Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Role of Ultrasound-Guided Lymph Node Biopsy in Axillary Staging of Invasive Breast Cancer in the Post-ACOSOG Z0011 Trial Era

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

Abstract

Background

Axillary status in invasive breast cancer, established by sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or ultrasound-guided lymph node biopsy, is an important prognostic indicator. The ACOSOG Z0011 trial showed that axillary dissection may be redundant in selected sentinel node-positive patients, raising questions on the applicability of these conclusions on ultrasound positive patients. The purpose of this study was to evaluate potential differences in patient and tumor characteristics and survival between axillary node positive patients after ultrasound (US group) or sentinel lymph node procedure (SN group).

Methods

Patients diagnosed with invasive breast cancer at the Máxima Medical Center between January 2006 and December 2011 were studied.

Results

In total, 302 node-positive cases were included: 139 and 163 cases in the US and SN groups, respectively. Patients in the US group were older at diagnosis (p < 0.001), more often had palpable nodes (p < 0.001), mastectomy (p < 0.001), larger tumors (p < 0.001), higher tumor grade (p = 0.001), lymphovascular invasion (p = 0.035), a positive Her2Neu (p = 0.006), and a negative hormonal receptor status (p = 0.003). Also, they were more likely to have more lymph nodes with macrometastases (p < 0.001), extranodal extension (p < 0.001), and involvement of level-III-lymph node (p < 0.001). Finally, they showed a worse disease-free survival [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.71; 95 % confidence interval (CI) = 1.49–4.92] and overall survival (HR = 2.67; 95 % CI = 1.48–4.84) than the SN group.

Conclusions

These results suggest that ultrasound-positive patients have less favorable disease characteristics and a worse prognosis than SN-positive patients. Therefore, we conclude that omitting an ALND is as yet only applicable, as concluded in the Z0011, in 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 includes VAT (France)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Donker M, Straver ME, van Tienhoven G, et al. Comparison of the sentinel node procedure between patients with multifocal and unifocal breast cancer in the EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS trial: Identification rate and nodal outcome. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49(9):2093–2100.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. 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(5):1128-35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. NABON national guideline breast cancer 2.0; Comprehensive Cancer Centre Netherlands (2012). www.oncoline.nl/mammacarcinoom. Accessed 29 Nov 2013.

  4. Senkus E, Kyriakides S, Penault-Llorca F, et al. Primary breast cancer: ESMO clinical practice guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up. Ann Oncol. 2013;24(Suppl 6):vi7-23.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology (NCCN guidelines 2014); breast cancer version 1.2014. www.nccn.com. Accessed 5 Jan 2014.

  6. Rajesh YS, Ellenbogen S, Banerjee B. Preoperative axillary ultrasound scan: its accuracy in assessing the axillary nodal status in carcinoma breast. Breast. 2002;11(1):49-52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Specht MC, Fey JV, Borgen PI, Cody HS 3rd. Is the clinically positive axilla in breast cancer really a contraindication to sentinel lymph node biopsy? J Am Coll Surg. 2005;200(1):10-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Gur AS, Unal B, Ozbek U, et al. Validation of breast cancer nomograms for predicting the non-sentinel lymph node metastases after a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy in a multi-center study. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36(1):30-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 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(4):733-40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Coutant C, Rouzier R, Fondrinier E, et al. Validation of the tenon breast cancer score for predicting non-sentinel lymph node status in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node metastasis: a prospective multicenter study. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;113(3):537-43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Nath J, Sami N, Massey J, Donnelly J, Corder AP. Selection for axillary clearance in breast cancer (ultrasound negative, sentinel node positive patients have low rates of further metastases). Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39(5):450-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: A randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2011;305(6):569-75.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Swinson C, Ravichandran D, Nayagam M, Allen S. Ultrasound and fine needle aspiration cytology of the axilla in the pre-operative identification of axillary nodal involvement in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009;35(11):1152-7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Hackney L, Williams S, Bajwa S, Morley-Davies AJ, Kirby RM, Britton I. Influence of tumor histology on preoperative staging accuracy of breast metastases to the axilla. Breast J. 2013;19(1):49-55.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Roumen RM, Geuskens LM, Valkenburg JG. In search of the true sentinel node by different injection techniques in breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1999;25(4):347-51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Roumen RM, Valkenburg JG, Geuskens LM. Lymphoscintigraphy and feasibility of sentinel node biopsy in 83 patients with primary breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997;23(6):495-502.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Rao R, Euhus D, Mayo HG, Balch C. Axillary node interventions in breast cancer: A systematic review. JAMA. 2013;310(13):1385-94.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Katz A, Smith BL, Golshan M, et al. Nomogram for the prediction of having four or more involved nodes for sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(13):2093-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Van Wely BJ, de Wilt JH, Schout PJ, et al. Ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of suspicious nodes in breast cancer patients; selecting patients with extensive nodal involvement. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2013;140(1):113-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cools-Lartigue J, Sinclair A, Trabulsi N, et al. Preoperative axillary ultrasound and fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the diagnosis of axillary metastases in patients with breast cancer: Predictors of accuracy and future implications. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(3):819-27.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Diepstraten SC, Sever AR, Buckens CF, et al. Value of preoperative ultrasound-guided axillary lymph node biopsy for preventing completion axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(1):51-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Houssami N, Diepstraten SC, Cody HS 3rd, Turner RM, Sever AR. Clinical utility of ultrasound-needle biopsy for preoperative staging of the axilla in invasive breast cancer. Anticancer Res. 2014;34(3):1087-97.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Pesce C, Morrow M. The need for lymph node dissection in nonmetastatic breast cancer. Annu Rev Med. 2013;64:119-29.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Unal B, Gur AS, Beriwal S, et al. Predicting likelihood of having four or more positive nodes in patient with sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer: a nomogram validation study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2009;75(4):1035-40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Van den Hoven I, Kuijt GP, Voogd AC, Roumen RM. High intersystem variability for the prediction of additional axillary non-sentinel lymph node involvement in individual patients with sentinel node-positive breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(6):1841-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Van den Hoven I, Kuijt GP, Voogd AC, van Beek MW, Roumen RM. Value of memorial sloan-kettering cancer center nomogram in clinical decision making for sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2010;97(11):1653-8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. 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(10):1140-51.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. 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(4):484-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Abe H, Schacht D, Sennett CA, Newstead GM, Schmidt RA. Utility of preoperative ultrasound for predicting pN2 or higher stage axillary lymph node involvement in patients with newly diagnosed breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2013;200(3):696-702.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Rutgers EJT, Donker M, Straver ME, et. al. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer patients: final analysis of the EORTC AMAROS trial. J Clin Oncol. 2013;31(Suppl):abstr LBA1001.

Download references

Conflict of interest

None to declare.

Disclosure

None to declare.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Máxima Medical Center, Veldhoven, The Netherlands

    N. C. Verheuvel MSc, MD, I. van den Hoven MD & R. M. H. Roumen MD, PhD

  2. Department of Radiology, Máxima Medical Center, Veldhoven, The Netherlands

    H. W. A. Ooms MD, PhD

  3. Comprehensive Cancer Center Netherlands, Eindhoven, The Netherlands

    A. C. Voogd PhD

  4. School GROW, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands

    A. C. Voogd PhD & R. M. H. Roumen MD, PhD

Authors
  1. N. C. Verheuvel MSc, MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. I. van den Hoven MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. W. A. Ooms MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. C. Voogd PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. R. M. H. Roumen MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to N. C. Verheuvel MSc, MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Verheuvel, N.C., van den Hoven, I., Ooms, H.W.A. et al. The Role of Ultrasound-Guided Lymph Node Biopsy in Axillary Staging of Invasive Breast Cancer in the Post-ACOSOG Z0011 Trial Era. Ann Surg Oncol 22, 409–415 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4071-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-4071-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation