Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of Three Scoring Systems Predicting Non Sentinel Node Metastasis in Breast Cancer Patients with a Positive Sentinel Node Biopsy

  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND), performed after a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in breast cancer patients, often results in no additional positive nodes. Scoring systems have been published to aid in the prediction of nonsentinel node metastasis. Our purpose was to assess the validity of these scoring systems in our patient population.

Methods

For 39 consecutive patients who underwent cALND after a positive SLNB, scores were calculated using retrospective patient data for each of the three scoring systems used. Receiver operating characteristics (ROC) curves were drawn, and the areas under the curves were calculated to assess the discriminative power of each system. Univariate analysis was performed to assess the predictability of individual patient and tumor characteristics.

Results

Nonsentinel nodes were positive in 23 (59%) patients. The areas under the ROC curves were 0.63, 0.70, and 0.68, respectively. The proportion of sentinel nodes that were positive and the total number of sentinel nodes retrieved were the only individual predictors of nonsentinel node metastasis.

Conclusions

Given the high incidence of retrieving no additional metastasis on cALND, individualized patient management according to risk is desirable. Scoring systems provide additional information regarding the likelihood of metastasis in nonsentinel nodes, but their predictability remains less than optimal. The use of scoring systems must be applied with caution until future studies provide a more accurate assessment of risk for patients with a positive SLNB.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

FIG. 1.
FIG. 2.
FIG. 3.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Guiliano AE, Jones RC, Brennan M, et al. Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15:2345–2350

    Google Scholar 

  2. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Galimberti V, et al. Sentinel node biopsy to avoid axillary dissection in breast cancer with clinically negative lymph nodes. Lancet 1997; 349:1864–1867

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, et al. The sentinel node in breast cancer: a multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med 1998; 339:941–946

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. A randomized comparison of sentinel node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 349:546–553

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Giuliano AE, Haigh PI, Brennan MB, et al. Prospective observational study of sentinel lymphadenectomy without further axillary dissection in patients with sentinel node negative breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18:2553–2559

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. 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; 10:248–254

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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; 91:113–119

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Chu Ku, Turner RR, Hansen NM, et al. Do all patients with sentinel node metastsis from breast carcinoma need complete axillary node dissection? Ann Surg 1999; 229:536–541

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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; 89:574–581

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Joslyn SA, Konety BR. Effect of axillary lymphadenectomy on breast carcinoma survival. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2005; 91:11–18

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Orr RK. The impact of prophylactic axillary node dissection on breast cancer survival: a Bayesian meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol 1999; 6:109–116

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DC, et al. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status and survival in 24740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 1989; 63:181–187

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Kakuda JT, Stuntz M, Trivedi V, et al. Objective assessment of axillary morbidity in breast cancer treatment. Am Surg 1999; 65:995–998

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Purushotham AD, Upponi S, Klevesath MB, et al. Morbidity after sentinel lymph node biopsy in primary breast cancer: results from a randomized controlled trial. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23:4312–4321

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Farshid G, Pradhan M, Kollias J, Gill PG. A decision aid for predicting non-sentinel node involvement in women with breast cancer and at least one positive sentinel node. The Breast 2004; 13;494–501

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Tan YY, Fan YG, Lu Y, et al. Ratio of positive to total number of sentinel nodes predicts nonsentinel node status in breast cancer patients. Breast J 2005; 11:248–253

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. 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; 89:574–581

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Wong SL, Edwards MJ, Chao C, et al. Predicting the status of the nonsentinel axillary nodes. Arch Surg 2001; 136:563–568

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Guenther JM, Hansen NM, DeFronzo LA, et al. Axillary dissection is not required for all patients with breast cancer and positive nodes. Arch Surg 2003; 138:52–56

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Schrenk P, Konstantiniuk P, Wolfl S, et al. Prediction of non-sentinel lymph node status in breast cancer with a micrometastatic sentinel node. Br J Surg 2005; 92:707–713

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Van Zee K, Manasseh DME, Becilacqua JLB, 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; 10:1140–1151

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Vargas HI, Tolmos J, Agbunag RV, et al. A validation trial of subdermal injection compared with intraparenchymal injection for sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Am Surg 2002; 68:87–91

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Cady, Blake. A contemporary view of axillary dissection. Ann Surg 2000; 232:8–9

  24. Fant JS, Grant MD, Knox SM, et al. Preliminary outcome analysis in patients with breast cancer and a positive sentinel lymph node who declined axillary dissection. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:126–130

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. International Breast Cancer Study Group. Randomized trial comparing axillary clearance versus no axillary clearance in older patients with breast cancer: first results of international breast cancer study group trial 10-93. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:337–344

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Fisher B, Montague E, Redmond C, et al. Findings of NSABP Protocol No. B-04 – comparison of radical mastectomy with alternative treatments for primary breast cancer. Cancer 1980; 46:1–13

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Louis-Silvester C, Clough K, Asselain B, et al. Axillary treatment in conservative management of operable breast cancer: dissection or radiotherapy? Results of a randomized study with 15 years of follow-up. J Clin Oncol 2004; 22:97–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Specht MC, Kattan MW, Gonen M, et al. Predicting nonsentinel node status after positive sentinel lymph biopsy for breast cancer: clinicians versus nomogram. Ann Surg Oncol 2005; 12:654–659

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Smidt ML, Kuster DM, Jan van der Wilt G, et al. Can the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center Nomogram predict the likelihood of nonsentinel node metastases in breast cancer patients in the Netherlands? Ann Surg Oncol 2005; 12:1066–1072

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Melissa Burla, MSN, NP and Katherine Gonzalez, RN for their contributions to this work.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California, USA

    Christine E. Dauphine, Maria P. Vargas, Nova M. Isaac & Hernan I. Vargas

  2. Department of Emergency Medicine, Denver Health Medical Center, Denver, Colorado, USA

    Jason S. Haukoos

  3. Department of Preventive Medicine and Biometrics, University of Colorado Health Sciences Center, Denver, Colorado, USA

    Jason S. Haukoos

  4. Department of Radiology, Harbor-UCLA Medical Center, Torrance, California, USA

    Iraj Khalkhali

  5. Section of Surgical Oncology, 1000 West Carson Street, Box 25, Torrance, CA, 90502, USA

    Hernan I. Vargas

Authors
  1. Christine E. Dauphine
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jason S. Haukoos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Maria P. Vargas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nova M. Isaac
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Iraj Khalkhali
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Hernan I. Vargas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hernan I. Vargas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dauphine, C.E., Haukoos, J.S., Vargas, M.P. 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 14, 1014–1019 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9223-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-006-9223-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation