Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 20, Issue 8, pp 2569–2575 | Cite as

Guiding Breast-Conserving Surgery in Patients After Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy for Breast Cancer: A Comparison of Radioactive Seed Localization with the ROLL Technique

  • Mila Donker
  • Caroline A. Drukker
  • Renato A. Valdés Olmos
  • Emiel J. Th. Rutgers
  • Claudette E. Loo
  • Gabe S. Sonke
  • Jelle Wesseling
  • Tanja Alderliesten
  • Marie-Jeanne T. F. D. Vrancken Peeters
Breast Oncology

Abstract

Background

Radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) with technetium-99 m colloid (ROLL-99mTc) is commonly used to perform breast-conserving surgery in patients with nonpalpable breast tumors. Radioactive seed localization is a relatively new technique that localizes the tumor with a radioactive iodine-125 (125I) seed. The feasibility and outcome of these techniques after neoadjuvant systemic treatment has not been widely investigated.

Methods

All patients treated with neoadjuvant systemic treatment between 2007 and 2010 in the Netherlands Cancer Institute who underwent breast-conserving surgery with the ROLL-99mTc technique (n = 83) or with 125I seed localization (n = 71) were analyzed. The weight of the resected specimen, the margins, and the percentage of patients requiring a second surgical intervention as a result of positive margins were assessed.

Results

Patient and tumor characteristics and systemic treatment regimens were comparable between both groups. The median weight of the resected specimen (53 vs. 48 g), the median smallest margin (3.5 vs. 3.0 mm), and the risk for additional surgery for incomplete resections (7 vs. 8 %) did not differ significantly between patients treated with the ROLL-99mTc technique and 125I seed localization.

Conclusions

The ROLL-99mTc technique and 125I seed localization demonstrate comparable results when used to perform breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant systemic treatment. Because 125I seed localization does not require additional radiological localization shortly before surgery, it simplifies surgery scheduling. Therefore, we prefer 125I seed localization to perform breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant systemic treatment.

Keywords

Positive Margin Complete Pathological Response 125I Seed Sentinel Node Procedure Nonpalpable Breast Lesion 

Notes

Acknowledgment

The authors thank Nicola Russell for her critical review.

