Advertisement

A Radiation Oncologist’s Guide to Axillary Management in Breast Cancer: a Walk Through the Trials

  • Julie K. Jang
  • Elana R. Sverdlik
  • Naomi R. SchechterEmail author
Clinical Trials (JE Lang, Section Editor)
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Topical Collection on Clinical Trials

Abstract

Purpose of Review

The axilla is the most common site for breast cancer nodal metastases. Aggressive management includes axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), radiotherapy, and systemic therapy, but carries the risks of lymphedema and “overtreatment”. We review the clinical trials that led to de-escalation of axillary management and their nuances that are often overlooked.

Recent Findings

With the rise of sentinel lymph node biopsy, several trials conclude that ALND can be omitted in specific populations. However, the subtleties in those trials, such as the role of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, have yet to be clarified. These discussions carry forward into the era of neoadjuvant chemotherapy, where ongoing trials investigate who needs ALND and/or radiation.

Summary

This review examines the clinical trials that form the standard of care, and highlights why axillary management is individualized today.

Keywords

Axilla Radiotherapy Breast cancer Axillary lymph node dissection Sentinel lymph node biopsy Lymph node metastasis 

Notes

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance •• Of major importance

  1. 1.
    Edwards BK, Noone AM, Mariotto AB, Simard EP, Boscoe FP, Henley SJ, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, 1975-2010, featuring prevalence of comorbidity and impact on survival among persons with lung, colorectal, breast, or prostate cancer. Cancer. 2014;120(9):1290–314.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.28509.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dodwell D, Taylor C, McGale P, Coles C, Duane F, Gray R, et al. Abstract GS4–02: regional lymph node irradiation in early stage breast cancer: an EBCTCG meta-analysis of 13,000 women in 14 trials. Cancer Research. 2019;79:GS4–02-GS4.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Freedman GM, Fowble BL, Nicolaou N, Sigurdson ER, Torosian MH, Boraas MC, et al. Should internal mammary lymph nodes in breast cancer be a target for the radiation oncologist? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;46(4):805–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen RC, Lin NU, Golshan M, Harris JR, Bellon JR. Internal mammary nodes in breast cancer: diagnosis and implications for patient management -- a systematic review. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(30):4981–9.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.17.4862.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Verma V, Beriwal S. Internal mammary node radiation in light of the EORTC 22922 and MA.20 trials-what have we really learned? JAMA Oncol. 2016;2(8):992–3.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2015.5810.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hennequin C, Bossard N, Servagi-Vernat S, Maingon P, Dubois JB, Datchary J, et al. Ten-year survival results of a randomized trial of irradiation of internal mammary nodes after mastectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;86(5):860–6.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.03.021.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nguyen MH, Lavilla M, Kim JN, Fang LC. Cardiac sparing characteristics of internal mammary chain radiotherapy using deep inspiration breath hold for left-sided breast cancer. Radiat Oncol. 2018;13(1):103.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13014-018-1052-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johansen H, Kaae S, Schiodt T. Simple mastectomy with postoperative irradiation versus extended radical mastectomy in breast cancer. A twenty-five-year follow-up of a randomized trial. Acta Oncol. 1990;29(6):709–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Greco M, Agresti R, Cascinelli N, Casalini P, Giovanazzi R, Maucione A, et al. Breast cancer patients treated without axillary surgery: clinical implications and biologic analysis. Ann Surg. 2000;232(1):1–7.  https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-200007000-00001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Fisher B, Jeong JH, Anderson S, Bryant J, Fisher ER, Wolmark N. Twenty-five-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing radical mastectomy, total mastectomy, and total mastectomy followed by irradiation. N Engl J Med. 2002;347(8):567–75.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa020128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zurrida S, Orecchia R, Galimberti V, Luini A, Giannetti I, Ballardini B, et al. Axillary radiotherapy instead of axillary dissection: a randomized trial. Italian Oncological Senology Group. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(2):156–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Louis-Sylvestre C, Clough K, Asselain B, Vilcoq JR, Salmon RJ, Campana F, 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(1):97–101.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2004.12.108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Martelli G, Boracchi P, De Palo M, Pilotti S, Oriana S, Zucali R, et al. A randomized trial comparing axillary dissection to no axillary dissection in older patients with T1N0 breast cancer: results after 5 years of follow-up. Ann Surg. 2005;242(1):1–6; discussion 7-9.  https://doi.org/10.1097/01.sla.0000167759.15670.14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    • Nguyen TT, Hoskin TL, Habermann EB, Cheville AL, Boughey JC. Breast Cancer-related lymphedema risk is related to multidisciplinary treatment and not surgery alone: results from a large cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(10):2972–80.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-5960-x This study gives rate of lymphedema with different aspects of multi-modality treatment. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz PW, 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.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz P, Leitch AM, et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2010;252(3):426–32; discussion 32-3.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181f08f32.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Donker M, van Tienhoven G, Straver ME, Meijnen P, van de Velde CJ, Mansel RE, et al. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12):1303–10.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70460-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Straver ME, Meijnen P, van Tienhoven G, van de Velde CJ, Mansel RE, Bogaerts J, et al. Sentinel node identification rate and nodal involvement in the EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17(7):1854–61.  https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-010-0945-z.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Cardoso F, van't Veer LJ, Bogaerts J, Slaets L, Viale G, Delaloge S, et al. 70-gene signature as an aid to treatment decisions in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2016;375(8):717–29.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1602253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Albain KS, Hayes DF, et al. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(21):2005–14.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1510764.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Orucevic A, Heidel RE, Bell JL. Utilization and impact of 21-gene recurrence score assay for breast cancer in clinical practice across the United States: lessons learned from the 2010 to 2012 National Cancer Data Base analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;157(3):427–35.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-016-3833-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    • Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, Pritchard KI, Albain KS, Hayes DF, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379(2):111–21.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1804710 This clinical trial showed that adjuvant endocrine therapy and chemo-endocrine therapy yield similar survival and recurrence rates among patients with node-negative breast cancer and midrange recurrence scores (11–25) on a 21-gene expression assay (Oncotype Dx®, Genomic Health)—with the caveat that chemotherapy offers women aged 50 or younger with recurrence scores of 16–25 a small absolute benefit in lower rates of distant failure. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Stemmer SM, Steiner M, Rizel S, Geffen DB, Nisenbaum B, Peretz T, et al. Clinical outcomes in ER+ HER2 -node-positive breast cancer patients who were treated according to the recurrence score results: evidence from a large prospectively designed registry. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2017;3:32.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-017-0033-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    •• Mamounas EP, Russell CA, Lau A, Turner MP, Albain KS. Clinical relevance of the 21-gene Recurrence Score((R)) assay in treatment decisions for patients with node-positive breast cancer in the genomic era. NPJ Breast Cancer. 2018;4:27.  https://doi.org/10.1038/s41523-018-0082-6 While the Tailor RX trial evaluated Oncotype DX® as a tool to predict chemotherapy benefit in patients with node-negative breast cancer, this review highlights the evidence supporting the use of Oncotype DX® in node-positive, hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early-stage breast cancer. The recurrence scores identify patients with low genomic risks who may avoid chemotherapy, although they are node-positive. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Iyer RV, Hanlon A, Fowble B, Freedman G, Nicolaou N, Anderson P, et al. Accuracy of the extent of axillary nodal positivity related to primary tumor size, number of involved nodes, and number of nodes examined. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2000;47(5):1177–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Van Zee KJ, Manasseh DM, Bevilacqua JL, Boolbol SK, Fey JV, Tan LK, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Specht MC, Kattan MW, Gonen M, Fey J, Van Zee KJ. Predicting nonsentinel node status after positive sentinel lymph biopsy for breast cancer: clinicians versus nomogram. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(8):654–9.  https://doi.org/10.1245/ASO.2005.06.037.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shahar KH, Hunt KK, Thames HD, Ross MI, Perkins GH, Kuerer HM, et al. Factors predictive of having four or more positive axillary lymph nodes in patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes: implications for selection of radiation fields. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;59(4):1074–9.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.01.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Katz A, Smith BL, Golshan M, Niemierko A, Kobayashi W, Raad RA, 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.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.11.9479.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Gur AS, Unal B, Ozbek U, Ozmen V, Aydogan F, Gokgoz S, 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejso.2009.05.007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Harris EE, Freilich J, Lin HY, Chuong M, Acs G. The impact of the size of nodal metastases on recurrence risk in breast cancer patients with 1-3 positive axillary nodes after mastectomy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2013;85(3):609–14.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2012.05.050.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Whelan TJ, Olivotto IA, Levine MN. Regional nodal irradiation in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(19):1878–9.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1510505.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Poortmans PM, Struikmans H, Bartelink H. Regional nodal irradiation in early-stage breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(19):1879–80.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1510505.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Poortmans PM, Collette S, Kirkove C, Van Limbergen E, Budach V, Struikmans H, et al. Internal mammary and medial supraclavicular irradiation in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(4):317–27.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1415369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Ebctcg, McGale P, Taylor C, Correa C, Cutter D, Duane F, et al. Effect of radiotherapy after mastectomy and axillary surgery on 10-year recurrence and 20-year breast cancer mortality: meta-analysis of individual patient data for 8135 women in 22 randomised trials. Lancet. 2014;383(9935):2127–35.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(14)60488-8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Clarke M, Collins R, Darby S, Davies C, Elphinstone P, Evans V, et al. Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of the randomised trials. Lancet. 2005;366(9503):2087–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)67887-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Ricci JA, Epstein S, Momoh AO, Lin SJ, Singhal D, Lee BT. A meta-analysis of implant-based breast reconstruction and timing of adjuvant radiation therapy. J Surg Res. 2017;218:108–16.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jss.2017.05.072.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Jagsi R, Momoh AO, Qi J, Hamill JB, Billig J, Kim HM et al. Impact of radiotherapy on complications and patient-reported outcomes after breast reconstruction. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2018;110(2). doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djx148.
  39. 39.
    • Gross JP, Whelan TJ, Parulekar WR, Chen BE, Rademaker AW, Helenowski IB, et al. Development and validation of a nomogram to predict lymphedema following axillary surgery and radiotherapy in women with breast cancer from the NCIC CTG MA.20 randomized trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.05.002 This nomogram is a clinical tool to predict lymphedema risk following multi-modality therapy involving the axilla.
  40. 40.
    Haffty BG, Hunt KK, Harris JR, Buchholz TA. Positive sentinel nodes without axillary dissection: implications for the radiation oncologist. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29(34):4479–81.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.36.1667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Krug D, Baumann R, Budach W, Dunst J, Feyer P, Fietkau R, et al. Individualization of post-mastectomy radiotherapy and regional nodal irradiation based on treatment response after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer : a systematic review. Strahlenther Onkol. 2018;194(7):607–18.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s00066-018-1270-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Haffty BG, McCall LM, Ballman KV, Buchholz TA, Hunt KK, Boughey JC. Impact of radiation on Locoregional control in women with node-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy and axillary lymph node dissection: results from ACOSOG Z1071 clinical trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2019;105:174–82.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2019.04.038.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Pilewskie M, Morrow M. Axillary nodal management following neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a review. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(4):549–55.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4163.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Hunt KK, Yi M, Mittendorf EA, Guerrero C, Babiera GV, Bedrosian I, 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(4):558–66.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181b8fd5e.Google Scholar
  45. 45.
    Early Breast Cancer Trialists' Collaborative G. Long-term outcomes for neoadjuvant versus adjuvant chemotherapy in early breast cancer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from ten randomised trials. Lancet Oncol. 2018;19(1):27–39.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30777-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Mamounas EP, Bandos H, White JR, Julian TB, Khan AJ, Shaitelman SF, et al. NRG Oncology/NSABP B-51/RTOG 1304: Phase III trial to determine if chest wall and regional nodal radiotherapy (CWRNRT) post mastectomy (Mx) or the addition of RNRT to breast RT post breast-conserving surgery (BCS) reduces invasive breast cancer recurrence free interval (IBCRFI) in patients (pts) with positive axillary (PAx) nodes who are ypN0 after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NC). Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2017;35(15_suppl):TPS589-TPS.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.TPS589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Khan AJ, Poppe MM, Goyal S, Kokeny KE, Kearney T, Kirstein L, et al. Hypofractionated postmastectomy radiation therapy is safe and effective: first results from a prospective phase II trial. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35(18):2037–43.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.70.7158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Yarnold J, Ashton A, Bliss J, Homewood J, Harper C, Hanson J, et al. Fractionation sensitivity and dose response of late adverse effects in the breast after radiotherapy for early breast cancer: long-term results of a randomised trial. Radiother Oncol. 2005;75(1):9–17.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.radonc.2005.01.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Haviland JS, Owen JR, Dewar JA, Agrawal RK, Barrett J, Barrett-Lee PJ, et al. The UK standardisation of breast radiotherapy (START) trials of radiotherapy hypofractionation for treatment of early breast cancer: 10-year follow-up results of two randomised controlled trials. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(11):1086–94.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70386-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Whelan TJ, Pignol JP, Levine MN, Julian JA, MacKenzie R, Parpia S, et al. Long-term results of hypofractionated radiation therapy for breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2010;362(6):513–20.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa0906260.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Bane AL, Whelan TJ, Pond GR, Parpia S, Gohla G, Fyles AW, et al. Tumor factors predictive of response to hypofractionated radiotherapy in a randomized trial following breast conserving therapy. Ann Oncol. 2014;25(5):992–8.  https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdu090.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    McCormick B, Botnick M, Hunt M, Petrek J. Are the axillary lymph nodes treated by standard tangent breast fields? J Surg Oncol. 2002;81(1):12–6; discussion 7-8.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.10148.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Setton J, Cody H, Tan L, Morrow M, Hudis C, Catalano J, et al. Radiation field design and regional control in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients with omission of axillary dissection. Cancer. 2012;118(8):1994–2003.  https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.26504.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Schlembach PJ, Buchholz TA, Ross MI, Kirsner SM, Salas GJ, Strom EA, et al. Relationship of sentinel and axillary level I-II lymph nodes to tangential fields used in breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51(3):671–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Takeda A, Shigematsu N, Ikeda T, Kawaguchi O, Kutsuki S, Ishibashi R, et al. Evaluation of novel modified tangential irradiation technique for breast cancer patients using dose-volume histograms. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;58(4):1280–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2003.10.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Alco G, Igdem SI, Ercan T, Dincer M, Senturk R, Atilla S, et al. Coverage of axillary lymph nodes with high tangential fields in breast radiotherapy. Br J Radiol. 2010;83(996):1072–6.  https://doi.org/10.1259/bjr/25788274.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Reznik J, Cicchetti MG, Degaspe B, Fitzgerald TJ. Analysis of axillary coverage during tangential radiation therapy to the breast. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2005;61(1):163–8.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2004.04.065.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Sanuki N, Takeda A, Amemiya A, Ofuchi T, Ono M, Ogata H, et al. Axillary irradiation with high tangent fields for clinically node-negative breast cancer: can 3-D conformal radiotherapy with a field-in-field technique better control the axilla? Breast Care (Basel). 2013;8(5):362–7.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000355708.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Hayes SB, Freedman GM, Li T, Anderson PR, Ross E. Does axillary boost increase lymphedema compared with supraclavicular radiation alone after breast conservation? Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008;72(5):1449–55.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2008.02.080.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Warren LE, Miller CL, Horick N, Skolny MN, Jammallo LS, Sadek BT, et al. The impact of radiation therapy on the risk of lymphedema after treatment for breast cancer: a prospective cohort study. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2014;88(3):565–71.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijrobp.2013.11.232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Fisher B, Montague E, Redmond C, Barton B, Borland D, Fisher ER, et al. Comparison of radical mastectomy with alternative treatments for primary breast cancer. A first report of results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Cancer. 1977;39(6 Suppl):2827–39.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1097-0142(197706)39:6<2827::aid-cncr2820390671>3.0.co;2-i.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, Bauer M, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, et al. Ten-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing radical mastectomy and total mastectomy with or without radiation. N Engl J Med. 1985;312(11):674–81.  https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198503143121102.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Ashikaga T, 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70278-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Ashikaga T, Krag DN, Land SR, Julian TB, Anderson SJ, Brown AM, et al. Morbidity results from the NSABP B-32 trial comparing sentinel lymph node dissection versus axillary dissection. J Surg Oncol. 2010;102(2):111–8.  https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.21535.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Costantino JP, 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.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70207-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Giuliano AE, Hunt K, Ballman KV, Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz PW, et al. Ten-year survival results of ACOSOG Z0011: A randomized trial of axillary node dissection in women with clinical T1–2 N0 M0 breast cancer who have a positive sentinel node (Alliance). Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2016;34(15_suppl):1007.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2016.34.15_suppl.1007.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    •• Giuliano AE, Ballman KV, McCall L, Beitsch PD, Brennan MB, Kelemen PR, et al. Effect of axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection on 10-year overall survival among women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: the ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2017;318(10):918–26.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.11470 For women with T1 or T2 invasive primary breast cancer, no palpable adenopathy, and 1 or 2 positive SLN, the 10-year data on the Z0011 trial show similar survival rates with or without ALND. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    Giuliano AE, Ballman K, McCall L, Beitsch P, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz P, et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: long-term follow-up from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (Alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 randomized trial. Ann Surg. 2016;264(3):413–20.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Lucci A, McCall LM, Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Reintgen DS, Blumencranz PW, et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) plus axillary lymph node dissection compared with SLND alone in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group trial Z0011. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(24):3657–63.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2006.07.4062.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    •• Rutgers E, Donker M, Poncet C, Straver M, Meijnen P, van de Velde C, et al. Abstract GS4–01: Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer patients: 10 year follow up results of the EORTC AMAROS trial (EORTC 10981/22023). Cancer Research. 2019;79(4 Supplement):GS4–01-GS4.  https://doi.org/10.1158/1538-7445.Sabcs18-gs4-01 This key abstract presented at the 2018 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium presents the 10-year follow up results of the landmark AMAROS trial, showing similar survival and recurrence for early-stage, clinical node-negative, and pathologic SLN-positive breast cancer patients randomized to ALND or axillary radiotherapy. Google Scholar
  71. 71.
    Jagsi R, Chadha M, Moni J, Ballman K, Laurie F, Buchholz TA, et al. Radiation field design in the ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) trial. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(32):3600–6.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.56.5838.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Galimberti V, Cole BF, Zurrida S, Viale G, Luini A, Veronesi P, et al. Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with sentinel-node micrometastases (IBCSG 23-01): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(4):297–305.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70035-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Morrow M, Van Zee KJ, Patil S, Petruolo O, Mamtani A, Barrio AV, et al. Axillary dissection and nodal irradiation can be avoided for most node-positive Z0011-eligible breast cancers: a prospective validation study of 793 patients. Ann Surg. 2017;266(3):457–62.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000002354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Houvenaeghel G, Cohen M, Raro P, De Troyer J, de Lara CT, Gimbergues P, et al. Overview of the pathological results and treatment characteristics in the first 1000 patients randomized in the SERC trial: axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with involved sentinel node. BMC Cancer. 2018;18(1):1153.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-018-5053-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Gentilini O, Veronesi U. Abandoning sentinel lymph node biopsy in early breast cancer? A new trial in progress at the European Institute of Oncology of Milan (SOUND: sentinel node vs observation after axillary UltraSouND). Breast. 2012;21(5):678–81.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2012.06.013.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Reimer T, Hartmann S, Stachs A, Gerber B. Local treatment of the axilla in early breast cancer: concepts from the national surgical adjuvant breast and bowel project B-04 to the planned intergroup sentinel mamma trial. Breast Care (Basel). 2014;9(2):87–95.  https://doi.org/10.1159/000360411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Henke G, Knauer M, Ribi K, Hayoz S, Gerard MA, Ruhstaller T, et al. Tailored axillary surgery with or without axillary lymph node dissection followed by radiotherapy in patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer (TAXIS): study protocol for a multicenter, randomized phase-III trial. Trials. 2018;19(1):667.  https://doi.org/10.1186/s13063-018-3021-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Tinterri C, Canavese G, Bruzzi P, Dozin B. SINODAR ONE, an ongoing randomized clinical trial to assess the role of axillary surgery in breast cancer patients with one or two macrometastatic sentinel nodes. Breast. 2016;30:197–200.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.breast.2016.06.016.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Goyal A, Dodwell D. POSNOC: a randomised trial looking at axillary treatment in women with one or two sentinel nodes with macrometastases. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2015;27(12):692–5.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clon.2015.07.005.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Rastogi P, Anderson SJ, Bear HD, Geyer CE, Kahlenberg MS, Robidoux A, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy: updates of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and bowel project protocols B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(5):778–85.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2007.15.0235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ, Julien JP, Tubiana-Hulin M, Vandervelden C, Duchateau L. Preoperative chemotherapy in primary operable breast cancer: results from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer trial 10902. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19(22):4224–37.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2001.19.22.4224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. 82.
    van Nes JG, Putter H, Julien JP, Tubiana-Hulin M, van de Vijver M, Bogaerts J, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy is safe in early breast cancer, even after 10 years of follow-up; clinical and translational results from the EORTC trial 10902. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2009;115(1):101–13.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-008-0050-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Chen Y, Shi XE, Tian JH, Yang XJ, Wang YF, Yang KH. Survival benefit of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for resectable breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2018;97(20):e10634.  https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000010634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, Ahrendt GM, Wilke LG, Taback B, et al. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. JAMA. 2013;310(14):1455–61.  https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2013.278932.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, Ahrendt GM, Wilke LG, Taback B, et al. Factors affecting sentinel lymph node identification rate after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer patients enrolled in ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance). Ann Surg. 2015;261(3):547–52.  https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000000551.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Boughey JC, Ballman KV, Hunt KK, McCall LM, Mittendorf EA, Ahrendt GM, et al. Axillary ultrasound after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and its impact on sentinel lymph node surgery: results from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1071 trial (Alliance). J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(30):3386–93.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.57.8401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Kuehn T, Bauerfeind I, Fehm T, Fleige B, Hausschild M, Helms G, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective, multicentre cohort study. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(7):609–18.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70166-9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Boileau JF, Poirier B, Basik M, Holloway CM, Gaboury L, Sideris L, et al. Sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer: the SN FNAC study. J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(3):258–64.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2014.55.7827.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Mamounas ET. Optimal management of the axilla: a look at the evidence. Adv Surg. 2016;50(1):29–40.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yasu.2016.03.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Mamounas EP, Anderson SJ, Dignam JJ, Bear HD, Julian TB, Geyer CE Jr, et al. Predictors of locoregional recurrence after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: results from combined analysis of National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18 and B-27. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(32):3960–6.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2011.40.8369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. 91.
    NIH. Comparison of axillary lymph node dissection with axillary radiation for patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with chemotherapy (Alliance A011202). https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01901094. Accessed 7 July 2019.
  92. 92.
    •• Mamounas EP, Liu Q, Paik S, Baehner FL, Tang G, Jeong JH et al. 21-Gene recurrence score and locoregional recurrence in node-positive/ER-positive breast cancer treated with chemo-endocrine therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2017;109(4). doi: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djw259. While the Tailor RX trial evaluated Oncotype DX® as a tool to predict chemotherapy benefit in patients with node-negative breast cancer, this retrospective assessment of a prospective trial (NSABP B-28) suggests that the recurrence scores can predict loco-regional recurrence risk in node-positive ER+ breast cancer treated with chemo-hormonal therapy.
  93. 93.
    Parulekar WR, Berrang T, Kong I, Rakovitch E, Theberge V, Gelmon KA, et al. Cctg MA.39 tailor RT: a randomized trial of regional radiotherapy in biomarker low-risk node-positive breast cancer (NCT03488693). Journal of Clinical Oncology. 2019;37(15_suppl):TPS602-TPS.  https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2019.37.15_suppl.TPS602.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Julie K. Jang
    • 1
  • Elana R. Sverdlik
    • 2
  • Naomi R. Schechter
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Radiation OncologyUSC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Keck School of Medicine of USCLos AngelesUSA
  2. 2.Department of Surgical OncologyUSC Norris Comprehensive Cancer Center, Keck School of Medicine of USCLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations