Does Lymph Node Status Prior to Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Influence the Number of Sentinel Nodes Removed?
Recent prospective trials support the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) with a lower false-negative rate if three or more sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) are identified. In this study, we investigated whether the pre-NAC axillary lymph node status influences the number of SLNs identified.
Stage I–III breast cancer patients who received NAC and underwent SLNB from May 2014 to April 2016 were identified from an institutional prospective database. Clinical and pathological factors among clinically node-negative (cN−) and clinically node-positive (cN+) patients who converted to cN− post-NAC were compared. Generalized linear mixed models analyzed factors associated with the number of SLNs removed.
Among 343 patients who underwent SLNB during the study period, 335 (98%) had at least one SLN identified, and subsequently comprised the study population. The median number of SLNs identified was 4 (range 1–14), which did not differ according to pre-NAC nodal status (P = 0.15). Overall, 85% of patients had three or more SLNs identified (80% cN− group vs. 89% cN+ group; P = 0.02). On univariable analysis, age < 50 years and presenting with a positive axillary node were significantly associated with identifying three or more SLNs.
Our study confirms that SLNB was successfully performed in 98% of our patients after NAC, with very few failed mapping procedures. In the post-NAC setting, the median number of SLNs identified was four, and the status of the axilla prior to NAC did not negatively affect the number of SLNs identified.
The preparation of this manuscript was funded in part by NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant No. P30 CA008748 to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.
- 3.Boughey JC, McCall LM, Ballman KV, et al. Tumor biology correlates with rates of breast-conserving surgery and pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: findings from the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) Prospective Multicenter Clinical Trial. Ann Surg 2014; 260(4):608–14; (discussion 14–6).CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 9.National Comprehensive Cancer Network: NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology, Breast Cancer. Version. 1.2018.Google Scholar
- 15.Caudle AS, Yang WT, Krishnamurthy S, et al. Improved axillary evaluation following neoadjuvant therapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer using selective evaluation of clipped nodes: implementation of targeted axillary dissection. J Clin Oncol 2016; 34(10):1072–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 19.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(10):881–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 21.Boughey JC, Ballman KV, Le-Petross HT, et al. Identification and resection of clipped node decreases the false-negative rate of sentinel lymph node surgery in patients presenting with node-positive breast cancer (T0-T4, N1-N2) Who receive neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance). Ann Surg 2016; 263(4):802–7.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 23.Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2010; 11(10):927–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar