Advertisement

Axillary Lymph Node Ultrasound Following Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Biopsy-Proven Node-Positive Breast Cancer: Results from the SN FNAC Study

  • Dominique Morency
  • Sinziana Dumitra
  • Elena Parvez
  • Karyne Martel
  • Mark Basik
  • André Robidoux
  • Brigitte Poirier
  • Claire M. B. Holloway
  • Louis Gaboury
  • Lucas Sideris
  • Sarkis Meterissian
  • Jean-François BoileauEmail author
Breast Oncology
  • 18 Downloads

Abstract

Background

The sentinel node biopsy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SN FNAC) study has shown that in node-positive (N+) breast cancer, sentinel node biopsy (SNB) can be performed following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), with a low false negative rate (FNR = 8.4%). A secondary endpoint of the SN FNAC study was to determine whether axillary ultrasound (AxUS) could predict axillary pathological complete response (ypN0) and increase the accuracy of SNB.

Methods

The SN FNAC trial is a study of patients with biopsy-proven N+ breast cancer who underwent SNB followed by completion node dissection. All patients had AxUS following NAC and the axillary nodes were classified as either positive (AxUS+) or negative (AxUS−). AxUS was compared with the final axillary pathology results.

Results

There was no statistical difference in the baseline characteristics of patients with AxUS+ versus those with AxUS−. Overall, 82.5% (47/57) of AxUS+ patients had residual positive lymph nodes (ypN+) at surgery and 53.8% (42/78) of AxUS− patients had ypN+. Post NAC AxUS sensitivity was 52.8%, specificity 78.3%, and negative predictive value 46.2%. AxUS FNR was 47.2%, versus 8.4% for SNB. If post-NAC AxUS− was used to select patients for SNB, FNR would decrease from 8.4 to 2.7%. However, using post-NAC AxUS in addition to SNB as an indication for ALND would have led to unnecessary ALND in 7.8% of all patients.

Conclusion

AxUS is not appropriate as a standalone staging procedure, and SNB itself is sufficient to assess the axilla post NAC in patients who present with N+ breast cancer.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We would like to thank the following authors would participated in the original SN FNAC study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology on 20 January 2015: Jean-Francois Boileau, Mark Basik, and Andre Lisbona, Montreal Jewish General Segal Cancer Centre, McGill University; Louis Gaboury, Isabelle Trop, Rami J. Younan, Erica Patocskai, and Andre Robidoux, Centre Hospitalier de l’Université de Montreal; Lucas Sideris, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Université de Montreal; Sarkis Meterissian and Atilla Omeroglu, McGill University Health Centre; Brigitte Poirier and Louise Provencher, Hôpital Saint-Sacrement, Université Laval; Claire M.B. Holloway and Frances C. Wright, Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre, University of Toronto; David R. McCready, University Health Network, University of Toronto; Angel Arnaout, Ottawa Hospital, University of Ottawa; Muriel Brackstone, London Regional Cancer Program, University of Western Ontario; and Stephen E. Karp, Lahey Hospital and Medical Center, Tufts University School of Medicine.

Funding

The original SN FNAC study was supported by the Quebec Breast Cancer Foundation, Cancer Research Society, Week-end to End Women’s Cancers, and Montreal Jewish General Segal Cancer Centre.

Disclosures

Dominique Morency, Sinziana Dumitra, Elena Parvez, Karyne Martel, Mark Basik, André Robidoux, Brigitte Poirier, Claire M.B. Holloway, Louis Gaboury, Lucas Sideris, Sarkis Meterissian, and Jean-François Boileau have no disclosures to declare.

References

  1. 1.
    Fleissig A, Fallowfield LJ, Langridge CI, et al. Post-operative arm morbidity and quality of life. Results of the ALMANAC randomised trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with standard axillary treatment in the management of patients with early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;95(3):279–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Breast Cancer (Version 3.2018) (2018). https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/breast.pdf. Accessed 12 Jan 2019.
  4. 4.
    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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Geng C, Chen X, Pan X, Li J. The feasibility and accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy in initially clinically node-negative breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS ONE 2016;11(9):e0162605.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boileau JF, Poirier B, Basik M, 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):258–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, 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.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kuehn T, Bauerfeind I, Fehm T, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Jung Y, Young E, Han B, Hee J, Seon S, Yeon S. High-resolution ultrasonographic features of axillary lymph node metastasis in patients with breast cancer. The Breast. 2009;18(2):119–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lee B, Lim AK, Krell J, et al. The efficacy of axillary ultrasound metastasis in breast cancer. AJR Am J Roentgenol 2013;200(3):W314–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vijayaraghavan GR, Vedantham S, Kataoka M, Debenedectis C, Quinlan RM. The relevance of ultrasound imaging of suspicious axillary lymph nodes and fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the post-ACOSOG Z11 era in early breast cancer. Acad Radiol. 2019;24(3):308–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Boughey JC, Ballman K V, Hunt KK, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Peppe A, Wilson R, Pope R, Downey K, Rusby J. The use of ultrasound in the clinical re-staging of the axilla after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). The Breast. 2017;35:104–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Black D. Axillary ultrasound: for all, for none, to diagnose positive nodes, or to support avoiding sentinel lymph node biopsy altogether. Ann Surg Oncol 2017;24(1):64–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schwentner L, Helms G, Nekljudova V, et al. Using ultrasound and palpation for predicting axillary lymph node status following neoadjuvant chemotherapy—results from the multi-center SENTINA trial. Breast 2017;31:202–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Le-Petross HT, Mccall LM, Hunt KK, Mittendorf EA. Axillary ultrasound identifies residual nodal disease after chemotherapy: results from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z1071 trial (alliance). AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2018;210(3):669–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Masuda N, Lee S-J, Ohtani S, et al. Adjuvant capecitabine for breast cancer after preoperative chemotherapy. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(22):2147–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Von Minckwitz G, Huang CS, Mano MS, et al. Trastuzumab emtansine for residual invasive HER2-positive breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2019;380(7):617–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Donker M, van Tienhoven G, Straver ME, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lucci A, Mccall LM, Beitsch PD, 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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    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):1072–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Dominique Morency
    • 1
  • Sinziana Dumitra
    • 1
  • Elena Parvez
    • 1
  • Karyne Martel
    • 2
  • Mark Basik
    • 1
  • André Robidoux
    • 3
  • Brigitte Poirier
    • 4
  • Claire M. B. Holloway
    • 5
  • Louis Gaboury
    • 3
  • Lucas Sideris
    • 6
  • Sarkis Meterissian
    • 7
  • Jean-François Boileau
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Jewish General Hospital Segal Cancer CentreMcGill UniversityMontrealCanada
  2. 2.Hopital de Saint-Jerome CISSS St-JeromeSaint-JeromeCanada
  3. 3.Centre Hospitalier de l’Universite de MontrealMontrealCanada
  4. 4.Centre des maladies du sein HSS CHU de Quebec, Universite LavalQuebecCanada
  5. 5.Sunnybrook Health Sciences CentreUniversity of TorontoTorontoCanada
  6. 6.Hopital Maisonneuve-RosemontUniversite de MontrealMontrealCanada
  7. 7.McGill University Health CentreMontrealCanada

Personalised recommendations