Optimal management of breast cancer with physical exam negative/radiological abnormal axilla.

Item request has been placed! ×
Item request cannot be made. ×
loading   Processing Request
Read More Add to Saved list
  • Additional Information
    • Source:
      Publisher: Nature Publishing Group Country of Publication: England NLM ID: 101563288 Publication Model: Electronic Cited Medium: Internet ISSN: 2045-2322 (Electronic) Linking ISSN: 20452322 NLM ISO Abbreviation: Sci Rep Subsets: MEDLINE
    • Publication Information:
      Original Publication: London : Nature Publishing Group, copyright 2011-
    • Subject Terms:
      Breast Neoplasms*/pathology ; Breast Neoplasms*/therapy ; Breast Neoplasms*/surgery ; Breast Neoplasms*/diagnostic imaging ; Breast Neoplasms*/diagnosis ; Axilla* ; Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy*/methods; Humans ; Female ; Middle Aged ; Retrospective Studies ; Adult ; Aged ; Lymphatic Metastasis ; Lymph Nodes/pathology ; Lymph Nodes/diagnostic imaging ; Neoadjuvant Therapy/methods ; Physical Examination ; Neoplasm Staging ; Biopsy, Fine-Needle/methods
    • Abstract:
      For breast cancer patients with physical exam node negative but radiological finding node abnormal (cN0/rNa), the NCCN and ASCO guidelines recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) as the first-line axillary staging. However, patients who undergo surgery firstly may be upstaged to pathological II-III status, and these patients happen to be the adaptive population of neoadjuvant therapy (NAT). There is no consensus on the optimal management of cN0/rNa patients. The aim is to explore the optimal management strategy of these patients. We performed a retrospective real-world study of 1414 cN0/rNa patients from June 2014 to October 2022. There were 1003 patients underwent surgery first and 411 patients underwent surgery after NAT. We analyzed the real-world conditions of these patients, compared axilla tumor burden between these two groups. In addition, we compared benefit ratio of axillary surgery and regional nodal irradiation (RNI) de-escalation under the two strategies. Among 1003 patients underwent surgery first, the positive and negative rates of fine needle aspiration (FNA) were 18.5% and 81.5%, respectively. There were 66.1% had ≤ 2 lymph nodes+. There were 40.8% of FNA+ patients could be exempted from ALND underwent surgery first. In 411 patients underwent surgery after NAT, the FNA positive and negative rates were 60.8% and 49.2%, respectively. There were 54.4% of FNA+ patients achieved axilla pathologic complete response (apCR) and could omit ALND after NAT. The apCR was 67.3% in HER2+/TNBC subtypes. According to the NSABP-B51 trial, there were 0 and 54.4% of FNA+ patients could omit RNI among surgery first and after NAT, respectively. Among 1-2 sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive patients underwent surgery first, with a median follow-up 49 months, there was no difference of survival benefit between SLNB-only and SLNB-ALND. Compared with 1-2 SLN+ patients without RNI, RNI could bring better invasive disease-free survival (97.38% vs. 89.36%, P = 0.046) and breast cancer special survival (100% vs. 94.68%, P = 0.020). It is safe to perform SLNB omitting ALND when detected 1-2 positive SLNs in cN0/rNa patients. Patients with HER2+/TNBC subtypes underwent surgery after NAT had more chance to benefit from dual de-escalation, including axillary surgery and RNI de-escalation.
      (© 2024. The Author(s).)
    • References:
      JAMA. 2017 Sep 12;318(10):918-926. (PMID: 28898379)
      Lancet Oncol. 2021 Apr;22(4):476-488. (PMID: 33721561)
      Ann Oncol. 2021 Oct;32(10):1216-1235. (PMID: 34242744)
      Ann Surg Oncol. 2021 Feb;28(2):930-940. (PMID: 32712895)
      Cancer Biol Med. 2023 Mar 2;20(2):. (PMID: 36861446)
      J Clin Oncol. 2021 May 1;39(13):1485-1505. (PMID: 33507815)
      J Clin Oncol. 2022 Oct 10;40(29):3361-3364. (PMID: 35675571)
      Ann Oncol. 2023 Nov;34(11):970-986. (PMID: 37683978)
      Lancet. 2014 Jun 21;383(9935):2127-35. (PMID: 24656685)
      Lancet Oncol. 2010 Oct;11(10):927-33. (PMID: 20863759)
      Front Oncol. 2021 Dec 06;11:779140. (PMID: 34938660)
      Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2022 Nov;196(2):245-254. (PMID: 36138294)
      Lancet Oncol. 2020 Nov;21(11):1443-1454. (PMID: 33152284)
      Int J Surg. 2023 Nov 01;109(11):3727-3729. (PMID: 37678269)
      Lancet Oncol. 2018 Oct;19(10):1385-1393. (PMID: 30196031)
      Ann Surg Oncol. 2016 Apr;23(4):1123-8. (PMID: 26553439)
      Lancet Oncol. 2014 Nov;15(12):1303-10. (PMID: 25439688)
      JAMA Oncol. 2016 Nov 01;2(11):1477-1486. (PMID: 27367583)
      J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2022 Jun;20(6):691-722. (PMID: 35714673)
      JAMA Oncol. 2022 Aug 1;8(8):1190-1194. (PMID: 35653145)
      Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2020 Nov;184(2):397-405. (PMID: 32776291)
      J Clin Oncol. 2021 Sep 20;39(27):3056-3082. (PMID: 34279999)
      Int J Surg. 2021 Dec;96:106165. (PMID: 34774726)
    • Grant Information:
      2022M721987 China Postdoctoral Science Foundation
    • Contributed Indexing:
      Keywords: Breast cancer; Neoadjuvant therapy; Regional nodal irradiation; Sentinel lymph node biopsy; Surgery
    • Publication Date:
      Date Created: 20240903 Date Completed: 20240903 Latest Revision: 20240906
    • Publication Date:
      20240906
    • Accession Number:
      PMC11372074
    • Accession Number:
      10.1038/s41598-024-70874-w
    • Accession Number:
      39227511