Magnetic Seed vs Guidewire Breast Cancer Localization With Magnetic Lymph Node Detection: A Randomized Clinical Trial.


Journal

JAMA surgery
ISSN: 2168-6262
Titre abrégé: JAMA Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101589553

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
27 Dec 2023
Historique:
medline: 27 12 2023
pubmed: 27 12 2023
entrez: 27 12 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

Guidewires have been the standard for breast lesion localization but pose operative and logistic challenges. Paramagnetic seeds have shown promising results, but to the authors' knowledge, no randomized comparison has been performed. To determine whether the combination of a paramagnetic seed and superparamagnetic iron oxide (SPIO) is equivalent to guidewire and SPIO for breast cancer localization and sentinel lymph node detection (SLND). This was a phase 3, pragmatic, equivalence, 2-arm, open-label, randomized clinical trial conducted at 3 university and/or community hospitals in Sweden from May 2018 to May 2022. Included in the study were patients with early breast cancer planned for breast conservation and SLND. Study data were analyzed July to November 2022. Participants were randomly assigned 1:1 to a paramagnetic seed or a guidewire. All patients underwent SLND with SPIO. Re-excision rate and resection ratio (defined as actual resection volume / optimal resection volume). A total of 426 women (median [IQR] age, 65 [56-71] years; median [IQR] tumor size, 11 [8-15] mm) were included in the study. The re-excision rate was 2.90% (95% CI, 1.60%-4.80%), and the median (IQR) resection ratio was 1.96 (1.15-3.44). No differences were found between the guidewire and the seed in re-excisions (6 of 211 [2.84%] vs 6 of 209 [2.87%]; difference, -0.03%; 95% CI, -3.20% to 3.20%; P = .99) or resection ratio (median, 1.93; IQR, 1.18-3.43 vs median, 2.01; IQR, 1.11-3.47; P = .70). Overall SLN detection was 98.6% (95% CI, 97.1%-99.4%) with no differences between arms (203 of 207 [98.1%] vs 204 of 206 [99.0%]; difference, -0.9%; 95% CI, -3.6% to 1.8%; P = .72). More failed localizations occurred with the guidewire (21 of 208 [10.1%] vs 4 of 215 [1.9%]; difference, 8.2%; 95% CI, 3.3%-13.2%; P < .001). Median (IQR) time to specimen excision was shorter for the seed (15 [10-22] minutes vs 18 [12-30] minutes; P = .01), as was the total operative time (69 [56-86] minutes vs 75.5 [59-101] minutes; P = .03). The experience of surgeons, radiologists, and surgical coordinators was better with the seed. The combination of SPIO and a paramagnetic seed performed comparably with SPIO and guidewire for breast cancer conserving surgery and resulted in more successful localizations, shorter operative times, and better experience. ISRCTN.org Identifier: ISRCTN11914537.

Identifiants

pubmed: 38150215
pii: 2813216
doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2023.6520
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Auteurs

Eirini Pantiora (E)

Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Section for Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.

Allan Jazrawi (A)

Center for Clinical Research, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Västerås, Sweden.
Section for Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Västmanlands County Hospital, Västerås, Sweden.

Abdi-Fatah Hersi (AF)

Center for Clinical Research, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Västerås, Sweden.
Section for Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Västmanlands County Hospital, Västerås, Sweden.

Shahin Abdsaleh (S)

Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Evidia Mammography Department, Uppsala, Sweden.

Hanna Ahlstedt (H)

Department of Breast Radiology, Division of Radiology, Västmanlands County Hospital, Västerås, Sweden.

Eva Molnar (E)

Department for Breast Radiology, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Fredrik Wärnberg (F)

Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Section for Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.
Sahlgrenska Center for Cancer Research, Department of Surgery, Institute of Clinical Sciences, Sahlgrenska Academy, University of Gothenburg, Gothenburg, Sweden.
Department of Surgery, Sahlgrenska University Hospital, Gothenburg, Sweden.

Staffan Eriksson (S)

Center for Clinical Research, Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Västerås, Sweden.
Section for Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Västmanlands County Hospital, Västerås, Sweden.

Andreas Karakatsanis (A)

Department of Surgical Sciences, Uppsala University, Uppsala, Sweden.
Section for Breast Surgery, Department of Surgery, Uppsala University Hospital, Uppsala, Sweden.

Classifications MeSH