Annals of surgical oncology · 2022
Factors Influencing Non-sentinel Lymph Node Involvement in Patients with Positive Sentinel Lymph Node(s) After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Sanders Stacy B, Hoskin Tanya L, Stafford Arielle P, Boughey Judy C
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: When a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) is identified after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) is generally recommended. We sought to evaluate the rate of non-SLN positivity and factors influencing this in patients with a positive SLN following NAC.
METHODS: We identified all patients at our hospital between 2006 and 2021 with a positive SLN (> 0.2 mm) following NAC who underwent cALND. Rates of positive non-SLN (NSLN) on cALND were compared by nodal status. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression were used to assess factors predictive of positive NSLN and overall nodal burden.
RESULTS: Overall, 229 cases (177 cN+, 52 cN0 prior to NAC) with positive SLN(s) after NAC underwent cALND. Additional NSLN involvement was found in 129/229 (56.3%) patients, including 24/52 (46.2%) cN0 and 105/177 (59.3%) cN+ patients (p = 0.09). There was a trend for patients with SLN micrometastases to be less likely to have positive NSLN(s) than those with SLN macrometastases (38.5% vs. 58.6%; p = 0.05). Subgroup analyses showed no clinicopathologic factors significantly associated with additional axillary involvement for initially cN0 patients. Factors found to significantly influence NSLN positivity in the initially cN+ subgroup were HER2 status, multicentricity/multifocality, number of positive SLNs, and size of SLN metastasis. SLN metastasis size > 5 mm and three or more positive SLNs exerted the greatest influence on NSLN positivity.
CONCLUSION: Rates of nodal positivity on cALND in the setting of positive SLN after NAC are high, supporting the current standard of routine cALND. In cN+ disease, NSLN positivity varies by tumor biology, multicentricity/multifocality, number of positive SLNs, and SLN metastasis size.
METHODS: We identified all patients at our hospital between 2006 and 2021 with a positive SLN (> 0.2 mm) following NAC who underwent cALND. Rates of positive non-SLN (NSLN) on cALND were compared by nodal status. Chi-square tests and multivariable logistic regression were used to assess factors predictive of positive NSLN and overall nodal burden.
RESULTS: Overall, 229 cases (177 cN+, 52 cN0 prior to NAC) with positive SLN(s) after NAC underwent cALND. Additional NSLN involvement was found in 129/229 (56.3%) patients, including 24/52 (46.2%) cN0 and 105/177 (59.3%) cN+ patients (p = 0.09). There was a trend for patients with SLN micrometastases to be less likely to have positive NSLN(s) than those with SLN macrometastases (38.5% vs. 58.6%; p = 0.05). Subgroup analyses showed no clinicopathologic factors significantly associated with additional axillary involvement for initially cN0 patients. Factors found to significantly influence NSLN positivity in the initially cN+ subgroup were HER2 status, multicentricity/multifocality, number of positive SLNs, and size of SLN metastasis. SLN metastasis size > 5 mm and three or more positive SLNs exerted the greatest influence on NSLN positivity.
CONCLUSION: Rates of nodal positivity on cALND in the setting of positive SLN after NAC are high, supporting the current standard of routine cALND. In cN+ disease, NSLN positivity varies by tumor biology, multicentricity/multifocality, number of positive SLNs, and SLN metastasis size.