.0 %) (P < .0001). Overall, the result of this repeat SNB led to a change in the adjuvant treatment plan in 16.5 % of the patients with a successful repeat SNB.
Repeat SNB is technically feasible and provides reliable results in patients with locally recurrent breast cancer, leading to change in management in 1 of 6 patients.
KeywordsSentinel Node Sentinel Node Biopsy Axillary Lymph Node Dissection Recurrent Breast Cancer Lymphatic Mapping
The authors thank the following clinicians for patient recruitment and providing the study data: Dr. R. F. Schmitz, Dr. J. E. de Vries, Mw. Dr. M. F. Ernst, Dr. F. W. C. van der Ent, Dr. B. van Ooijden, Dr. J. M. Klaase, Dr. J. A. van Essen, Dr. J. W. D. de Waard, Dr. F. C. den Boer, Dr. J. W. S. Merkus, Mw. Dr. M. B. E. Menke-Pluymers, Mw. Dr. C. M. E. Contant, Mw. J. P. J. Burgmans, Dr. H. W. P. M. Kemperman, Dr. B. C. Vrouenraets, Dr. P. H. J. M. Veldman, Dr. M. Smidt, and Dr. S. A. Koopal. The authors thank the Dutch Breast Cancer Trialists’ Group (BOOG) for their support in promoting, coordinating, and facilitating the SNARB study. This study was supported by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society-KWF (Grant No. 2009-4466) for data registration and management.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
- 1.Nationaal Borstkanker Overleg Nederland (NABON). Richtlijn behandeling van het mammacarcinoom. 2008. Available at: www.oncoline.nl.
- 3.Naik AM, Fey J, Gemignani M, Heerdt A, Montgomery L, Petrek J, 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;240:462–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 8.Voogd AC, Nielsen M, Peterse JL, Blichert-Toft M, Bartelink H, Overgaard M, et al. Differences in risk factors for local and distant recurrence after breast-conserving therapy or mastectomy for stage I and II breast cancer: pooled results of two large European randomized trials. J Clin Oncol. 2001;15:1688–97.Google Scholar
- 9.Recht A, Come SE, Troyan SL, Sadowski NL. Management of recurrent breast cancer. In: Harris J, Lippman M, Morrow M, Osborne CK, editors. Diseases of the breast. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2000. p.731–48.Google Scholar
- 10.Derkx F, Maaskant-Braat AJG, van der Sangen MJC, Nieuwenhuijzen GAP, van de Poll-Franse LV, Roumen RMH, et al. Staging and management of axillary lymph nodes in patients with local recurrence in the breast or chest wall after a previous negative sentinel node procedure. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36:646–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Hermanek P, Sobin LH, editors. UICC TNM classification of malignant tumors. Berlin: Springer; 1987. p. 94–9.Google Scholar
- 20.van Tienhoven G, Voogd AC, Peterse JL, Nielsen M, Andersen KW, Mignolet F, et al. on behalf of the EORTC Breast Cancer Cooperative Group and the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group. Prognosis after treatment for loco-regional recurrence after mastectomy or breast conserving therapy in two randomized trials (EORTC 10801 and DBCG-82TM). Eur J Cancer. 1999;35:32–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Borner M, Bacchi M, Goldhirsch A, Greiner R, Harder F, Castiglione M, et al. First isolated locoregional recurrence following mastectomy for breast cancer: results of a phase III multicenter study comparing systemic treatment with observation after excision and radiation. Swiss Group for Clinical Cancer Research. J Clin Oncol. 1994;12:2071–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
- 27.Rauschecker H, Clarke M, Gatzemeier, Recht A. Systemic therapy for treating locoregional recurrence in women with breast cancer. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2001;(4):CD002195.Google Scholar