Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 19, Issue 12, pp 3755–3761 | Cite as

Omission of Axillary Dissection after a Positive Sentinel Node Dissection may Influence Adjuvant Chemotherapy Indications in Operable Breast Cancer Patients

  • Filippo Montemurro
  • Furio Maggiorotto
  • Giorgio Valabrega
  • Franziska Kubatzki
  • Valentina Rossi
  • Alessandra Magistris
  • Francesco Marocco
  • Marco Gatti
  • Ivana Sarotto
  • Massimo Aglietta
  • Riccardo Ponzone
Breast Oncology

Abstract

Background

This study was designed to evaluate how the omission of axillary dissection would have altered the indication for adjuvant chemotherapy (ACT) in patients with early breast cancer submitted to conservative surgery with one or two positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs).

Methods

We identified 321 women in our institutional database who fulfilled the characteristics. All underwent completion axillary lymph node dissection (AD). Each case was blindly reviewed by our breast team in two rounds, and the total number of positive lymph nodes was disclosed only in the second. At each round, the panel chose between: (1) recommend, (2) discuss, (3) do not recommend ACT. Changes between round 1 and 2 were studied by the marginal homogeneity test. Exploratory logistic regression analyses were performed to study predictors of non-SLN involvement and of changes in the indication for ACT.

Results

AD revealed non-SLNs metastases in 96 patients (30 %). Fifty-two patients (16 %) had their initial indication changed at round 2 (p < 0.001). Most of the changes were toward ACT (83 %), and all except two occurred in patients with immunohistochemically defined luminal A and luminal B/HER2-negative tumors. In these two subgroups, a Ki67 above the median value (21 %) was the only independent predictor of no change in the indication to ACT at round 2.

Conclusions

Omission of AD in patients with one or two positive SLNs may change the indication to ACT in a significant proportion of patients with hormone receptor-positive/HER2-negative tumors. All implications should be taken into account before abandoning AD, including a possible biologically tailored surgical approach.

Keywords

Axillary Dissection Axillary Dissection Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection Completion Axillary Dissection 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Disclosure

None.

Supplementary material

10434_2012_2505_MOESM1_ESM.docx (11 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 11 kb)
10434_2012_2505_MOESM2_ESM.docx (19 kb)
Supplementary material 2 (DOCX 18 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Goldhirsch A, Wood WC, Coates AS, Gelber RD, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ. Strategies for subtypes–dealing with the diversity of breast cancer: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2011. Ann Oncol. 2011;22:1736–47.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Goldhirsch A, Ingle JN, Gelber RD, Coates AS, Thurlimann B, Senn HJ. Thresholds for therapies: highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2009. Ann Oncol. 2009;20:1319–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    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;25:3657–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Fleissig A, Fallowfield LJ, Langridge CI, et al. Postoperative 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;95:279–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:7703–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    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;305:569–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Stuart A. A test for homogeneity of the marginal distributions in a two-way classification. Biometrika. 1956;42:412–6.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hugh J, Hanson J, Cheang MC, et al. Breast cancer subtypes and response to docetaxel in node-positive breast cancer: use of an immunohistochemical definition in the BCIRG 001 trial. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:1168–76.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cheang MC, Chia SK, Voduc D, et al. Ki67 index, HER2 status, and prognosis of patients with luminal B breast cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009;101:736–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    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;11:927–33.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kim T, Giuliano AE, Lyman GH. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast carcinoma: a metaanalysis. Cancer. 2006;106:4–16.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Cserni G, Gregori D, Merletti F, et al. Meta-analysis of non-sentinel node metastases associated with micrometastatic sentinel nodes in breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1245-52.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van la Parra RF, Peer PG, Ernst MF, Bosscha K. Meta-analysis of predictive factors for non-sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive SLN. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2011;37:290–9.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Straver ME, Meijnen P, van TG, et al. Role of axillary clearance after a tumor-positive sentinel node in the administration of adjuvant therapy in early breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:731–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Galimberti V, Cole BF, Zurrida S, et al. Update of the International Breast Cancer Study Group trial 23-01 to compare axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with clinically node negative breast cancer and micrometastases in the sentinel node. Cancer Res. 2011;71:34 s (Abstract S3-1).Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Morrow M, Giuliano AE. To cut is to cure: can we really apply Z11 in practice? Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:2413–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    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;347:567–75.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wang Z, Wu LC, Chen JQ. Sentinel lymph node biopsy compared with axillary lymph node dissection in early breast cancer: a meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011;129:675–89.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Vinh-Hung V, Burzykowski T, Cserni G, Voordeckers M, Van De Steene J, Storme G. Functional form of the effect of the numbers of axillary nodes on survival in early breast cancer. Int J Oncol. 2003;22:697–704.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Reimer T, Fietkau R, Markmann S, Stachs A, Gerber B. How important is the axillary nodal status for adjuvant treatment decisions at a breast cancer multidisciplinary tumor board? A survival analysis. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:472–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Vogel BA, Helmes AW, Hasenburg A. Concordance between patients’ desired and actual decision-making roles in breast cancer care. Psychooncology. 2008;17:182–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Yerushalmi R, Woods R, Ravdin PM, Hayes MM, Gelmon KA. Ki67 in breast cancer: prognostic and predictive potential. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:174–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Dowsett M, Nielsen TO, A’Hern R, et al. Assessment of Ki67 in breast cancer: recommendations from the International Ki67 in Breast Cancer Working Group. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103:1656–64.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Montemurro F, Aglietta M. Hormone receptor-positive early breast cancer: controversies in the use of adjuvant chemotherapy. Endocr Relat Cancer. 2009;16:1091-102.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Paik S, Tang G, Shak S, et al. Gene expression and benefit of chemotherapy in women with node-negative, estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:3726–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Albain KS, Barlow WE, Shak S, et al. Prognostic and predictive value of the 21-gene recurrence score assay in postmenopausal women with node-positive, oestrogen-receptor-positive breast cancer on chemotherapy: a retrospective analysis of a randomised trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010;11:55–65.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Sotiriou C, Pusztai L. Gene-expression signatures in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2009;360:790-800.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Prat A, Parker JS, Fan C, Cheang MC, Milled LD, Bergh J, Chia SK, Bernard PS, Nielsen TO, Ellis MJ, Carey LA, Perou CM. Concordance among gene expression-based predictors for ER-positive breast cancer treated with adjuvant tamoxifen. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2011;29(15s), 45s (Abstract 502).Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Reyal F, Rouzier R, Depont-Hazelzet B, et al. The molecular subtype classification is a determinant of sentinel node positivity in early breast carcinoma. PLoS One. 2011;6:e20297.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Voduc KD, Cheang MC, Tyldesley S, Gelmon K, Nielsen TO, Kennecke H. Breast cancer subtypes and the risk of local and regional relapse. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28:1684–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Haffty BG, Hunt KK, Harris JR, Buchholz TA. Positive sentinel nodes without axillary dissection: implications for the radiation oncologist. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:4479–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Filippo Montemurro
    • 1
    • 2
  • Furio Maggiorotto
    • 3
  • Giorgio Valabrega
    • 2
  • Franziska Kubatzki
    • 3
  • Valentina Rossi
    • 2
  • Alessandra Magistris
    • 3
  • Francesco Marocco
    • 3
  • Marco Gatti
    • 4
  • Ivana Sarotto
    • 5
  • Massimo Aglietta
    • 2
  • Riccardo Ponzone
    • 3
  1. 1.Unit of Investigative Clinical Oncology (INCO)Institute for Cancer Research and TreatmentCandioloItaly
  2. 2.Division of Medical OncologyInstitute for Cancer Research and TreatmentCandioloItaly
  3. 3.Division of Gynecological OncologyInstitute for Cancer Research and TreatmentCandioloItaly
  4. 4.Division of RadiotherapyInstitute for Cancer Research and TreatmentCandioloItaly
  5. 5.Division of PathologyInstitute for Cancer Research and TreatmentCandioloItaly

Personalised recommendations