Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Axillary and Extra-axillary Lymph Node Recurrences after a Tumor-Negative Sentinel Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer Using Intralesional Tracer Administration

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

Abstract

Background

At our institution, tracer fluids are administered in the primary breast cancer and, in addition to the ones in the axilla, sentinel nodes outside the axilla are rigorously pursued. The objective of the present study of sentinel node-negative breast cancer patients was to determine the lymph node recurrence rates in the axilla and elsewhere, the false-negative rates, and the survival.

Methods

Between January 1999 and November 2005, 1,019 breast cancer patients underwent a sentinel node biopsy. In 748 of them, 755 sentinel node biopsies did not reveal a tumor-positive sentinel node and they did not undergo axillary node dissection. Metastases were revealed in 284 sentinel node biopsies performed in the remaining 271 patients: 247 in the axilla, 20 outside the axilla, and 17 both in the axilla and elsewhere. The median follow-up duration was 46 months.

Results

Two of the 748 sentinel node-negative patients developed an axillary lymph node recurrence (0.25%) and two others developed a supraclavicular lymph node recurrence (0.25%). The overall lymph node recurrence rate was 0.5%. The false-negative rates were 1.4% overall, 0.8% for the axilla, and 5.1% for the extra-axillary nodes. After five years, 95.9% of all sentinel node-negative patients were alive and 89.7% were alive without evidence of disease.

Conclusion

The low recurrence and false-negative rates and promising survival figures show that our lymphatic mapping method with intralesional tracer administration is accurate for the axilla. Outside the axilla, 5.1% of involved sentinel nodes were missed.

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.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1.
Fig. 2.
Fig. 3.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Fleissig A, Fallowfield LJ, Langridge CI, 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; 95:279–93

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006; 98:599–609

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Schrenk P, Rieger R, Shamiyeh A, et al. Morbidity following sentinel lymph node biopsy versus axillary lymph node dissection for patients with breast carcinoma. Cancer 2000; 88:608–14

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. TNM Classification of malignant tumorurs. Sixth edition ed. 2002. New York: Wiley

  6. Nieweg OE, van Rijk MC, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Sentinel node biopsy and selective lymph node clearance–impact on regional control and survival in breast cancer and melanoma. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2005; 32:631–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Wright FC, Walker J, Law CH, et al. Outcomes after localized axillary node recurrence in breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:1054–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Nieweg OE, Estourgie SH, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Lymphatic mapping with tracer administration into the primary breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol 2003; 29:95–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Estourgie SH, Nieweg OE, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Lymphatic drainage patterns from the breast. Ann Surg 2004; 239:232–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Paganelli G, Galimberti V, Trifiro G, et al. Internal mammary node lymphoscintigraphy and biopsy in breast cancer. Q J Nucl Med 2002; 46:138–44

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Shen P, Glass EC, DiFronzo LA, et al. Dermal versus intraparenchymal lymphoscintigraphy of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 2001; 8:241–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. van Rijk MC, Tanis PJ, Nieweg OE, et al. Clinical implications of sentinel nodes outside the axilla and internal mammary chain in patients with breast cancer. J Surg Oncol 2006; 94:281–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Estourgie SH, Nieweg OE, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Intratumoral versus intraparenchymal injection technique for lymphoscintigraphy in breast cancer. Clin Nucl Med 2003; 28:371–4

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Estourgie SH, Tanis PJ, Nieweg OE, et al. Should the hunt for internal mammary chain sentinel nodes begin? An evaluation of 150 breast cancer patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:935–41

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. van Rijk MC, Tanis PJ, Nieweg OE, et al. Sentinel node biopsy and concomitant probe-guided tumor excision of nonpalpable breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2007; 14:627–32

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Nieweg OE, Estourgie SH. What is a sentinel node and what is a false-negative sentinel node? Ann Surg Oncol 2004; 11:169S–173S

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Krag DN. The Sentinel Node for Staging Breast Cancer: Current Review. Breast Cancer 1999; 6:233–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Nieweg OE, Jansen L, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Eur J Nucl Med 1999; 26:S11–S16

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. de Boer R, Hillen HF, Roumen RM, et al. Detection, treatment and outcome of axillary recurrence after axillary clearance for invasive breast cancer. Br J Surg 2001; 88:118–22

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Fredriksson I, Liljegren G, Arnesson LG, et al. Consequences of axillary recurrence after conservative breast surgery. Br J Surg 2002; 89:902–8

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Recht A, Pierce SM, Abner A, et al. Regional nodal failure after conservative surgery and radiotherapy for early-stage breast carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 1991; 9:988–96

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Naik AM, Fey J, Gemignani M, 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; 240:462–8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. de Kanter AY, Menke-Pluymers MM, Wouters MW, et al. 5-Year follow-up of sentinel node negative breast cancer patients. Eur J Surg Oncol 2006; 32:282–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Torrenga H, Fabry H, van der Sijp JR, et al. Omitting axillary lymph node dissection in sentinel node negative breast cancer patients is safe: a long term follow-up analysis. J Surg Oncol 2004; 88:4–7

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Domenech A. Patients with breast cancer and negative sentinel node biopsy without additional axillay dissection: evolution after a 5-year follow-up. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33[Suppl 2], S155. 2006

  26. Grigolato D. Imaging Axillary recurrence after sentinel node biopsy in primary breast cancer: accuracy in our clinical setting. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 33[Suppl 2], S271. 2006

  27. Van Wely BJ. Fout negatieve sentinel lymph node biopsie; follow up van 391 sentinel lymph node negatieve patienten met borstkanker. Nederlandse Vereniging voor Heelkunde, Najaarsvergadering. 2006

  28. Ruoslahti E. How cancer spreads. Sci Am 1996; 275:72–7

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Estourgie SH, Nieweg OE, Valdes Olmos RA, et al. Eight false negative sentinel node procedures in breast cancer: what went wrong? Eur J Surg Oncol 2003; 29:336–40

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. de Kanter AY, van Geel AN, Paul MA, et al. Controlled introduction of the sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer in a multi-centre setting: the role of a coordinator for quality control. Eur J Surg Oncol 2000; 26:652–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Davidson NE, Morrow M, Kopans DB, et al. Case records of the Massachusetts General Hospital. Case 35–2005. A 56-year-old woman with breast cancer and isolated tumor cells in a sentinel lymph node. N Engl J Med 2005; 353:2177–85

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Fant JS, Grant MD, Knox SM, et al. Preliminary outcome analysis in patients with breast cancer and a positive sentinel lymph node who declined axillary dissection. Ann Surg Oncol 2003; 10:126–30

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Guenther JM, Hansen NM, DiFronzo LA, et al. Axillary dissection is not required for all patients with breast cancer and positive sentinel nodes. Arch Surg 2003; 138:52–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. van Rijk MC, Teertstra HJ, Peterse JL, et al. Ultrasonography and fine-needle aspiration cytology in the preoperative evaluation of melanoma patients eligible for sentinel node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2006; 13:1511–6

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Gallegos Hernandez JF, Tanis PJ, Deurloo EE, et al. Radio-guided surgery improves outcome of therapeutic excision in non-palpable invasive breast cancer. Nucl Med Commun 2004; 25:227–32

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  36. van der Ent FW, Kengen RA, van der Pol HA, et al. Halsted revisited: internal mammary sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer. Ann Surg 2001; 234:79–84

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Iris M. C. van der Ploeg MD, Bin B. R. Kroon PhD, Emiel J. T. Rutgers PhD & Omgo E. Nieweg PhD

  2. Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Ninja Antonini Msc

  3. Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Plesmanlaan 121, 1066, CX, Amsterdam, the Netherlands

    Renato A. Valdés Olmos PhD

Authors
  1. Iris M. C. van der Ploeg MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Bin B. R. Kroon PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Ninja Antonini Msc
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Renato A. Valdés Olmos PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Emiel J. T. Rutgers PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Omgo E. Nieweg PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Iris M. C. van der Ploeg MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

van der Ploeg, I.M.C., Kroon, B.B.R., Antonini, N. et al. Axillary and Extra-axillary Lymph Node Recurrences after a Tumor-Negative Sentinel Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer Using Intralesional Tracer Administration. Ann Surg Oncol 15, 1025–1031 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9760-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9760-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation