Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Efficacy of physical examination, ultrasound, and ultrasound combined with fine-needle aspiration for axilla staging of primary breast cancer

  • Clinical Trial
  • Published:
Breast Cancer Research and Treatment Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of physical examination (PE), ultrasound (US), and US combined with fine-needle cytology (US-FNAC) in evaluation of node status before sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for breast cancer patients. We performed a retrospective study of 3,781 breast cancer patients and calculated the sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy for PE, US, and US-FNAC, respectively. A total of 3,175 cases were documented as cN0 and 606 as cN1. Abnormal axillary nodes under US were detected in 1,152 cases, among which 821 were proven to have positive nodes by FNAC. The positive FNAC results enabled 11.7 % of cN0 patients (373/3,175) to avoid unnecessary SLNB. All 331 cases with abnormal US but negative FNAC results, and the 2,629 cases with normal US underwent SLNB procedure for nodal staging, and metastatic nodes were identified in 745 patients. The sensitivity of PE was 32.2 %, with a specificity of 95.5 %, a PPV of 83.5 %, a NPV of 65 %, and an accuracy of 69.3 %. The sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of axillary US alone were 58.6, 89.4, 79.6, 75.3, and 76.7 %, respectively. Combining axillary US with FNAC resulted in sensitivity, specificity, PPV, NPV, and accuracy of 52.4, 100, 100, 74.8, and 80.3 %, respectively. Our study demonstrated that US-FNAC is a feasible and effective triage during axillary staging for newly diagnosed breast cancer patients.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, Goyal A, Newcombe RG, Dixon JM, Yiangou C, Horgan K, Bundred N, Monypenny I et al (2006) Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 98(9):599–609

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Sacre RA (1986) Clinical evaluation of axillar lymph nodes compared to surgical and pathological findings. Eur J Surg Oncol 12(2):169–173

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Valente SA, Levine GM, Silverstein MJ, Rayhanabad JA, Weng-Grumley JG, Ji L, Holmes DR, Sposto R, Sener SF (2012) Accuracy of predicting axillary lymph node positivity by physical examination, mammography, ultrasonography, and magnetic resonance imaging. Ann Surg Oncol 19(6):1825–1830

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Alvarez S, Anorbe E, Alcorta P, Lopez F, Alonso I, Cortes J (2006) Role of sonography in the diagnosis of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer: a systematic review. Am J Roentgenol 186(5):1342–1348

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Deurloo EE, Tanis PJ, Gilhuijs KG, Muller SH, Kroger R, Peterse JL, Rutgers EJ, Valdes Olmos R, Schultze Kool LJ (2003) Reduction in the number of sentinel lymph node procedures by preoperative ultrasonography of the axilla in breast cancer. Eur J Cancer 39(8):1068–1073

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Damera A, Evans AJ, Cornford EJ, Wilson AR, Burrell HC, James JJ, Pinder SE, Ellis IO, Lee AH, Macmillan RD (2003) Diagnosis of axillary nodal metastases by ultrasound-guided core biopsy in primary operable breast cancer. Br J Cancer 89(7):1310–1313

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ciatto S, Brancato B, Risso G, Ambrogetti D, Bulgaresi P, Maddau C, Turco P, Houssami N (2007) Accuracy of fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) of axillary lymph nodes as a triage test in breast cancer staging. Breast Cancer Res Treat 103(1):85–91

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Genta F, Zanon E, Camanni M, Deltetto F, Drogo M, Gallo R, Gilardi C (2007) Cost/accuracy ratio analysis in breast cancer patients undergoing ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology, sentinel node biopsy, and frozen section of node. World J Surg 31(6):1155–1163

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sapino A, Cassoni P, Zanon E, Fraire F, Croce S, Coluccia C, Donadio M, Bussolati G (2003) Ultrasonographically-guided fine-needle aspiration of axillary lymph nodes: role in breast cancer management. Br J Cancer 88(5):702–706

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Krishnamurthy S, Sneige N, Bedi DG, Edieken BS, Fornage BD, Kuerer HM, Singletary SE, Hunt KK (2002) Role of ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration of indeterminate and suspicious axillary lymph nodes in the initial staging of breast carcinoma. Cancer 95(5):982–988

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Wang XJ, Lin BH, Yang Z, Ouyang T, Li JF, Xu B, Zhang Y, Zhang MY (2006) Preliminary study on a new sentinel lymphoscintigraphy agent 99mTc-Rituximab for breast patient. Zhonghua Zhong Liu Za Zhi 28(3):200–203

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Li JF, Ouyang T, Wang XJ, Wang TF, Xie YT, Fan ZQ, Lin BH, Yang Z, Lin BY (2006) Preliminary study of new imaging agent, 99mTc-Rituximab, for sentinel lymph node biopsy of primary breast cancer. Zhonghua Wai Ke Za Zhi 44(9):600–602

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, Benson AB 3rd, Bodurka DC, Burstein HJ, Cochran AJ, Cody HS 3rd, Edge SB, Galper S et al (2005) American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(30):7703–7720

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Wells B, Saskin R, Wright F, McCready D, Quan ML (2013) Measuring the quality of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for breast cancer: a population-based evaluation. Ann Surg Oncol 20(2):615–619

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Veronesi U, Viale G, Paganelli G, Zurrida S, Luini A, Galimberti V, Veronesi P, Intra M, Maisonneuve P, Zucca F et al (2010) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: ten-year results of a randomized controlled study. Ann Surg 251(4):595–600

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Costantino JP, Ashikaga T, Weaver DL, Mamounas EP, Jalovec LM 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(10):927–933

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Majid S, Tengrup I, Manjer J (2013) Clinical assessment of axillary lymph nodes and tumor size in breast cancer compared with histopathological examination: a population-based analysis of 2,537 women. World J Surg 37(1):67–71

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Pamilo M, Soiva M, Lavast EM (1989) Real-time ultrasound, axillary mammography, and clinical examination in the detection of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients. J Ultrasound Med 8(3):115–120

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Lam WW, Yang WT, Chan YL, Stewart IE, Metreweli C, King W (1996) Detection of axillary lymph node metastases in breast carcinoma by technetium-99m sestamibi breast scintigraphy, ultrasound and conventional mammography. Eur J Nucl Med 23(5):498–503

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Yang WT, Ahuja A, Tang A, Suen M, King W, Metreweli C (1996) High resolution sonographic detection of axillary lymph node metastases in breast cancer. J Ultrasound Med 15(3):241–246

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Yang WT, Metreweli C (1998) Colour Doppler flow in normal axillary lymph nodes. Br J Radiol 71(844):381–383

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Bedrosian I, Bedi D, Kuerer HM, Fornage BD, Harker L, Ross MI, Ames FC, Krishnamurthy S, Edeiken-Monroe BS, Meric F et al (2003) Impact of clinicopathological factors on sensitivity of axillary ultrasonography in the detection of axillary nodal metastases in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 10(9):1025–1030

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Garcia Fernandez A, Fraile M, Gimenez N, Rene A, Torras M, Canales L, Torres J, Barco I, Gonzalez S, Veloso E et al (2011) Use of axillary ultrasound, ultrasound-fine needle aspiration biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging in the preoperative triage of breast cancer patients considered for sentinel node biopsy. Ultrasound Med Biol 37(1):16–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Park SH, Kim MJ, Park BW, Moon HJ, Kwak JY, Kim EK (2011) Impact of preoperative ultrasonography and fine-needle aspiration of axillary lymph nodes on surgical management of primary breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 18(3):738–744

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, Luini A, Zurrida S, Galimberti V, Intra M, Veronesi P, Maisonneuve P, Gatti G et al (2006) Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy as a staging procedure in breast cancer: update of a randomised controlled study. Lancet Oncol 7(12):983–990

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Kim T, Giuliano AE, Lyman GH (2006) Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast carcinoma: a metaanalysis. Cancer 106(1):4–16

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Leenders M, Richir M, Broeders M, Moormann G, Mollema R, Lopes Cardozo A, Meijer S, Schreurs H (2013) Axillary staging by ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration cytology in breast cancer patients. Still up to date? Breast J 19(6):637–642

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Houssami N, Ciatto S, Turner RM, Cody HS 3rd (2011) Macaskill P: Preoperative ultrasound-guided needle biopsy of axillary nodes in invasive breast cancer: meta-analysis of its accuracy and utility in staging the axilla. Ann Surg 254(2):243–251

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Yuan XM, Wang N, Ouyang T, Yang L, Song MY, Lin BY, Xie YT, Li JF, Pan KF, You WC et al (2011) Current status of diagnosis and treatment of primary breast cancer in Beijing, 2008. Chin J Cancer Res 23(1):38–42

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge Danielle Wilson Marlow and Huizhong Hu for their kind comments on this paper, all the nurses in the breast center for their services, and women involved in this study.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. All authors have approved the final draft submitted.

Ethical standard

This study complies with current Chinese law.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Yu Feng

    Present address: Breast Center, Beijing Shijitan Hospital, Capital Medical University, Beijing, China

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Breast Centre, Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China

    Yu Feng, Rui Huang, Yingjian He, Zhaoqing Fan, Tie Fan, Meng Qi, Xinguang Wang, Wei Cao, Xing Wang, Yuntao Xie, Tianfeng Wang, Jinfeng Li & Tao Ouyang

  2. Department of Pathology, Key Laboratory of Carcinogenesis and Translational Research (Ministry of Education), Peking University Cancer Hospital & Institute, Beijing, 100142, China

    Aiping Lu

Authors
  1. Yu Feng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rui Huang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yingjian He
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Aiping Lu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Zhaoqing Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Tie Fan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Meng Qi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Xinguang Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Wei Cao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Xing Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Yuntao Xie
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Tianfeng Wang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Jinfeng Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Tao Ouyang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Tao Ouyang.

Additional information

Yu Feng and Rui Huang have contributed equally to this work.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 18 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Feng, Y., Huang, R., He, Y. et al. Efficacy of physical examination, ultrasound, and ultrasound combined with fine-needle aspiration for axilla staging of primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 149, 761–765 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3280-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549-015-3280-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation