Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 22, Issue 13, pp 4270–4279 | Cite as

Is Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection Warranted for Patients with a Diagnosis of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ?

  • Ashleigh M. Francis
  • Christine E. Haugen
  • Lynn M. Grimes
  • Jaime R. Crow
  • Min Yi
  • Elizabeth A. Mittendorf
  • Isabelle Bedrosian
  • Abigail S. Caudle
  • Gildy V. Babiera
  • Savitri Krishnamurthy
  • Henry M. Kuerer
  • Kelly K. HuntEmail author
Breast Oncology

Abstract

Background

Positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) findings in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) range from 1 to 22 % but have unknown biologic significance. This study sought to identify predictors of positive SLNs and to assess their clinical significance for patients with an initial diagnosis of DCIS.

Methods

The study identified 1234 patients with an initial diagnosis of DCIS who underwent SLN dissection (SLND) at our institution from 1997 through 2011. Positive SLN findings were categorized as isolated tumor cells (ITCs) (≤0.2 mm), micrometastases (>0.2–2 mm), or macrometastases (>2 mm). Predictors of positive SLNs were analyzed, and survival outcomes were examined.

Results

Positive SLN findings were identified in 132 patients (10.7 %): 66 patients with ITCs (5.4 %), 36 patients with micrometastases (2.9 %), and 30 patients with macrometastases (2.4 %). Upstaging to microinvasive (n = 68, 5.5 %) or invasive (n = 259, 21.0 %) cancer occurred for 327 patients (26.5 %). Factors predicting positive SLNs included diagnosis by excisional biopsy (odds ratio [OR] 1.90; P = 0.007), papillary histology (OR 1.77; P = 0.006), DCIS larger than 2 cm (OR 1.55; P = 0.030), more than three interventions before SLND (4 interventions: OR 2.04; P = 0.022; ≥5 interventions: OR 3.87; P < 0.001), and occult invasion (microinvasive: OR 3.44; P = 0.001; invasive: OR 6.21; P < 0.001). The median follow-up period was 61.7 months. Patients who had pure DCIS with and without positive SLNs had equivalent survival rates (100.0 vs 99.7 %; P = 0.679). Patients with occult invasion and positive SLNs had the worst survival rate (91.7 %; P < 0.001).

Conclusions

Occult invasion and more than three total interventions were the strongest predictors of positive SLN findings in patients with an initial diagnosis of DCIS. This supports the theory of benign mechanical transport of breast epithelial cells. Except for patients at high risk for invasive disease, routine use of SLND in DCIS is not warranted.

Keywords

Sentinel Lymph Node Axillary Lymph Node Dissection Final Pathology Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgment

This work was supported by Grants from the National Institutes of Health, Cancer Center Support Grant CA016672 (Ronald DePinho) and T32 Grant CA009599 (Funda Meric-Bernstam). The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institutes of Health. We thank Stephanie Deming for editorial assistance.

References

  1. 1.
    Silverstein MJ, Rosser RJ, Gierson ED, et al. Axillary lymph node dissection for intraductal breast carcinoma: is it indicated? Cancer. 1987;59:1819–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Intra M, Veronesi P, Mazzarol G, et al. Axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Arch Surg. 2003;138:309–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cox CE, Nguyen K, Gray RJ, et al. Importance of lymphatic mapping in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS): why map DCIS? Am Surg. 2001;67:513–9. discussion 519–21.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Klauber-DeMore N, Tan LK, Liberman L, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy: is it indicated in patients with high-risk ductal carcinoma in situ and ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion? Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7:636–42.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kelly TA, Kim JA, Patrick R, Grundfest S, Crowe JP. Axillary lymph node metastases in patients with a final diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Am J Surg. 2003;186:368–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lara JF, Young SM, Velilla RE, Santoro EJ, Templeton SF. The relevance of occult axillary micrometastasis in ductal carcinoma in situ: a clinicopathologic study with long-term follow-up. Cancer. 2003;98:2105–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pendas S, Dauway E, Giuliano R, Ku N, Cox CE, Reintgen DS. Sentinel node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ patients. Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7:15–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Veronesi P, Intra M, Vento AR, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for localised ductal carcinoma in situ? Breast. 2005;14:520–2.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zavotsky J, Hansen N, Brennan MB, Turner RR, Giuliano AE. Lymph node metastasis from ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion. Cancer. 1999;85:2439–43.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Camp R, Feezor R, Kasraeian A, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for ductal carcinoma in situ: an evolving approach at the University of Florida. Breast J. 2005;11:394–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Cserni G. Sentinel lymph node biopsy as a tool for the staging of ductal carcinoma in situ in patients with breast carcinoma. Surg Today. 2002;32:99–103.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Farkas EA, Stolier AJ, Teng SC, Bolton JS, Fuhrman GM. An argument against routine sentinel node mapping for DCIS. Am Surg. 2004;70:13–7. discussion 17–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rahusen FD, Meijer S, Taets van Amerongen AH, Pijpers R, van Diest PJ. Sentinel node biopsy for nonpalpable breast tumors requires a preoperative diagnosis of invasive breast cancer. Breast J. 2003;9:380–4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Mittendorf EA, Arciero CA, Gutchell V, Hooke J, Shriver CD. Core biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: an indication for sentinel lymph node biopsy. Curr Surg. 2005;62:253–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Carter BA, Jensen RA, Simpson JF, Page DL. Benign transport of breast epithelium into axillary lymph nodes after biopsy. Am J Clin Pathol. 2000;113:259–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Diaz LK, Wiley EL, Venta LA. Are malignant cells displaced by large-gauge needle core biopsy of the breast? AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;173:1303–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Diaz NM, Cox CE, Ebert M, et al. Benign mechanical transport of breast epithelial cells to sentinel lymph nodes. Am J Surg Pathol. 2004;28:1641–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Diaz NM, Mayes JR, Vrcel V. Breast epithelial cells in dermal angiolymphatic spaces: a manifestation of benign mechanical transport. Hum Pathol. 2005;36:310–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Diaz NM, Vrcel V, Centeno BA, Muro-Cacho C. Modes of benign mechanical transport of breast epithelial cells to axillary lymph nodes. Adv Anat Pathol. 2005;12:7–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hansen NM, Ye X, Grube BJ, Giuliano AE. Manipulation of the primary breast tumor and the incidence of sentinel node metastases from invasive breast cancer. Arch Surg. 2004;139:634–9. discussion 639–40.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Hoorntje LE, Schipper ME, Kaya A, Verkooijen HM, Klinkenbijl JG, Borel Rinkes IH. Tumour cell displacement after 14G breast biopsy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2004;30:520–5.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liberman L, Vuolo M, Dershaw DD, et al. Epithelial displacement after stereotactic 11-gauge directional vacuum-assisted breast biopsy. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 1999;172:677–81.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Moore KH, Thaler HT, Tan LK, Borgen PI, Cody HS III. Immunohistochemically detected tumor cells in the sentinel lymph nodes of patients with breast carcinoma: biologic metastasis or procedural artifact? Cancer. 2004;100:929–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nagi C, Bleiweiss I, Jaffer S. Epithelial displacement in breast lesions: a papillary phenomenon. Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2005;129:1465–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rosser RJ. A point of view: trauma is the cause of occult micrometastatic breast cancer in sentinel axillary lymph nodes. Breast J. 2000;6:209–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Tvedskov TF, Jensen MB, Kroman N, Balslev E. Iatrogenic displacement of tumor cells to the sentinel node after surgical excision in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2012;131:223–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    van Deurzen CH, Bult P, de Boer M, et al. Morphometry of isolated tumor cells in breast cancer sentinel lymph nodes: metastases or displacement? Am J Surg Pathol. 2009;33:106–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Youngson BJ, Cranor M, Rosen PP. Epithelial displacement in surgical breast specimens following needling procedures. Am J Surg Pathol. 1994;18:896–903.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Youngson BJ, Liberman L, Rosen PP. Displacement of carcinomatous epithelium in surgical breast specimens following stereotaxic core biopsy. Am J Clin Pathol. 1995;103:598–602.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Tan JC, McCready DR, Easson AM, Leong WL. Role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ treated by mastectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:638–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Yen TW, Hunt KK, Ross MI, et al. Predictors of invasive breast cancer in patients with an initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: a guide to selective use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in management of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200:516–26.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Hunt KK, Yi M, Mittendorf EA, et al. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is accurate and reduces the need for axillary dissection in breast cancer patients. Ann Surg. 2009;250:558–66.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Edge SB, American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC cancer staging manual. 7th ed. New York: Springer; 2010.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    Intra M, Rotmensz N, Veronesi P, et al. Sentinel node biopsy is not a standard procedure in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the experience of the European Institute of Oncology on 854 patients in 10 years. Ann Surg. 2008;247:315–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Cserni G, Boross G, Maraz R, et al. Multicentre validation of different predictive tools of non-sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer. Surg Oncol. 2012;21:59–65.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Yi M, Krishnamurthy S, Kuerer HM, et al. Role of primary tumor characteristics in predicting positive sentinel lymph nodes in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ or microinvasive breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2008;196:81–7.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ashleigh M. Francis
    • 1
  • Christine E. Haugen
    • 1
  • Lynn M. Grimes
    • 1
  • Jaime R. Crow
    • 1
  • Min Yi
    • 1
  • Elizabeth A. Mittendorf
    • 1
  • Isabelle Bedrosian
    • 1
  • Abigail S. Caudle
    • 1
  • Gildy V. Babiera
    • 1
  • Savitri Krishnamurthy
    • 2
  • Henry M. Kuerer
    • 1
  • Kelly K. Hunt
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Surgical OncologyThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA
  2. 2.Department of PathologyThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer CenterHoustonUSA

Personalised recommendations