References

  1. 1.
    Untch M, von Minckwitz G. Recent advances in systemic therapy: advances in neoadjuvant (primary) systemic therapy with cytotoxic agents. Breast Cancer Res. 2009;11:203.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Mauri D, Pavlidis N, Ioannidis JP. Neoadjuvant versus adjuvant systemic treatment in breast cancer: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2005;97:188–194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mieog JS, van der Hage JA, van de Velde CJ. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for operable breast cancer. Br J Surg. 2007;94:1189–1200.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen JH, Feig BA, Hsiang DJ, et al. Impact of MRI-evaluated neoadjuvant chemotherapy response on change of surgical recommendation in breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2009;249:448–454.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Straver ME, Rutgers EJ, Rodenhuis S, et al. The relevance of breast cancer subtypes in the outcome of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:2411–2418.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Aggarwal V, Agarwal G, Lal P, et al. Feasibility study of safe breast conservation in large and locally advanced cancers with use of radiopaque markers to mark pre-neoadjuvant chemotherapy tumor margins. World J Surg. 2008;32:2562–2569.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Specht J, Gralow JR. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for locally advanced breast cancer. Semin Radiat Oncol. 2009;19:222–228.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Loo CE, Straver ME, Rodenhuis S, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging response monitoring of breast cancer during neoadjuvant chemotherapy: relevance of breast cancer subtype. J Clin Oncol. 2011;29:660–666.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Loo CE, Teertstra HJ, Rodenhuis S, et al. Dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI for prediction of breast cancer response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy: initial results. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2008;191:1331–1338.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Besic N, Zgajnar J, Hocevar M, et al. Breast biopsy with wire localization: factors influencing complete excision of nonpalpable carcinoma. Eur Radiol. 2002;12:2684–2689.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pleijhuis RG, Graafland M, de Vries J, Bart J, de Jong JS, van Dam GM. Obtaining adequate surgical margins in breast-conserving therapy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: current modalities and future directions. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:2717–2730.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Donker M, Straver ME, Rutgers EJ, et al. Radioguided occult lesion localisation (ROLL) in breast-conserving surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2012;38:1218–1224.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    van Riet YE, Maaskant AJ, Creemers GJ, et al. Identification of residual breast tumour localization after neo-adjuvant chemotherapy using a radioactive 125 iodine seed. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2010;36:164–169.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lovrics PJ, Goldsmith CH, Hodgson N, et al. A multicentered, randomized, controlled trial comparing radioguided seed localization to standard wire localization for nonpalpable, invasive and in situ breast carcinomas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2011;18:3407–3414.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Gray RJ, Salud C, Nguyen K, et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of a novel technique for biopsy or lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast lesions: radioactive seed versus wire localization. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8:711–715.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Medina-Franco H, Abarca-Perez L, Garcia-Alvarez MN, Ulloa-Gomez JL, Romero-Trejo C, Sepulveda-Mendez J. Radioguided occult lesion localization (ROLL) versus wire-guided lumpectomy for non-palpable breast lesions: a randomized prospective evaluation. J Surg Oncol. 2008;97:108–111.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gallegos Hernandez JF, Tanis PJ, Deurloo EE, et al. Radio-guided surgery improves outcome of therapeutic excision in non-palpable invasive breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun. 2004; 25:227–232.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Karstaedt PJ, Roarke MC. Radioactive seed localization of nonpalpable breast lesions is better than wire localization. Am J Surg. 2004;188:377–380.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hughes JH, Mason MC, Gray RJ, et al. A multi-site validation trial of radioactive seed localization as an alternative to wire localization. Breast J. 2008;14:153–157.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thind CR, Desmond S, Harris O, Nadeem R, Chagla LS, Audisio RA. Radio-guided localization of clinically occult breast lesions (ROLL): a DGH experience. Clin Radiol. 2005;60:681–686.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Alderliesten T, Loo CE, Pengel KE, Rutgers EJ, Gilhuijs KG, Vrancken Peeters MJ. Radioactive seed localization of breast lesions: an adequate localization method without seed migration. Breast J. 2011;17:594–601.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Straver ME, Loo CE, Rutgers EJ, et al. MRI-model to guide the surgical treatment in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg. 2010;251:701–707.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mazouni C, Peintinger F, Wan-Kau S, et al. Residual ductal carcinoma in situ in patients with complete eradication of invasive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy does not adversely affect patient outcome. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:2650–2655.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Rampaul RS, Bagnall M, Burrell H, Pinder SE, Evans AJ, Macmillan RD. Randomized clinical trial comparing radioisotope occult lesion localization and wire-guided excision for biopsy of occult breast lesions. Br J Surg. 2004;91:1575–1577.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Cox CE, Furman B, Stowell N, et al. Radioactive seed localization breast biopsy and lumpectomy: can specimen radiographs be eliminated? Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10:1039–1047.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mila Donker
    • 1
  • Caroline A. Drukker
    • 1
  • Renato A. Valdés Olmos
    • 2
  • Emiel J. Th. Rutgers
    • 1
  • Claudette E. Loo
    • 3
  • Gabe S. Sonke
    • 4
  • Jelle Wesseling
    • 5
  • Tanja Alderliesten
    • 6
  • Marie-Jeanne T. F. D. Vrancken Peeters
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Surgical OncologyNetherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  2. 2.Department of Nuclear MedicineNetherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyNetherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  4. 4.Department of Medical OncologyNetherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  5. 5.Department of PathologyNetherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamThe Netherlands
  6. 6.Department of Radiation OncologyNetherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek HospitalAmsterdamThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations