Sentinel Node Biopsy after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer: Preliminary Experience with Clinically Node Negative Patients after Systemic Treatment.
breast cancer
locally advanced breast cancer
mini-invasive treatment
neoadjuvant chemotherapy
sentinel lymph node
systemic treatment
Journal
Journal of personalized medicine
ISSN: 2075-4426
Titre abrégé: J Pers Med
Pays: Switzerland
ID NLM: 101602269
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 Mar 2021
02 Mar 2021
Historique:
received:
21
01
2021
revised:
20
02
2021
accepted:
22
02
2021
entrez:
3
4
2021
pubmed:
4
4
2021
medline:
4
4
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) following neoadjuvant treatment (NACT) has been questioned by many studies that reported heterogeneous identification (IR) and false negative rates (FNR). As a result, some patients receive axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) regardless of response to NACT, leading to a potential overtreatment. To better assess reliability and clinical significance of SLNB status on ycN0 patients, we retrospectively analyzed oncological outcomes of 399 patients treated between January 2016 and December 2019 that were either cN0-ycN0 (219 patients) or cN1/2-ycN0 (180 patients). The Endpoints of our study were to assess, furthermore than IR: oncological outcomes as Overall Survival (OS); Distant Disease Free Survival (DDFS); and Regional Disease Free Survival (RDFS) according to SLNB status. SLN identification rate was 96.8% (98.2% in patients cN0-ycN0 and 95.2% in patients cN+-ycN0). A median number of three lymph nodes were identified and removed. Among cN0-ycN0 patients, 149 (68%) were confirmed ypN0(sn), whereas regarding cN1/2-ycN0 cases 86 (47.8%) confirmed an effective downstaging to ypN0. Three year OS, DDFS and RDFS were significantly related to SLNB positivity. Our data seemed to confirm SLNB feasibility following NACT in ycN0 patients, furthermore reinforcing its predictive role in a short observation timing.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33801435
pii: jpm11030172
doi: 10.3390/jpm11030172
pmc: PMC7998155
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Références
Ann Surg. 2009 Oct;250(4):558-66
pubmed: 19730235
J Surg Oncol. 2011 Jul 1;104(1):97-103
pubmed: 21456092
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2016 Mar;42(3):361-8
pubmed: 26746091
Surgeon. 2017 Dec;15(6):372-378
pubmed: 28624359
PLoS One. 2016 Sep 08;11(9):e0162605
pubmed: 27606623
J Res Med Sci. 2019 Feb 25;24:18
pubmed: 30988686
Clin Transl Oncol. 2013 Jan;15(1):79-84
pubmed: 22926944
Ann Ital Chir. 2018;89:290
pubmed: 30352955
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Apr 1;3(4):549-555
pubmed: 27918753
J Clin Oncol. 2009 Feb 10;27(5):726-32
pubmed: 19114697
Am J Surg. 2016 Nov;212(5):969-981
pubmed: 27671032
Ann Surg. 2019 Mar;269(3):432-442
pubmed: 30312200
JAMA. 2013 Oct 9;310(14):1455-61
pubmed: 24101169
Ann Surg Oncol. 2018 Dec;25(Suppl 3):640-641
pubmed: 30302645
Breast J. 2020 Feb;26(2):125-132
pubmed: 31562686
Ann Ital Chir. 2015 Mar-Apr;86(2):89-99
pubmed: 25951853
Breast J. 2018 Nov;24(6):902-910
pubmed: 30255534
Br J Surg. 2018 Nov;105(12):1541-1552
pubmed: 30311642
Lancet Oncol. 2013 Jun;14(7):609-18
pubmed: 23683750
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2020 Jan;46(1):216-217
pubmed: 31676199