Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Latest
    • Archive
    • home
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Office
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Advertising
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Folders
    • Help
  • Other Publications
    • NeuroSciences Journal

User menu

  • My alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
Saudi Medical Journal
  • Other Publications
    • NeuroSciences Journal
  • My alerts
  • Log in
Saudi Medical Journal

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Latest
    • Archive
    • home
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Reviewers
    • Subscribers
    • Institutions
    • Advertisers
  • About Us
    • About Us
    • Editorial Office
    • Editorial Board
  • More
    • Advertising
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Folders
    • Help
  • Follow psmmc on Twitter
  • Visit psmmc on Facebook
  • RSS
Research ArticleOriginal Article
Open Access

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer

Abdulaziz A. Alsaif
Saudi Medical Journal September 2015, 36 (9) 1053-1060; DOI: https://doi.org/10.15537/smj.2015.9.12228
Abdulaziz A. Alsaif
From the Department of Surgery, Faculty of Medicine, King Khalid University Hospital, King Saud University, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: [email protected] [email protected]
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • Info & Metrics
  • References
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Objectives: To report our experience in sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in early breast cancer.

Methods: This is a retrospective study conducted at King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia between January 2005 and December 2014. There were 120 patients who underwent SLNB with frozen section examination. Data collected included the characteristics of patients, index tumor, and sentinel node (SN), SLNB results, axillary recurrence rate and SLNB morbidity.

Results: There were 120 patients who had 123 cancers. Sentinel node was identified in 117 patients having 120 tumors (97.6% success rate). No SN was found intraoperatively in 3 patients. Frozen section results showed that 95 patients were SN negative, those patients had no immediate axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), whereas 25 patients were SN positive and subsequently had immediate ALND. Upon further examination of the 95 negative SN’s by hematoxylin & eosin (H&E) and immunohistochemical staining for doubtful H&E cases, 10 turned out to have micrometastases (6 had delayed ALND and 4 had no further axillary surgery). Median follow up of patients was 35.5 months and the mean was 38.8 months. There was one axillary recurrence observed in the SN negative group. The morbidity of SLNB was minimal.

Conclusion: The obtainable results from our local experience in SLNB in breast cancer, concur with that seen in published similar literature in particular the axillary failure rate. Sentinel lymph node biopsy resulted in minimal morbidity.

Breast cancer (BC) is the top cancer in women both in the developed and developing world.1 In the USA, nearly 230,000 BCs are diagnosed annually.2 The population of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is approximately 30 million, 65% of them are below the age of 30.3 In KSA, the total number of patients diagnosed to have BC in the year 2010 was 1,473 patients, which constituted 27.4% of all newly diagnosed female cancers in the year 2010. The Age Standardized Rate was 24.9/100,000 for female population. The median age at diagnosis was 49 years. More than half of BC patients in KSA presented with locoregional or distant disease.4 In KSA, there is no national screening program for BC and the Saudi Cancer Registry does not include ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) cases in their capture form, which may explain the low number of DCIS cases reported from local centers. It is clear that, KSA is among countries with low disease burden, but it is expected that this burden will increase in the years to come.5 Axillary lymph node status is considered the most important prognostic factor for patients with BC, and it participates largely in the decision regarding subsequent adjuvant systemic treatment.6,7 Axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with BC was introduced more than 200 years ago for staging and local control.8,9 It is associated with an increase risk of adverse outcomes, including lymphedema in 14% of cases, limited shoulder motion in 28% of the cases and neuropathic pain in 31% of the cases.10 The therapeutic advantage of removing negative nodes with respect to axillary control and survival remains questionable.11-14 At the present time, most BC patients receive some sort of adjuvant systemic therapy irrespective of their lymph node status.15 Based on that, minimally invasive procedures for staging the axilla have been introduced. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in BC, a minimally invasive procedure, was first described in 1994.16 Since then, it has been widely practiced with a wide literature to support its reliability for ascertaining the status of the axillary lymph nodes. Currently, SLNB is accepted as the standard of care for axillary staging in early BC.17-19 In this paper, we are documenting the beginning, development, results and follow up of patients who underwent SLNB for BC at King Khalid University Hospital (KKUH), Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.

Methods

Over a 10-year period (January 2005 to December 2014), a total of 916 BC patients were diagnosed and treated at KKUH (6 patients with pure DCIS and 910 patients with invasive disease). Of those 916 patients, there were 120 patients who fulfilled the criteria to undergo SLNB procedure, 3 of them had bilateral disease. The inclusion criteria were set at the beginning of the experience and changed as time passed by, the changes in the inclusion criteria were based on cumulative scientific evidence favoring the change (Figure 1). The Institutional Review Board, College of Medicine, King Saud University (Ethical Review Committee) approved this study.

Figure 1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1

Beginning and development of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) program at King Khalid University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia. ALND - axillary lymph node biopsy, DCIS - ductal carcinoma in situ, NAC - neoadjuvant chemotherapy

We conducted the study by reviewing the data of 117 patients who had 120 SLNB procedures, of them, 85 sentinel node (SN) negative patients who had only SLNB with no further ALND and 10 patients who had negative SN on frozen section (FS), doubtful hematoxylin & eosin (H&E) result, but turned out to have micrometastasis on immunohistochemistry (IHC) testing, ALND was performed to 6 of the 10 patients, but no ALND was performed on the remaining 4 patients. Twenty-five patients in this series had positive SN on FS, so immediate ALND was performed to them. At KKUH, the first case of SLNB in BC was carried out in 2005 by one of the surgeons who had formal overseas training on the procedure where he attained the initial learning phase and validation of the procedure.

Patient’s characteristics were age, gender, bilaterality, and hormonal status. Tumor characteristics were histological type, tumor size, lymphovascular invasion, tumor grade, perineural invasion, hormonal receptors. Sentinel node characteristics were number of SN removed, FS result, H&E result, IHC result, and ALND result (in case of positive SN). Tumors were classified histologically according to the American Joint Cancer Commission Staging System.20

Sentinel lymph node identification procedures

Sentinel lymph node biopsy was performed using isotope and blue dye together, and were all carried out under general anesthesia. The radiotracer is injected early in the morning when the procedure is planned to be performed in the afternoon same day or late afternoon the day before the procedure when the SLNB is planned to be carried out in the early morning next day. The blue dye is injected just after induction of anesthesia. One-and-a-half ml Tc99m sodium pertechnetate (GE Healthcare Limited, HP7 9LL, United Kingdom) with activity ranging from 5-100 mCi (185-3700 MBq) is introduced in a vial. Four syringes are prepared from this vial, each syringe contains 0.1-0.2 ml Tc99m albumin colloid containing 0.2-0.4 mCi (7.4-14.4 MBq). The material is injected at 4 peritumoral sites or in the periareolar area in cases with multifocal or multicentric cancers, then the nurse performs gentle breast massage for 30 minutes to facilitate migration of the particles toward the axilla. Post injection imaging is performed using gamma camera (Phillips SPECT-CT system, Andover, Massachusetts, USA 01810-1099). Anterior and lateral views are obtained 15 minutes post injection and continued until the SN is visualized or the study is declared negative from imaging point of view. Two-and-a-half ml of sterile saline plus 2.5 ml of the blue dye (Bleu Patente V, Sodique Guerbet 2.5%, France) are mixed and injected subdermally peritumorally just after induction of anesthesia, followed by breast massage for 5 minutes. The axilla is explored 10-15 minutes after the blue dye injection and massaging. A lymph node is called SN when it is blue stained or there is a blue lymphatic channel leading to it, or when it is a hot node by using the gamma detector probe (GPS Navigator GPS-9100-00 Dynasil, USA). After the removal of the SN, the axillary basin is checked for residual radioactivity, a count less than 10% of the hottest SN is considered a background activity. The SN(s) is/are sent for FS. At the FS laboratory, each lymph node is sliced perpendicular to its long axis, touch preparation are submitted from the cut surfaces and stained with modified giemsa stain (Diff Quick). The entire lymph node(s) is/are submitted after slicing for FS, the slices are performed in an equidistant manner of 2mm thickness for each slice. Immunohistochemistry is used for doubtfully negative H&E cases. Macrometastases are defined as metastatic lesions larger than 2.0 mm, whereas micrometastases is defined as metastatic lesions between 0.2-2.0 mm. In case the SN is positive for metastasis by FS, ALND is carried out immediately (level 1 & level 2), but if the SN is negative by FS, no ALND is performed. When no axillary SN is identified by both modalities, an axillary lymph node dissection is carried out immediately. While waiting for the FS result, the planned breast procedure is performed.

Statistical analysis

All data collected were encoded into a Microsoft Excel program and analyzed using Predictive Analysis for Social Sciences (PASW) Version 19.0 (IBM SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA). Results are presented as frequency (number) and percentages.

Results

Between January 2005 and December 2014 (10 years period), a total of 916 BC patients were diagnosed and treated at KKUH. Of those 916 patients, 120 female patients were seen to be suitable for SLNB procedure. The median age was 48 years, the mean age was 49.2 ± 10.4 years. Patients in this series are mostly pre-menopausal (65%). Infiltrating ductal carcinoma was seen in 106 of our patients (86.2%), whereas lobular carcinoma was seen in 11 patients (8.9%). There were 6 cases of DCIS (4.9%). The tumor size was T1 in 40 patients (32.5%), T2 in 79 patients (64.2%), and T3 in 4 patients (3.3%). Grade 2 tumors were seen in 82 patients (66.7%), grade 3 tumors in 30 patients (24.4%), and grade one tumors were seen only in 11 patients (8.9%). Lymphovascular invasion was seen in 21.1% and perineural invasion was seen in 12.2%. There were 20 patients with multifocal disease (16.7%) and 10 patients with multicentric disease (8.3%). Eighteen patients (15.4%) received NAC prior to SLNB procedure. Almost 70% of our patients were estrogen hormone positive and 20.3% were Her2 positive (Table 1). In the first few years of this study, the number of recruited patients was very little due to the low volume of BC patients referred to our center and also due to the strict inclusion criteria for the study, but as time passed by the number of BC patients referred to our center has increased and our inclusion criteria was modified to include more patients (Figure 1).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1

Patients’ demographic and tumor characteristics (120 patients, 3 of them having bilateral cancer).

The SLNB procedure was successfully carried out in 117 out of 120 patients (97.6% success rate).3 Of the 117 patients, 3 had bilateral disease, so there were 120 SLNB procedures performed. A combination of radiolabeled technetium and patent blue dye were used to map and localize the SN in all patients. In 3 cases, the SN was not identified by both modalities; thus, ALND was performed immediately on these 3 patients.

Intraoperative SN identification

Sentinel node was identified intraoperatively in 120 out of 123 tumors (97.6% success rate). Three patients had bilateral disease. Ninety-six percent of SN were identified by lymphoscintigraphy, while 92% was identified by the patent blue dye method. The number of SN harvested was one in 36 cases (30%), 2 in 60 cases (50%), 3 in 19 cases (15.8%), 4 in 3 cases (2.5%), and 5 in 2 cases (1.7%) (Table 2).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 2

Details of sentinel lymph node (SLN) findings in 120 patients who underwent SLNB.

Sentinel node results

Of the 120 SLNB’s, FS examinations resulted in 25 positive SN (20.8%), all had immediate ALND. The remaining 95 cases (79.2%) were reported as negative SN by FS and consequently, no ALND was performed on them. Hematoxylin & eosin staining of SN revealed results similar to that of FS. Cytokeratin immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining was carried out to doubtfully negative H&E results, which revealed positivity in 10 out of 95 SN (10.5%). These 10 SN’s contained micrometastases (cancer deposits from 0.2-2.0 mm). Of these 10 SN’s containing micrometastases, 6 patients were subjected to delayed ALND (early phase of study), whereas the other 4 patients did not have delayed ALND (late phase of study) (Table 2).

Axillary lymph nodes status of patients submitted to ALND for a positive SN

In 6 patients who had micrometastases, the positive SN was the only positive lymph node in the axillary basin, but in the macrometastases patients (25 cases), only 8 patients had positive lymph nodes in the axillary basin other than the positive SN (25.8%). We opted not to do ALND for the other 4 cases of micrometastases, so there were 31 ALND for a positive SN. Only 8 cases (25.8%) showed positive lymph nodes in the axillary basin other than the positive SN (Table 3).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 3

Axillary lymph nodes status of patients submitted to ALND after a positive SLNB.

Table 4 shows the characteristics of all the SN’s obtained in this series. There were 35 positive SN’s (25 macrometastases and 10 micrometastases). In 21 cases (60%), there was only one positive SN, in 11 cases (31.4%) there were 2 positive SN’s, and in 3 cases (8.6%) there were 3 positive SN’s. All the SN’s in this study were obtained from the ipsilateral axilla. In 23 out of 31 ALND cases (74.2%), the SN was the only positive node in the axillary basin. There was a discordance between FS and final pathology result, which was seen in 10 cases (the micrometastases cases by IHC).

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 4

Characteristics of 120 sentinel nodes (SN) from studied patient.

Table 5 shows that 71 patients (59.2%) had breast conservative therapy followed by whole breast irradiation. Forty nine patients (40.8%) had mastectomy. In the late phase of the study, we included 18 patients (15.4%) who received NAC prior to having SLNB.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 5

Treatments and events outcome in 120 patients who underwent SLNB.

Events in the study group

At a median follow up of 35.5 months, none of the patients who had SLNB (only) developed lymphedema, arm numbness, or shoulder joint dysfunction of the operated side, yet there were 2 wound infections and 3 seromas which were treated conservatively. There were 2 deaths in this series; one was due to BC (T3, triple negative young patient), and the other was due to cardiac condition. There was one axillary recurrence, this patient had negative SN by all testing modalities, and had mastectomy as a primary breast procedure, thus ALND was carried out to deal with her recurrence. There were 2 ipsilateral breast recurrences (both had breast conservative therapy as a primary breast procedure followed by whole breast irradiation), and both patients subsequently had completion mastectomy. Bone metastasis was seen in one patient 3 years after the SLNB procedure. We lost follow up of 14 patients out of 117 (11.9%).

Discussion

This is a descriptive analysis of our experience with 120 cases of SLNB in BC covering 10 years (2005-2014). The SLNB program for patients with BC at our institution started in 2005 in a multidisciplinary setting with strict inclusion criteria. The program was initiated by one of the surgeons who had formal overseas training on SLNB in BC where he attained the initial learning phase and validation of the procedure. At the beginning our program, there was a scientific evidence to support our plan of not performing axillary lymph node dissection for patients with negative SN.21-23 Sentinel lymph node biopsy in BC, a minimally invasive procedure, was first described in 1994,16 since that time, it gained a substantial ground and it is now accepted as the standard of care for axillary staging in clinically negative axilla BC patients.17-19,24

To maximize our SN identification rate, we used the dual method (radioactive tracer and patent blue dye).25-29 Our identification rate was 97.6%, which is in accordance with most of the published literatures.26,27,30

Tumor multifocality and multicentricity are no longer contraindications to perform SLNB. Current point of view suggests that there is/are specific SN(s) for the whole breast gland. It has been shown that success rates and false negative rates of SLNB in multifocal and multicentric cancers are similar to those for unifocal cancers.31-35 In the past, big tumor size was one of the limiting factors to do SLNB, but this has changed recently. Nowadays, SLNB is being performed to patients with tumor size as big as 5 cm or more as long as the axilla is clinically negative, although the chances of finding a positive SN increases as the tumor size increases.24,36,37 It has been thought before that any past surgical procedure in the breast would alter the lymphatic channels and drainage and consequently make SLNB inaccurate. This concept has been challenged and at the present time, SLNB is being carried out for patients who even had excisional biopsy for the index tumor.38-40 The number of documented cases of DCIS in KSA is low, may be one of the reasons is the absence of a national screening program for BC and the fact SCR does not register premalignant conditions. In this series, we performed SLNB in patients diagnosed to have DCIS and were high risk, or going for mastectomy or had a palpable disease.41-44

Since the introduction of SLNB in the management of the axilla in early BC patients, there has been a growing interest in the clinical significance of micrometastasis detected in the SN, but it seems now that ALND can be safely avoided in patients with early BC and limited SN involvement, as the survival outcomes are similar between patients with negative and micrometastatic axillary lymph nodes.45-48

The rationale for giving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) to patients with large operable tumors is the potential downstaging of tumors, providing the alternative of breast-conserving surgery instead of mastectomy. In patients with clinically negative axilla, SLNB following NAC is considered an acceptable option, largely based on retrospective studies demonstrating a high identification rate of SN intraoperatively and false negative rates comparable to that seen in patients who undergo SLNB prior to chemotherapy.49-52 In our series, almost 96% of patients had one to 3 SN removed at the time of SLNB. Studies have shown that the average number of SN removed at the time of SLNB is 3.53 The identification of more than one SN may be attributed to migration of isotope or blue dye from the true SN to second line nodes or just a normal anatomic variation in which the lymphatics of a given site in the breast drain simultaneously.53 We performed intraoperative FS for all the SN in this series. It allowed us to do immediate ALND for the SN positive cases which was approximately 21% of the patients in this study.

There was an agreement between FS results and H&E results, yet there were 10 doubtful cases in H&E reading, for which we performed IHC. All of the 10 cases showed micrometastasis (between 0.2 and 2.0 mm cancer deposits), 6 of the 10 cases had delayed ALND, with negative harvested lymph nodes other than the SN. Histologically, the negative SN that were re-examined with serial sectioning and IHC, detected an additional 10-16% with occult metastases. Sentinel node metastases detected by IHC did not appear to have a significant impact on 5-year overall survival.47,54

In this series, the SN was the only positive lymph node(s) in the axillary content in 74.2% of cases, which ended up by doing ALND. It is worth mentioning that 19.4% of them were micrometastasis. This issue has been looked at in the literature and there were evidences that in up to 60% of cases, the SN is the only metastatic lymph node in the axillary basin.55,56 A nomogram has been published to predict non-SN metastasis in patients with positive SN using nuclear grade, lymphovascular invasion, multifocality, estrogen receptor status, number of positive SN, tumor size, and method of detecting positivity in SN.57 However, this nomogram was not reliably predictive for positive non-SN in cases with micrometastatic positive SN plus the fact that it is not always reproducible in every center. In a recent study, ACOSOG Z0011, in which patients with clinical T1-2 N0 M0 BC having a positive SN were randomized to have ALND or no further axillary surgery, results showed no trend toward a clinical benefit of ALND for patients with limited nodal disease.19,58 In this series, we observed one axillary recurrence (1.2%) after a negative SN, which occurred 2 years from surgery. A meta-analysis of 48 studies that included almost 15,000 SN negative patients followed for a median of 34 months demonstrated an axillary failure rate of 0.3%.59 Other studies in the literature showed failure rate ranging from 0 to 1.4% at 14-46 months of follow up.60-62

In conclusion, despite the low number of patients and short follow up of this study, the obtainable results from our local experience in SLNB in BC, concur with that seen in published similar literature in particular the axillary failure rate. Sentinel lymph node biopsy resulted in minimal morbidity. A large local multicentric similar study is needed to know more about breast cancer in Saudi Arabia with special emphasis on the applicability and suitability of sentinel lymph node biopsy technique in our patients.

Acknowledgment

The author would like to acknowledge the efforts of Dr. Massouma Alnasser (Surgical resident) and Dr. Hend Alidress (Senior Surgical Registrar) in data collection.

Footnotes

  • Disclosure. Authors have no conflict of interests, and the work was not supported or funded by any drug company.

  • Received May 10, 2015.
  • Accepted August 3, 2015.
  • Copyright: © Saudi Medical Journal

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 Unported, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

References

  1. ↵
    1. World Health Organization
    (2015) Breast Cancer: prevention and Control (World Health Organization, Geneva (CH)) Available from:www.who.int/cancer/detection/breastcancer/en/.
  2. ↵
    1. Siegel R,
    2. Naishadham D,
    3. Jemal A
    (2012) Cancer statistics, 2012. CA Cancer J Clin 62:10–29.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Central Department of Statistics and Information
    (2010) Estimates of population by sex and nationality in the Kingdom for the years 2004 to 2014 (Central Department of Statistics and Information, Riyadh (KSA)).
  4. ↵
    1. Saudi Cancer Registry
    Cancer incidence report Saudi Arabia 2010. Available from URL:http://www.chs.gov.sa/Ar/mediacenter/NewsLetter/2010%20Report%20%281%29.pdf. Updated 2014 April; Accessed 2015 April 11.
  5. ↵
    1. Ibrahim EM,
    2. Zeeneldin AA,
    3. Sadiq BB,
    4. Ezzat AA
    (2008) The present and the future of breast cancer burden in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. Med Oncol 25:387–393.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Fisher B,
    2. Bauer M,
    3. Wickerham DL,
    4. Redmond CK,
    5. Fisher ER,
    6. Cruz AB,
    7. et al.
    (1983) Relation of number of positive axillary nodes to the prognosis of patients with primary breast cancer. An NSABP update. Cancer 52:1551–1557.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Carter CL,
    2. Allen C,
    3. Henson DE
    (1989) Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 63:181–187.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Cotlar AM,
    2. Dubose JJ,
    3. Rose DM
    (2003) History of surgery for breast cancer: radical to the sublime. Curr Surg 60:329–337.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Halsted WS
    (1894) The results of operations for the cure of cancer of the breast performed at the Johns Hopkins Hospital from June, 1889, to January, 1894. Ann Surg 20:497–555.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Fleissig A,
    2. Fallowfield LJ,
    3. Langridge CI,
    4. Johnson L,
    5. Newcombe RG,
    6. Dixon JM,
    7. et al.
    (2006) Post-operative arm morbidity and quality of life. Results of the ALMANAC randomised trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with standard axillary treatment in the management of patients with early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 95:279–293.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  11. ↵
    1. Fisher B,
    2. Redmond C,
    3. Fisher ER,
    4. Bauer M,
    5. Wolmark N,
    6. Wickerham DL,
    7. et al.
    (1985) Ten-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing radical mastectomy and total mastectomy with or without radiation. N Engl J Med 312:674–681.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Haffy BG,
    2. Ward B,
    3. Pathare P,
    4. Salem R,
    5. McKhann C,
    6. Beinfield M,
    7. et al.
    (1997) Reappraisal of the role of axillary lymph node dissection in the conservative treatment of breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 15:691–700.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Sosa JA,
    2. Diener-West M,
    3. Gusev Y,
    4. Choti MA,
    5. Lange JR,
    6. Dooley WC,
    7. et al.
    (1998) Association between extent of axillary lymph node dissection and survival in patients with stage I breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 5:140–149.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  12. ↵
    1. Baxter N,
    2. McCready D,
    3. Chapman JA,
    4. Fish E,
    5. Kahn H,
    6. Hanna W,
    7. et al.
    (1996) Clinical behavior of untreated axillary nodes after local treatment for primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 3:235–240.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Cady B
    (1997) Is axillary lymph node dissection necessary in routine management of breast cancer?No. The Breast Journal 5:246–260.
    OpenUrl
  14. ↵
    1. Giuliano AE,
    2. Kirgan DM,
    3. Guenther JM,
    4. Morton DL
    (1994) Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 220:391–398, discussion 398-401.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Krag DN,
    2. Anderson SJ,
    3. Julian TB,
    4. Brown AM,
    5. Harlow SP,
    6. Costantino JP,
    7. et al.
    (2010) Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 11:927–933.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Grube BJ,
    2. Giuliano AE
    (2001) Observation of the breast cancer patient with a tumor-positive sentinel node: implications of the ACOSOG Z0011 trial. Semin Surg Oncol 20:230–237.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Giuliano AE,
