Several models have previously been proposed to predict the probability of non-sentinel lymph node (NSLN) metastases after a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in breast cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of two previously published nomograms (MSKCC, Stanford) and to develop an alternative model with the best predictive accuracy in a Czech population. In the basic population of 330 SLN-positive patients from the Czech Republic, the accuracy of the MSKCC and the Stanford nomograms was tested by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). A new model (MOU nomogram) was proposed according to the results of multivariate analysis of relevant clinicopathologic variables. The new model was validated in an independent test population from Hungary (383 patients). In the basic population, six of 27 patients with isolated tumor cells (ITC) in the SLN harbored additional NSLN metastases. The AUCs of the MSKCC and Stanford nomograms were 0.68 and 0.66, respectively; for the MOU nomogram it reached 0.76. In the test population, the AUC of the MOU nomogram was similar to that of the basic population (0.74). The presence of only ITC in SLN does not preclude further nodal involvement. Additional variables are beneficial when considering the probability of NSLN metastases. In the basic population, the previously published nomograms (MSKCC and Stanford) showed only limited accuracy. The developed MOU nomogram proved more suitable for the basic population, such as for another independent population from a mid-European country.
Objectives. The aim of the study was to develop a clinical prediction model for assessing the probability of having invasive cancer in the definitive surgical resection specimen in patients with biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast, to facilitate decision making regarding axillary surgery. Methods. In 349 women with DCIS, predictors of invasion in the definitive resection specimen were identified. A model to predict the probability of invasion was developed and subsequently simplified to divide patients into two risk categories. The model's performance was validated on another patient population. Results. Multivariate logistic regression revealed four independent predictors of invasion: (i) suspicious (micro)invasion in the biopsy specimen; (ii) visibility of the lesion on ultrasonography; (iii) size of the lesion on mammography >30 mm; (iv) clinical palpability of the lesion. The actual frequency of invasion in the high-risk patient group in the test and validation population was 52.6% and 48.3%, respectively; in the low-risk group it was 16.8% and 7.1%, respectively. Conclusion. The model proved to have good performance. In patients with a low probability of invasion, an axillary procedure can be omitted without a substantial risk of additional surgery.
Both ALND and SLNB are burdened by a clinically significant risk of lymphoedema. This risk is more serious after ALND. In the medium term, approximately 7-59% of operated patients suffer from lymphoedema. The incidence of lymphoedema after SLNB, considered a very gentle method, is also not negligible (0-14%). As the number of patients surviving breast cancer treatment continues to increase, monitoring the undesirable effects of axillary surgery over the long term will become more important. The results of published studies support research into treatment methods that have the potential to reduce the radicality of axillary surgery while preserving or improving total medical effectiveness.Key words: breast neoplasms - sentinel lymph node biopsy - axillary dissection - adverse effects - breast cancer lymphedemaThis work was supported by the grants MEYS - NPS I - LO1413 and MH CZ - DRO (MMCI, 00209- 805).The authors declare they have no potential conflicts of interest concerning drugs, products, or services used in the study.The Editorial Board declares that the manuscript met the ICMJE recommendation for biomedical papers.Submitted: 7. 11. 2016Accepted: 5. 12. 2016.
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.