This abstract was withdrawn by the authors.
Background: The decision to perform complete node dissection for a tumor positive sentinel node is becoming more controversial. Five year data from the American College of Surgeon's Z011 trial recently demonstrated no difference in regional control in patients undergoing sentinel node biopsy alone for node positive disease. We report our institution's 12 year experience with sentinel node biopsy alone for tumor positive sentinel node and clinicopathologic factors that are associated with sentinel node biopsy alone. Patients and Methods: From 1998 to 2009, a retrospective review was performed on 2,139 patients who underwent sentinel node biopsy alone for breast cancer. Of these 2,139 patients, 1,997 were tumor negative, 123 tumor positive and 19 cases were undocumented. Sentinel nodes were staged node positive according to AJCC criteria. Patient and tumor factors associated with sentinel node biopsy alone and locoregional recurrence, distant recurrence and overall survival were examined. Results: One hundred twenty three node positive patients underwent sentinel node biopsy alone with no completion axillary dissection for invasive breast cancer. Eighty two (66.7%) patient's sentinel nodes had macrometastases and 41 (33.3%) had micrometastases. Median follow-up was 8 years (range0.7 to 12yrs). Mean age was 57 years (range 32-92) and stage distribution was as follows: Stage IIA: 76 (62%) patients, Stage IIB: 40 (33%) patients, Stage III: 4 patients (3%), and Stage IV: 1 patient (0.8%). The mean size of the tumors was 1.9cm (range 0.1-9), 79 patients (64%) had grade I/II tumors and 36 (29%) had grade III tumors. Eighty nine (72%) underwent lumpectomy and 34 (28%) underwent mastectomy. When we examined patient and treatment factors that might explain omission of axillary dissection we saw that 95 (77%) patients had no comorbidities, 8 (6.5%) had one comorbidity and 20 (16%) had two or more comorbidities listed. Seventy seven patients (67%) received breast radiation in combination with adjuvant chemotherapy or hormonal therapy. Ninety (73%) patients had three or less sentinel nodes removed and 33 (27%) had four or more sentinel nodes removed. One hundred twenty patients had recurrence data, of which one (0.8%) had an axillary recurrence and 13 (11%) have expired. Of the 13 patients who died, four died of metastatic breast cancer and 9 of other causes. All patients with recurrence had macrometastasis to the lymph nodes. Conclusions: Favorable tumor and patient characteristics and high prevalence of adjuvant therapy may explain why completion axillary dissection was omitted in this group of tumor positive sentinel node patients. This study represents one of the longer follow-up periods in the literature and demonstrates that recurrent regional disease is rare with extended follow-up in patients undergoing sentinel node biopsy alone for node positive disease, even macrometastatic disease. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-01-02.
Background: There has been a rapid increase in the use of new radiation techniques for postlumpectomy radiation, including partial breast irradiation via brachytherapy (APBI-b), 3-dimentional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT), and intensity modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) techniques. However, it is unknown if these new radiation techniques provide survival benefit equivalent to external beam whole-breast irradiation (WBI) in patients undergoing breast conservation. Additionally, compliance with the 2009 ASTRO guidelines for partial breast radiation has not been examined in a contemporary cohort of patients. Method: From the National Cancer Database, we identified 718,392 women diagnosed with AJCC stage 0-III breast cancer between 2003 and 2010, who underwent breast conserving surgery. Patients were classified into suitable, cautionary, or unsuitable for APBI-b according to ASTRO guidelines. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine the effectiveness of the new irradiation modalities on overall survival in all eligible patients and within each ASTRO category. Results: Overall, 37,363 patients (6.4%) underwent APBI-b, 40,767 (5.7%) underwent IMRT, 45,721 (6.4%) underwent 3D-CRT, 421,497 (58.7%) underwent conventional WBI. The utilization of the three new radiation techniques increased over the study period, and 31.3% of all patients treated with radiotherapy after lumpectomy actually used one of the three new methods in 2010. Overall, 35% of patients receiving APBI-b fell in the suitable category, 47% in the cautionary category, and 18% in the unsuitable category. After publication of the ASTRO guideline, the proportion of patients receiving APBI-b in the suitable category has increased from 34% in 2008 to 40% in 2010. After a median follow up of 46 months, 52,099 patients died. In invasive breast cancer patients, we found patients undergoing APBI-b had a 38% reduction in the risk of death, compared to patients without radiotherapy (hazard ratio, HR = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.57-0.66, p<0.001) after adjusting for age, tumor stage, tumor grade, hormone receptor status, race/ethnicity, insurance, and other clinical, pathologic, and facility factors. The adjusted HR was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.59-0.67, p<0.001) for IMRT, 0.60 (95% CI: 0.57-0.64, p<0.001) for 3D-CRT, and 0.62 (95% CI: 0.60-0.64, p<0.001) for conventional WBI. The effectiveness of the four radiation modalities was similar (p = 0.84). In the ASTRO suitable category, the HR of APBI-b was 0.70 (95% CI: 0.63-0.79), which is similar to the effect of APBI-b in the cautionary category (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.56-0.73). Conclusions: In a large cohort of women with early stage breast cancer, radiotherapy using three new techniques (APBI-b, IMRT, and 3D-CRT) was found to be as effective in reducing mortality as conventional whole breast irradiation. Although this is promising, long-term follow-up studies and randomized clinical trials are warranted. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P5-14-09.
Mammographic screening of women at both ends of the age spectrum presents a number of challenges. The purpose of this study was to characterize experience with mammographic detection of breast cancer. The two goals were 1) to establish the cancer detection rate of screening mammography and 2) to compare the tumor size of cancers found by mammography, physical examination, or both modalities. From January 1994 through June 1997, data on 609 consecutive female primary breast cancer patients were collected concurrent with definitive surgical therapy. The method of detection was determined by the surgeon, after reviewing mammogram and physical examination. Screening ultrasound was not used. For the 184 patients under 50 years of age, 53 (29%) cancers were detected by mammography only and 48 (26%) by physical examination only. Women under 50 years of age had fewer cancers detected by mammography only (P < 0.001) and more cancers detected by physical examination only (P = 0.0014) than those over 50. With increasing age, the proportion of women with ductal carcinoma in situ decreased (P = 0.004), and the proportion with T1c or T2 tumors increased (P = 0.006). We conclude that 1) when examining women under 50 years of age, the surgeon must be clearly focused on the double-edged sword of screening mammography in this age group, and 2) community cancer programs should encourage annual screening of women over 40 years of age but focus on those over 70, without an arbitrary upper age limit.
This abstract was withdrawn by the authors.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.