Internal Mammary Lymphadenopathy Does Not Impact Oncologic Outcomes in Patients Treated with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: Results from the I-SPY2 Clinical Trial.
Journal
Annals of surgical oncology
ISSN: 1534-4681
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9420840
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 Jul 2024
09 Jul 2024
Historique:
received:
11
04
2024
accepted:
16
06
2024
medline:
9
7
2024
pubmed:
9
7
2024
entrez:
9
7
2024
Statut:
aheadofprint
Résumé
Internal mammary lymphadenopathy (IML) plays a role in breast cancer stage and prognosis. We aimed to evaluate method of IML detection, how IML impacts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and oncologic outcomes. We evaluated patients enrolled in the I-SPY-2 clinical trial from 2010 to 2022. We captured the radiographic method of IML detection (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], positron emission tomography/computed tomography [PET/CT], or both) and compared patients with IML with those without. Rates of locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant recurrence (DR) and event-free survival (EFS) were compared by bivariate analysis. Of 2095 patients, 198 (9.5%) had IML reported on pretreatment imaging. The method of IML detection was 154 (77.8%) MRI only, 11 (5.6%) PET/CT only, and 33 (16.7%) both. Factors associated with IML were younger age (p = 0.001), larger tumors (p < 0.001), and higher tumor grade (p = 0.027). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was slightly higher in the IML group (41.4% vs. 34.0%; p = 0.03). There was no difference in breast or axillary surgery (p = 0.41 and p = 0.16), however IML patients were more likely to undergo radiation (68.2% vs. 54.1%; p < 0.001). With a median follow up of 3.72 years (range 0.4-10.2), there was no difference between IM+ versus IM- in LRR (5.6% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.25), DR (9.1% vs. 7.9%; p = 0.58), or EFS (61.6% vs. 57.2%; p = 0.48). This was true for patients with and without pCR. In this large cohort of patients treated with NAC, outcomes were not negatively impacted by IML. We demonstrated that IML influences treatment selection but is not a poor prognostic indicator when treated with modern NAC and multidisciplinary disease management.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Internal mammary lymphadenopathy (IML) plays a role in breast cancer stage and prognosis. We aimed to evaluate method of IML detection, how IML impacts response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and oncologic outcomes.
METHODS
METHODS
We evaluated patients enrolled in the I-SPY-2 clinical trial from 2010 to 2022. We captured the radiographic method of IML detection (magnetic resonance imaging [MRI], positron emission tomography/computed tomography [PET/CT], or both) and compared patients with IML with those without. Rates of locoregional recurrence (LRR), distant recurrence (DR) and event-free survival (EFS) were compared by bivariate analysis.
RESULTS
RESULTS
Of 2095 patients, 198 (9.5%) had IML reported on pretreatment imaging. The method of IML detection was 154 (77.8%) MRI only, 11 (5.6%) PET/CT only, and 33 (16.7%) both. Factors associated with IML were younger age (p = 0.001), larger tumors (p < 0.001), and higher tumor grade (p = 0.027). Pathologic complete response (pCR) was slightly higher in the IML group (41.4% vs. 34.0%; p = 0.03). There was no difference in breast or axillary surgery (p = 0.41 and p = 0.16), however IML patients were more likely to undergo radiation (68.2% vs. 54.1%; p < 0.001). With a median follow up of 3.72 years (range 0.4-10.2), there was no difference between IM+ versus IM- in LRR (5.6% vs. 3.8%; p = 0.25), DR (9.1% vs. 7.9%; p = 0.58), or EFS (61.6% vs. 57.2%; p = 0.48). This was true for patients with and without pCR.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
In this large cohort of patients treated with NAC, outcomes were not negatively impacted by IML. We demonstrated that IML influences treatment selection but is not a poor prognostic indicator when treated with modern NAC and multidisciplinary disease management.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38980586
doi: 10.1245/s10434-024-15708-9
pii: 10.1245/s10434-024-15708-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Informations de copyright
© 2024. Society of Surgical Oncology.
Références
Livingston SF, Arlen M. The extended extrapleural radical mastectomy: its role in the treatment of carcinoma of the breast. Ann Surg. 1974;179(3):260–5.
doi: 10.1097/00000658-197403000-00002
pubmed: 4813471
pmcid: 1355883
Veronesi U, Cascinelli N, Greco M, et al. Prognosis of breast cancer patients after mastectomy and dissection of internal mammary nodes. Ann Surg. 1985;202(6):702–7.
doi: 10.1097/00000658-198512000-00007
pubmed: 3000303
pmcid: 1251002
Donegan WL. The influence of untreated internal mammary metastases upon the course of mammary cancer. Cancer. 1977;39(2):533–8.
doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(197702)39:2<533::AID-CNCR2820390222>3.0.CO;2-V
pubmed: 837336
Chen RC, Lin NU, Golshan M, et al. Internal mammary nodes in breast cancer: diagnosis and implications for patient management: a systematic review. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(30):4981–9.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2008.17.4862
pubmed: 18711171
Tanis PJ, Nieweg OE, Valdés Olmos RA, Kroon BB. Anatomy and physiology of lymphatic drainage of the breast from the perspective of sentinel node biopsy. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192(3):399–409.
doi: 10.1016/S1072-7515(00)00776-6
pubmed: 11245383
Suami H, Pan WR, Taylor GI. Historical review of breast lymphatic studies. Clin Anat. 2009;22(5):531–6.
doi: 10.1002/ca.20812
pubmed: 19484798
Madsen E, Gobardhan P, Bongers V, et al. The impact on post-surgical treatment of sentinel lymph node biopsy of internal mammary lymph nodes in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(4):1486–92.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-006-9230-6
pubmed: 17253106
pmcid: 1914262
Tan C, Caragata R, Bennett I. Is sentinel node biopsy of the internal mammary lymph nodes relevant in the management of breast cancer? Breast J. 2017;23(4):410–4.
doi: 10.1111/tbj.12754
pubmed: 28117520
Estourgie SH, Nieweg OE, Olmos RA, et al. Lymphatic drainage patterns from the breast. Ann Surg. 2004;239(2):232–7.
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000109156.26378.90
pubmed: 14745331
pmcid: 1356216
Braue K, Baker C, Lippey J. Internal mammary node involvement in patients with axilla-negative early breast cancer: a narrative review. ANZ J Surg. 2023;93(1–2):59–64.
doi: 10.1111/ans.17982
pubmed: 35997283
Morrow M, Foster RS Jr. Staging of breast cancer: a new rationale for internal mammary node biopsy. Arch Surg. 1981;116(6):748–51.
doi: 10.1001/archsurg.1981.01380180012003
pubmed: 7016069
Cserni G, Szekeres JP. Internal mammary lymph nodes and sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer. Surg Oncol. 2001;10(1–2):25–33.
doi: 10.1016/S0960-7404(01)00017-2
pubmed: 11719026
Veronesi U, Marubini E, Mariani L, et al. The dissection of internal mammary nodes does not improve the survival of breast cancer patients. 30-year results of a randomised trial. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35(9):1320–5.
doi: 10.1016/S0959-8049(99)00133-1
pubmed: 10658521
Lacour J, Le M, Caceres E, et al. Radical mastectomy versus radical mastectomy plus internal mammary dissection: ten year results of an international cooperative trial in breast cancer. Cancer. 1983;51(10):1941–3.
doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19830515)51:10<1941::AID-CNCR2820511032>3.0.CO;2-T
pubmed: 6339026
Meier P, Ferguson DJ, Karrison T. A controlled trial of extended radical versus radical mastectomy. Ten-year results. Cancer. 1989;63(1):188–95.
doi: 10.1002/1097-0142(19890101)63:1<188::AID-CNCR2820630130>3.0.CO;2-M
pubmed: 2642730
National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology. Breast Cancer Version 2.;2024.
Jochelson MS, Lebron L, Jacobs SS, et al. Detection of internal mammary adenopathy in patients with breast cancer by PET/CT and MRI. AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2015;205(4):899–904.
doi: 10.2214/AJR.14.13804
pubmed: 26397342
pmcid: 4970424
Cho SM, Cha JH, Kim HH, et al. Assessing internal mammary lymph node metastasis by breast magnetic resonance imaging in breast cancer. Medicine (Baltimore). 2023;102(47):e36301.
doi: 10.1097/MD.0000000000036301
pubmed: 38013365
Plichta JK, Ren Y, Thomas SM, et al. Implications for breast cancer restaging based on the 8th edition AJCC staging manual. Ann Surg. 2020;271(1):169–76.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000003071
pubmed: 30312199
Giuliano AE, Edge SB, Hortobagyi GN. Eighth edition of the AJCC cancer staging manual: breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(7):1783–5.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-018-6486-6
pubmed: 29671136
Barker AD, Sigman CC, Kelloff GJ, Hylton NM, Berry DA, Esserman LJ. I-SPY 2: an adaptive breast cancer trial design in the setting of neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2009;86:97–100.
doi: 10.1038/clpt.2009.68
pubmed: 19440188
R Core Team. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria; 2022. Available at: https://www.R-project.org/ .
Therneau T. A Package for Survival Analysis in R. R package version 3.5-8. 2024. Available at: https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=survival .
Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling survival data: extending the cox model. New York: Springer; 2000.
doi: 10.1007/978-1-4757-3294-8
Sjoberg D, Baillie M, Fruechtenicht C, Haesendonckx S, Treis T. ggsurvfit: Flexible Time-to-Event Figures. R package version 1.0.0; 2024. Available at: https://www.danieldsjoberg.com/ggsurvfit/ ; https://github.com/pharmaverse/ggsurvfit .
Huang O, Wang L, Shen K, et al. Breast cancer subpopulation with high risk of internal mammary lymph nodes metastasis: analysis of 2,269 Chinese breast cancer patients treated with extended radical mastectomy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008;107(3):379–87.
doi: 10.1007/s10549-007-9561-4
pubmed: 17457670
Qiu PF, Lv Q, Zhao WH, et al. Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting internal mammary sentinel node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2023;49(10):107040.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2023.107040
pubmed: 37672825
Zhang YJ, Oh JL, Whitman GJ, et al. Clinically apparent internal mammary nodal metastasis in patients with advanced breast cancer: incidence and local control. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2010;77(4):1113–9.
doi: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2009.06.081
pubmed: 20004535
Adam R, Duong TQ, Hodges L, Lu J, Maldjian T. Internal mammary lymph nodal response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy on imaging and breast cancer prognosis. Ann Med Surg (Lond). 2022;84:104900.
pubmed: 36536730
pmcid: 9758323
Chung HL, Shin K, Sun J, Leung JWT. Extra-axillary nodal metastases in breast cancer: comparison of ultrasound, MRI, PET/CT, and CT. Clin Imaging. 2021;79:113–8.
doi: 10.1016/j.clinimag.2021.03.028
pubmed: 33933824
Madsen EV, Aalders KC, van der Heiden, van der Loo M, et al. Prognostic significance of tumor-positive internal mammary sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer: a multicenter cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22(13):4254–62.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-015-4535-y
pubmed: 25808100
Wang W, Qiu P, Li J. Internal mammary lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients based on anatomical imaging and functional imaging. Breast Cancer. 2022;29(6):933–44.
doi: 10.1007/s12282-022-01377-7
pubmed: 35750935
Samreen N, Dhage S, Gerber NK, et al. Imaging and management of internal mammary lymph nodes. J Breast Imaging. 2020;2(6):530–40.
doi: 10.1093/jbi/wbaa046
pubmed: 38424849
Cheon H, Kim HJ, Lee SW, et al. Internal mammary node adenopathy on breast MRI and PET/CT for initial staging in patients with operable breast cancer: prevalence and associated factors. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2016;160(3):523–30.
doi: 10.1007/s10549-016-4022-6
pubmed: 27752848
Müller C, Schmidt G, Juhasz-Böss I, et al. Influences on pathologic complete response in breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2021;304(4):1065–71.
doi: 10.1007/s00404-021-06018-6
pubmed: 33689016
pmcid: 8429372
Jarząb M, Stobiecka E, Badora-Rybicka A, et al. Association of breast cancer grade with response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy assessed postoperatively. Pol J Pathol. 2019;70(2):91–9.
doi: 10.5114/pjp.2019.87101
pubmed: 31556559