SpringerLink
Log in

Axillary Recurrence Rate Following Negative Sentinel Node Biopsy for Invasive Breast Cancer: Long-Term Follow-Up

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 03 December 2009

Abstract

Objective

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has replaced axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) as the definitive nodal staging procedure for breast cancer. SLN biopsy has been proven to cause less morbidity and be more cost effective than complete ALND. Short-term follow-up has shown that lymphatic map** and SLN have a low false-negative rate, but there is limited data demonstrating long-term outcomes within a large consecutive series of patients.

Methods

Retrospective review of a prospective database of breast cancer patients at our institution was performed. The initial map** of 1,530 patients with invasive breast cancer who demonstrated a negative sentinel node biopsy and no axillary dissection between January 1995 and June 2003 were collated and reviewed to achieve a long-term follow-up. These 1,530 patients were reviewed for follow-up time, local recurrences, distant metastases, and survival.

Results

1,530 consecutively mapped invasive breast cancer patients had a negative SLN biopsy and no ALND. The mean invasive tumor size was 1.40 cm. Of 1,530 patients, 73% (1,121) underwent lumpectomy and 27% (409) underwent mastectomy. Mean follow-up was 4.92 years (range 0–12.0 years). There have been 4 (0.26%) patients presenting with local axillary recurrences, 54 (3.53%) patients presenting with local recurrences in the ipsilateral breast/chest wall, and 24 (1.57%) presenting with distant metastases.

Conclusion

These data confirm that SLN biopsy is an effective and safe alternative to ALND for detection of nodal metastases in patients with invasive breast cancer and should be used as the standard tool for nodal staging.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Canada)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fisher B, Slack NH. Number of lymph nodes examined and the prognosis of breast carcinoma. Surg Gynecol Obstet. 1970;131(1):79–88.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nemoto T, et al. Management and survival of female breast cancer: results of a national survey by the American College of Surgeons. Cancer. 1980;45(12):2917–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Petrek JA, Pressman PI, Smith RA. Lymphedema: current issues in research and management. CA Cancer J Clin. 2000;50(5):292–307.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bass SS, et al. Lymphatic map** and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Breast J. 1999;5(5):288–95.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Fleissig A, et al. 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. 2006;95(3):279–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lucci A, et al. Surgical complications associated with sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) plus axillary lymph node dissection compared with SLND alone in the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0011. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(24):3657–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Krag DN, et al. Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(10):881–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Liberman L. Pathologic analysis of sentinel lymph nodes in breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2000;88(5):971–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Veronesi U, et al. A randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(6):546–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Marrazzo A, et al. Is sentinel lymph node biopsy more accurate than axillary dissection for staging nodal involvement in breast cancer patients? Chir Ital. 2007;59(5):693–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Cox CE. Lymphatic map** in breast cancer: combination technique. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8(9 Suppl):67S–70S.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Bass SS, et al. The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. J Am Coll Surg. 1999;189(2):183–94.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. van der Ploeg IMC, et al. 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. 2008;34(12):1277–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Naik A, et al. 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. 2004;240(3):468–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Bergkvist L, et al. Axillary recurrence rate after negative sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer: three-year follow-up of the Swedish Multicenter Cohort Study. Ann Surg. 2008;247(1):150–6 doi 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318153ff40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Takei H, et al. Recurrence after sentinel lymph node biopsy with or without axillary lymph node dissection in patients with breast cancer. Breast Cancer. 2007;14(1):16–24.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Veronesi U, et al. Sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer: early results in 953 patients with negative sentinel node biopsy and no axillary dissection. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41(2):231–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Poletti P, et al. Axillary recurrence in sentinel lymph node-negative breast cancer patients. Ann Oncol. 2008;19(11):1842–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Blanchard DK, et al. Relapse and morbidity in patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy alone or with axillary dissection for breast cancer. Arch Surg. 2003;138(5):482–7 (discussion 487–8).

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Jeruss JS, et al. Axillary recurrence after sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(1):34–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Swenson KK, et al. Axillary disease recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection for breast carcinoma. Cancer. 2005;104(9):1834–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Carcoforo P, et al. Accuracy and reliability of sentinel node biopsy in patients with breast cancer Single centre study with long term follow-up. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;95(2):111–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. de Kanter AY, et al. 5-Year follow-up of sentinel node negative breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2006;32(3):282–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Veronesi U, et al. Conservative treatment of early breast cancer Long-term results of 1232 cases treated with quadrantectomy, axillary dissection, and radiotherapy. Ann Surg. 1990;211(3):250–9.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Recht A, et al. Regional nodal failure after conservative surgery and radiotherapy for early-stage breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 1991;9(6):988–96.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Chua B, Ung O, Boyages J. Competing considerations in regional nodal treatment for early breast cancer. Breast J. 2002;8(1):15–22.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Louis-Sylvestre C, et al. Axillary treatment in conservative management of operable breast cancer: dissection or radiotherapy? Results of a randomized study with 15 years of follow-up. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22(1):97–101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Greco M, et al. Breast cancer patients treated without axillary surgery: clinical implications and biologic analysis. Ann Surg. 2000;232(1):1–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We thank Jeff King at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center Comprehensive Breast Cancer Program Database and Helen Lewis at the Cancer Registry for their assistance in data retrieval. We also thank Samira Y. Khera, MD, Danielle M. Hasson, Laura B. White, and Elisabeth L. Dupont, MD for their assistance.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute (MCC), Tampa, FL, USA

    John V. Kiluk MD, Tammi Meade BS, Daniel Ramos BS, Sophie Dessureault MD, PhD, Michelle Davis BS, Corinne Shamehdi BS & Charles E. Cox MD

  2. University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USA

    Quan P. Ly MD

  3. Department of Surgery, USF College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, USA

    Tammi Meade BS, Daniel Ramos BS & Charles E. Cox MD

  4. Lakeland Regional Cancer Center, Lakeland, FL, USA

    Douglas S. Reintgen MD

  5. USF Breast Health, Carol and Frank Morsani Center for Advanced Health Care, Tampa, FL, USA

    Charles E. Cox MD

Authors
  1. John V. Kiluk MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Quan P. Ly MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Tammi Meade BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel Ramos BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Douglas S. Reintgen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Sophie Dessureault MD, PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Michelle Davis BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Corinne Shamehdi BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Charles E. Cox MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Charles E. Cox MD.

Additional information

An erratum to this article can be found at http://dx.doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0800-2

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kiluk, J.V., Ly, Q.P., Meade, T. et al. Axillary Recurrence Rate Following Negative Sentinel Node Biopsy for Invasive Breast Cancer: Long-Term Follow-Up. Ann Surg Oncol 18 (Suppl 3), 339–342 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0704-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0704-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation