Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Locally Advanced Breast Cancer After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy—an Indian Perspective

Arjunan, Ravi; Ramamani, Tiwari Ajeet; Ramachandra, C.; Krishnamurthy, Sairam; Chunduri, Srinivas; Althaf, Syed; Adiga, Usha; Ranganath, Namrata

doi:10.1007/s13193-020-01035-4

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 18 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The results reported by Chung et al 12 were encouraging. While the identification rate and FNR found by Arjunan et al 23 were 86.4% and 21.4%, respectively, which is considered to be unacceptable, because the FNRs reported by most of the previous literature were all less than 10%. 1 , 24-27 The following reasons may help explain the poor accuracy of SLNB reported by the latter.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 77%

“… 1 , 28-30 Second, 40.1% of patients were treated with a single tracer (methylene blue or radioactive colloid), while the FNR is lower when dual tracers are used for SLNB. 23 , 28 , 30 Third, 86.3% of the patients included in the latter study had cN1 disease before neoadjuvant chemotherapy, and the FNR of SLNB among these patients was more than 10%. 30 , 31 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 86%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Survival After Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Compared with Axillary Lymph Node Dissection for Female Patients with T3-4c Breast Cancer

Yang

Zhang

et al. 2023

The Oncologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background For patients with cN0 and T1-2 breast cancer, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) can provide survival results equivalent to axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). However, whether it can be performed on T3-4c patients is still controversial. Materials and Methods Female patients diagnosed with cN0, T3-4c, and M0 breast cancer from 2004 to 2019 were identified using the surveillance, epidemiology and end results (SEER) database and divided into 2 groups, the SLNB group (1-5 regional lymph nodes examined) and the ALND group (≥10 regional lymph nodes examined). Finally, only those with pN0 disease were included in the SLNB group. The baseline differences in clinicopathological characteristics between groups were eliminated by propensity score matching (PSM). We also conducted subgroup analyses according to age, overall TNM stage, breast cancer subtypes, surgical approaches, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was survival. Results With a mean follow-up of 75 months, a total of 186 deaths were reported among 864 patients. The overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) in the SLNB group were 78.2% and 87.5%, respectively, and that in the ALND group were 78.7% and 87.3%, respectively. The unadjusted hazard ratio (HR) for OS and BCSS in the SLNB group (vs. the ALND group) was 0.922 (95% CI, 0.691-1.230, P = .580) and 0.874 (95% CI, 0.600-1.273, P = .481), respectively. Besides, the OS and BCSS between the 2 groups were also similar in all subgroup analyses. Conclusions SLNB may be performed on female patients with cN0, T3-4c, and M0 breast cancer.

show abstract