    2. McCall LM,
    3. Beitsch PD,
    4. Whitworth PW,
    5. Morrow M,
    6. Blumencranz PW,
    7. et al.
    (2010) ACOSOG Z0011: A randomized trial of axillary node dissection in women with clinical T1-2 N0 M0 breast cancer who have a positive sentinel node. 2010 ASCO Annual Meeting. Journal of Clinical Oncology 28:18s: 2010 (suppl; abstr CRA506).
  17. ↵
    1. Edge S,
    2. Byrd DR,
    3. Compton CC,
    4. Fritz AG,
    5. Greene FL,
    6. Trotti A
    , eds (2010) American Joint Cancer Commission Staging System. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual (Springer, New York (NY)), 7th ed.
  18. ↵
    1. Cady B
    (2002) Consensus on sentinel node biopsy. Breast J 8:123–125.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Lyman GH,
    2. Giuliano AE,
    3. Somerfield MR,
    4. Benson AB 3rd.,
    5. Bodurka DC,
    6. Burstein HJ,
    7. et al.
    (2005) American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23:7703–7720.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  19. ↵
    1. Soni NK,
    2. Spillane AJ
    (2005) Experience of sentinel node biopsy alone in early breast cancer without further axillary dissection in patients with negative sentinel node. ANZ J Surg 75:292–299.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network
    (2015) Clinical practice guidelines in oncology (NCCN Guideline) version 2 (National Comprehensive Cancer, Fort Washington (PA)).
  21. ↵
    1. Elmadahm AA,
    2. Gill PG,
    3. Bochner M,
    4. Gebski VJ,
    5. Zannino D,
    6. Wetzig N,
    7. et al.
    (2015) Identification of the sentinel lymph node in the SNAC-1 trial. ANZ J Surg 85:58–63.
    OpenUrl
  22. ↵
    1. Tuttle TM
    (2005) Sentinel lymph node biopsy. Preferred method of axillary staging for breast cancer. Minerva Ginecol 57:293–303.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  23. ↵
    1. Somasundaram SK,
    2. Chicken DW,
    3. Waddington WA,
    4. Bomanji J,
    5. Ell PJ,
    6. Keshtgar MR
    (2009) Sentinel node imaging in breast cancer using superficial injections: technical details and observations. Eur J Surg Oncol 35:1250–1256.
    OpenUrlPubMed
    1. Bekker J,
    2. Meijer S
    (2008) The historical perspective of the sentinel lymph node concept. Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 152:38–45, Dutch.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  24. ↵
    1. Schwartz GF,
    2. Giuliano AE,
    3. Veronesi U,
    4. Consensus Conference Committee
    (2002) Proceedings of the Consensus Conference on the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in carcinoma of the Breast, April 19-22, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Cancer 94:2542–2551.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  25. ↵
    1. Ballarin A,
    2. Franchini Z,
    3. D’Atri C,
    4. Marchi R,
    5. Tedeschi U
    (2006) Sentinel lymph-node biopsy for breast cancer. Analysis of 235 cases and review of the literature. Chir Ital 58:583–595, Italian.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  26. ↵
    1. Kumar R,
    2. Jana S,
    3. Heiba SI,
    4. Dakhel M,
    5. Axelrod D,
    6. Siegel B,
    7. et al.
    (2003) Retrospective analysis of sentinel node localization in multifocal, multicentric, palpable, or nonpalpable breast cancer. J Nucl Med 44:7–10.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Tousimis E,
    2. Van Zee KJ,
    3. Fey JV,
    4. Hoque LW,
    5. Tan LK,
    6. Cody HS 3rd.,
    7. et al.
    (2003) The accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy in multicentric and multifocal invasive breast cancers. J Am Coll Surg 197:529–535.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Goyal A,
    2. Newcombe RG,
    3. Mansel RE,
    4. Chetty U,
    5. Ell P,
    6. Fallowfield L,
    7. et al.
    (2004) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with multifocal breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 30:475–479.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Spillane AJ,
    2. Brennan ME
    (2011) Accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy in large and multifocal/multicentric breast carcinoma--a systematic review. Eur J Surg Oncol 37:371–385.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  27. ↵
    1. Moody LC,
    2. Wen X,
    3. McKnight T,
    4. Chao C
    (2012) Indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy in multifocal and multicentric breast cancer. Surgery 152:389–396.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  28. ↵
    1. Schille J,
    2. Frisell J,
    3. Ingvar C,
    4. Bergkvist L
    (2007) Sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer larger than 3 cm in diameter. Br J Surg 94:948–951.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  29. ↵
    1. IBCSG 23-01
    International Breast Cancer Study Group, A randomized trial of axillary dissection vs. no axillary dissection for patients with clinically node negative breast cancer and micrometastases in the sentinel node. Sentinel lymph node biopsy trial. Available from:http://www.ibcsg.org/Public/Health_Professionals/Closed_Trials/IBCSG%2023-01/Pages/IBCSG23-01.aspx. Updated 2001; Accessed 2015 April 11.
  30. ↵
    1. Heuts EM,
    2. van der Ent FW,
    3. Kengen RA,
    4. van der Pol HA,
    5. Hulsewe KW,
    6. Hoofwijk AG
    (2006) Results of sentinel node biopsy not affected by previous excisional biopsy. Eur J Surg Oncol 32:278–281.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Dinan D,
    2. Nagle CE,
    3. Pettinga J
    (2005) Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in women with an ipsilateral second breast carcinoma and a history of breast and axillary surgery. Am J Surg 190:614–617.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  31. ↵
    1. Javan H,
    2. Gholami H,
    3. Assadi M,
    4. Pakdel AF,
    5. Sadeghi R,
    6. Keshtgar M
    (2012) The accuracy of sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer patients with the history of previous surgical biopsy of the primary lesion: systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Eur J Surg Oncol 38:45–109.
    OpenUrl
  32. ↵
    1. Yen TW,
    2. Hunt KK,
    3. Ross MI,
    4. Mirza NQ,
    5. Babiera GV,
    6. Meric-Bernstam F,
    7. et al.
    (2005) Predictors of invasive breast cancer in patients with an initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: a guide to selective use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in management of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Am Coll Surg 200:516–526.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Shapiro-Wright HM,
    2. Julian TB
    (2010) Sentinel lymph node biopsy and management of the axilla in ductal carcinoma in situ. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 2010:145–149.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. D’Eredita G,
    2. Giardina C,
    3. Napoli A,
    4. Ingravallo G,
    5. Troilo VL,
    6. Fischetti F,
    7. et al.
    (2009) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with pure and high-risk ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Tumori 95:706–711.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  33. ↵
    1. Intra M,
    2. Rotmensz N,
    3. Veronesi P,
    4. Colleoni M,
    5. Iodice S,
    6. Paganelli G,
    7. et al.
    (2008) Sentinel node biopsy is not a standard procedure in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the experience of the European Institute of Oncology in 854 patients in 10 years. Ann Surg 247:315–319.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  34. ↵
    1. Maaskant-Braat AJ,
    2. van de Poll-Franse LV,
    3. Voogd AC,
    4. Coebergh JW,
    5. Roumen RM,
    6. Nolthenius-Puylaert MC
    (2011) Sentinel node micrometastases in breast cancer do not affect prognosis: a population-based study. Breast Cancer Res Treat 127:195–203.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Gobardhan PD,
    2. Elias SG,
    3. Madsen EV,
    4. van Wely B,
    5. van den Wildenberg F,
    6. Theunissen EB,
    7. et al.
    (2011) Prognostic value of lymph node micrometastases in breast cancer: a multicenter cohort study. Ann Surg Oncol 18:1657–1664.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  35. ↵
    1. Weaver DL,
    2. Ashikaya T,
    3. Krag DN,
    4. Skelly JM,
    5. Anderson SJ,
    6. Harlow SP,
    7. et al.
    (2011) Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 364:412–421.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  36. ↵
    1. Galimberti V,
    2. Cole BF,
    3. Zurrida S,
    4. Viale G,
    5. Luini A,
    6. Veronesi P,
    7. et al.
    (2013) Axillary dissection versus no axillary dissection in patients with sentinel-node micrometastases (IBCSG 23-01): a phase 3 randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 14:297–305.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  37. ↵
    1. van Deurzen CH,
    2. Vriens BE,
    3. Tjan-Heijnen VC,
    4. van der Wall E,
    5. Albregts M,
    6. van Hilligersberg R,
    7. et al.
    (2009) Accuracy of sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in breast cancer patients: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer 45:3124–3130.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Xing Y,
    2. Foy M,
    3. Cox DD,
    4. Kuerer HM,
    5. Hunt KK,
    6. Cormier JN
    (2006) Meta-analysis of sentinel lymph node biopsy after preoperative chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer. Br J Surg 93:539–546.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Kelly AM,
    2. Dwamena B,
    3. Cronin P,
    4. Carlos RC
    (2009) Breast cancer sentinel node identification and classification after neoadjuvant chemotherapy-systematic review and meta analysis. Acad Radiol 16:551–563.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  38. ↵
    1. Lyman GH,
    2. Temin S,
    3. Edge SB,
    4. Newman LA,
    5. Turner RR,
    6. Weaver DL,
    7. et al.
    (2014) Sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with early-stage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 32:1365–1383.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  39. ↵
    1. Yi M,
    2. Meric-Bernstam F,
    3. Ross MI,
    4. Akins JS,
    5. Hwang RF,
    6. Lucci A,
    7. et al.
    (2008) How many sentinel lymph nodes are enough during sentinel lymph node dissection for breast cancer? Cancer 113:30–37.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  40. ↵
    1. Giuliano AE,
    2. Hawes D,
    3. Ballman KV,
    4. Whitworth PW,
    5. Blumencranz PW,
    6. Reintgen DS,
    7. et al.
    (2011) Association of occult metastases in sentinel lymph nodes and bone marrow with survival among women with early-stage invasive breast cancer. JAMA 306:385–393.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  41. ↵
    1. Yi M,
    2. Giordano SH,
    3. Meric-Bernstam F,
    4. Mittendorf EA,
    5. Kuerer HM,
    6. Hwang RF,
    7. et al.
    (2010) Trends in and outcomes from sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone vs. SLNB with axillary lymph node dissection for node-positive breast cancer patients: experience from the SEER database. Ann Surg Oncol 17(Suppl 3):S343–S351.
    OpenUrl
  42. ↵
    1. Grube BJ,
    2. Giuliano AE
    (2001) Observation of the breast cancer patient with a tumor-positive sentinel node: Implications of the ACOSOG Z0011 trial. Semin Surg Oncol 20:230–237.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  43. ↵
    1. Van Zee KJ,
    2. Manasseh DM,
    3. Bevilacqua JL,
    4. Boolbol SK,
    5. Fey JV,
    6. Tan LK,
    7. et al.
    (2003) A nomogram for predicting the likelihood of additional nodal metastases in breast cancer patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 10:1140–1151.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  44. ↵
    1. Caudle AS,
    2. Hunt KK,
    3. Kuerer HM,
    4. Meric-Bernstam F,
    5. Lucci A,
    6. Bedrosian I,
    7. et al.
    (2011) Multidisciplinary considerations in the implementation of the findings from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z0011 study: a practice-changing trial. Ann Surg Oncol 18:2407–2412.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  45. ↵
    1. van der Ploeg IM,
    2. Nieweg OE,
    3. van Rijk MC,
    4. Valdes Olmos RA,
    5. Kroon BB
    (2008) Axillary recurrence after a tumour-negative sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Eur J Surg Oncol 34:1277–1284.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  46. ↵
    1. Naik AM,
    2. Fey J,
    3. Gemignani M,
    4. Heerdt A,
    5. Montgomery L,
    6. Petrek J,
    7. et al.
    (2004) The risk of axillary relapse after sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer is comparable with that of axillary lymph node dissection: a follow-up study of 4008 procedures. Ann Surg 240:462–468, discussion 468-471.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Chung MA,
    2. Steinhoff MM,
    3. Cady B
    (2002) Clinical axillary recurrence in breast cancer patients after a negative sentinel node biopsy. Am J Surg 184:310–314.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  47. ↵
    1. Langer I,
    2. Marti WR,
    3. Guller U,
    4. Moch H,
    5. Harder F,
    6. Oertli D,
    7. et al.
    (2005) Axillary recurrence rate in breast cancer patients with negative sentinel lymph node (SLN) or SLN micrometastases: prospective analysis of 150 patients after SLN biopsy. Ann Surg 241:152–158.
    OpenUrlPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Saudi Medical Journal: 36 (9)
Saudi Medical Journal
Vol. 36, Issue 9
1 Sep 2015
  • Table of Contents
  • Cover (PDF)
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Saudi Medical Journal.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Saudi Medical Journal
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Saudi Medical Journal web site.
Citation Tools
Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer
Abdulaziz A. Alsaif
Saudi Medical Journal Sep 2015, 36 (9) 1053-1060; DOI: 10.15537/smj.2015.9.12228

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer
Abdulaziz A. Alsaif
Saudi Medical Journal Sep 2015, 36 (9) 1053-1060; DOI: 10.15537/smj.2015.9.12228
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Acknowledgment
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • eLetters
  • References
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • The interaction between no folic acid supplementation during early pregnancy and preeclampsia increased the risk of preterm birth
  • The characteristics of Grave’s disease in children and adolescent patients in Al-Madinah Al-Munawwarah
  • Patellar height changes after treatment of tibia plateau fractures
Show more Original Article

Similar Articles

CONTENT

  • home

JOURNAL

  • home

AUTHORS

  • home
Saudi Medical Journal

© 2023 Saudi Medical Journal Saudi Medical Journal is copyright under the Berne Convention and the International Copyright Convention.  Saudi Medical Journal is an Open Access journal and articles published are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial License (CC BY-NC). Readers may copy, distribute, and display the work for non-commercial purposes with the proper citation of the original work. Electronic ISSN 1658-3175. Print ISSN 0379-5284.

Powered by HighWire