 |
|
Axillary Dissection Is Not Required for All Patients With Breast Cancer and Positive Sentinel Nodes
J. Michael Guenther, MD;
Nora M. Hansen, MD;
L. Andrew DiFronzo, MD;
Armando E. Giuliano, MD;
J. Craig Collins, MD;
Baiba L. Grube, MD;
Theodore X. O'Connell, MD
Arch Surg. 2003;138:52-56.
ABSTRACT
| |
Hypothesis Sentinel node (SN) biopsy for breast cancer enhances staging sensitivity, often demonstrating only micrometastases (<2 mm) or isolated, keratin-positive cells. When SN metastasis is present, the value of additional axillary dissection is unclear and not all patients benefit from axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).
Design Prospective cohort study, median 32-month follow-up.
Setting Multidisciplinary breast cancer centers.
Patients Forty-six women having SN metastases diagnosed between May 1, 1996, and September 1, 2001, who refused ALND or were recommended to omit ALND owing to serious comorbid conditions.
Interventions Isosulfan blue dye–directed SN biopsy. Axillary lymph node dissection was not performed. Standard breast irradiation was given. Adjuvant systemic therapy was provided as determined by an oncologist. Interval clinical evaluation was performed.
Main Outcome Measure Axillary and systemic failure rates.
Results Mean patient age was 61.6 years (age range, 36-92 years). Mean tumor size was 1.65 cm (range, 0.4-5.5 cm). Thirty-five (76%) of 46 tumors were ductal carcinomas and 39 (87%) of 45 were estrogen receptor–positive. A mean of 2.6 SNs were identified (median, 2; range, 1-7). Thirty-nine patients (85%) had a single positive SN; the remaining 7 patients (15%) had 2 positive SNs. Seven patients (15%) had macrometastases (>2 mm); 16 (35%) had micrometastases (<2 mm); and 23 (50%) had cellular metastases. Only 16 positive SNs (35%) were seen on hematoxylin-eosin staining, while 30 SNs (65%) had positive immunohistochemical staining. There have been no axillary recurrences. One patient (2%) developed distant metastases during follow-up (range, 4-61 months).
Conclusions Patients with SN metastases who did not have ALND had a low incidence of regional failure. To confirm this observation, we suggest that patients with SN metastases are ideal candidates for trials evaluating the necessity of ALND.
INTRODUCTION
THE APPLICATION of Cabanas'1 concept of the "sentinel node"(SN) to malignant melanoma by Morton et al2 in 1992 greatly increased the sensitivity of surgical staging and provided a basis for omitting routine lymphadenectomies when the SN is tumor free. This practice substantially reduces the number of patients undergoing complete lymph node dissections, which avoids the possible complication of lymphedema. Use of isosulfan blue dye and, later, radioisotopes for audiovisual identification of the node(s) most likely to contain metastatic disease has revolutionized the treatment of melanoma. In a similar fashion, the adaptation of lymphatic mapping and SN biopsy for breast cancer staging by Giuliano et al3 and Krag et al4 has been one of the most significant surgical innovations of the last decade and has revolutionized the approach to treatment of breast cancer. Sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer has repeatedly and reproducibly been proven to increase the sensitivity of surgical staging through the discovery of microscopic or even cellular metastases missed on routine pathologic review.3-5
Although increased staging accuracy is desirable, the main benefit for patients with SNs negative for disease is the negligible incidence of arm lymphedema. Most (60%-80%, depending on tumor size) patients undergoing this more refined method of surgical staging have tumor-free SNs3, 5-7; thus, the benefit most women receive is a result of avoiding axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).
For patients with lymph node metastases, ALND has long been the standard of care.8 The standard levels 1 and 2 ALNDs obtain excellent regional control, provide prognostic information to patients and physicians, and have the potential to alter the extent or type of adjuvant therapy. A survival benefit of ALND has not been demonstrated, nor has it been conclusively disproved. As a result, important questions remain, namely, what is the role of ALND for patients whose SN contains metastatic disease? Is ALND a therapeutic procedure that is essential for regional and/or systemic control or merely a radical staging procedure with little other benefit? What is the axillary recurrence rate if no further axillary surgery beyond SN dissection is performed? We hypothesize that a significant percentage of patients with SN metastases, particularly those with small, estrogen receptor (ER)–positive cancers and SN micrometastases, have low regional recurrence rates and may safely avoid ALND and its complications.
METHODS
From May 1, 1996, to September 1, 2001, 46 women with invasive breast cancer and SN metastases were identified and underwent no further axillary surgery after definitive breast surgery. Either these patients were given a recommendation to omit ALND or they refused ALND despite recommendations to the contrary.
A recommendation to avoid ALND was made based on any of several factors: advanced age, the presence of significant medical comorbidity, inability to tolerate general anesthesia, a high likelihood of lymphedema after ALND, the combination of small primary tumors with SN micrometastases, and the lack of effect of further nodal pathologic abnormality on adjuvant therapy decisions.
Patients refusing ALND cited various reasons, including alteration of body image and inability to tolerate any significant lymphedema (careers based on upper extremity function—athletes, sculptors, musicians, and others). Another reason given was the lack of proven therapeutic benefit from ALND. None of the study group underwent ALND.
OPERATIVE TECHNIQUE
Lymphatic mapping was performed using isosulfan blue dye injected into peritumoral breast tissue or the biopsy cavity wall if a previous excisional biopsy had been performed. In most circumstances, 5 mL of isosulfan blue dye was injected, but the amount varied with the distance of the primary tumor from the axilla; 6 to 7 mL was injected around tumors remote from the axilla; and 3 to 4 mL was injected around tumors high in the upper outer quadrant of the breast. Similarly, breast compression and percussion was performed for about 5 minutes after injection of the dye. The duration also varied with the distance of the tumor from the axilla. Radioisotopes were not used.
After an appropriate amount of breast compression and percussion, a 3- to 4-cm transverse incision was made beneath the hair-bearing portion of the axilla. Gentle dissection with attention to hemostasis was performed until an isosulfan blue–stained channel or node was identified. A node was considered an SN if it directly received a blue lymphatic channel or if the node itself was blue. Once an SN was identified, it was dissected proximally into the tail of the breast to assure the primacy of the node identified. The afferent channel was ligated and additional blue nodes were sought in the axilla. After all isosulfan blue–stained nodes were removed, the remainder of the axilla was inspected and palpated to exclude suspicious non-SNs or extensive, matted disease (<1% of all patients undergoing an SN biopsy). Definitive breast surgery (segmentectomy or total mastectomy) was performed at the same setting, but after lymphatic mapping and the SN biopsy were complete.
PATHOLOGIC ANALYSIS
Sentinel nodes were routinely sent for intraoperative frozen section when a same-anesthetic axillary dissection was contemplated. Sentinel nodes negative for disease by frozen section underwent serial sectioning and staining with hematoxylin-eosin. Nodes found to be tumor free by routine analysis were stained for cytokeratin immunohistochemistry (IHC). Tumor-positive SNs were grouped according to the amount of tumor present in the node—macrometastases (>2 mm, hematoxylin-eosin–positive), micrometastases (<2 mm, hematoxylin-eosin–positive and/or IHC-positive), and cellular metastases (IHC-positive only).
POSTOPERATIVE TREATMENT AND FOLLOW-UP ASSESSMENT
All patients were treated and followed up prospectively in either the Breast Cancer Clinic at Kaiser Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, Calif, or the Joyce Eisenberg Keefer Breast Center at St John's Hospital, Santa Monica, Calif. Patients with SNs positive for disease received adjuvant therapy and breast irradiation after consultation with appropriate specialists. Axillary, internal mammary, and supraclavicular radiation fields were not used with the exception of a single patient who received irradition to an additional supraclavicular field. Postoperatively, surgeons examined patients semiannually; medical oncology and radiation oncology specialists examined patients at similar intervals.
RESULTS
All patients were women with a mean age of 61.6 years (age range, 36-92 years). Mean tumor size was 1.65 cm (range, 0.4-5.5 cm) (Figure 1). Thirty-five (76%) of the 46 cancers were ductal carcinomas; the remaining 11 (24%) were invasive lobular cancers. The vast majority (39/45 [87%]) of cancers were positive for the ER or progesterone receptor. A single patient with a microinvasive (T1a) primary tumor did not have enough tissue to determine receptor status.
|
|
|
|
Figure 1. Primary tumor distribution according to tumor size.
|
|
|
A mean of 2.6 SNs per patient was identified (median, 2 SNs; range, 1-7 SNs). Thirty-nine patients (85%) had a single positive SN; the remaining 7 (15%) had 2 positive SNs.
The amount of tumor present in an SN was measured by microscopic assessment. Seven patients (15%) had SN macrometastases. Sixteen patients (35%) had micrometastases smaller than 2 mm. Half the patients in the study had clustered or scattered cellular metastases seen only with keratin antibody IHC stains (Figure 2).9 Sixteen patients' (35%) SN metastases were seen using routine hematoxylin-eosin staining; the majority (30 [65%]) was only visible using IHC. Twenty-three patients (50%) received adjuvant chemotherapy postoperatively.
|
|
|
|
Figure 2. Size of sentinel node (SN) metastasis as measured microscopically in 46 patients.
|
|
|
There have been no axillary recurrences during the mean follow-up interval of 32 months (range, 4-61 months). One patient with an ER-progesterone receptor–negative T1c primary tumor and 2 SN micrometastases who refused ALND and underwent adjuvant cyclophosphamide-methotrexate-fluorouracil therapy developed systemic metastases to the liver, lung, and bones 18 months later. She is alive with disease 30 months after developing metastases.
COMMENT
Halsted's concept of an orderly pattern of metastasis from a primary tumor to regional lymph nodes and then to the systemic circulation has influenced breast cancer surgery since the late 19th century. Until recently, ALND combined with either segmentectomy or total mastectomy has been the standard criterion for regional control while providing prognostic information and helping to determine appropriate systemic therapy.
Advocates of ALND have stated that the clinical significance of a precise count of tumor-involved nodes justifies the morbidity and cost of the procedure, since the disease severity is directly related to the number of positive nodes.10 This prognostic information, they argue, is important for the patient and family as well as for adjuvant therapy deliberations. Until recently, patients with 10 or more positive nodes often were treated with high-dose chemotherapy and stem cell transplantation. In addition, patients with 4 or more positive nodes may be recommended to undergo postmastectomy radiation therapy.
Much of the prognosis treatment selection argument becomes moot, however, in the context of current medical oncology practices. Many premenopausal patients with positive lymph nodes are being treated with a combination of doxorubicin hydrochloride–cyclophosphamide followed by a taxane, regardless of the number of positive nodes. In fact, many patients who are node negative receive combination therapy of doxorubicin hydrochloride–cyclophosphamide with or without taxotere based simply on their age and the histopathologic features of the primary tumor. High-dose chemotherapy with stem cell rescue has not been proven to prolong survival and is only being done investigationally. Conversely, elderly patients who have ER-positive tumors and positive nodes are often treated effectively with tamoxifen citrate or aromatase inhibitors, regardless of the number of positive nodes.11 Many of these patients simply are not candidates for aggressive chemotherapy. In summary, the current patterns of delivery of adjuvant therapy have reduced greatly the necessity for quantitating axillary disease.
In addition, a significant percentage of positive SNs reveal only keratin-positive cells not seen on routine hematoxylin-eosin stains.5 The clinical significance of these cells remains to be determined by large, prospective studies such as the American College of Surgeons' Oncology Group (ACOSOG) study Z0010. Hansen et al12 in a study of 683 patients demonstrated that patients with IHC-only positive SNs had the same overall survival as did patients with negative SNs. Most physicians do not recommend making treatment decisions based solely on IHC-only positive SNs.
Data from validation studies combining sentinel lymphadenectomy and ALND have shown that most of the time the SN is the only positive node.13-15 Chu et al15 used multivariate analysis of various demographic and histopathologic characteristics of 157 women undergoing SN biopsy with concomitant ALND to identify risk factors for non-SN involvement. They found that only the size of the primary tumor and the size of the SN metastasis were independent variables. In particular, T1a and T1b primary tumors had non-SN metastatic rates of 0% and 13%, respectively. All 33 patients with IHC-only positive SNs had hematoxylin-eosin–negative non-SNs, while only 14% of patients with SN micrometastases had non-SN metastases. It is, thus, possible to identify prospectively subsets of patients such as those with small primary tumors and micrometastatic deposits in the SN who are at very low risk for additional axillary disease. In fact, most patients with 1 or 2 positive SNs undergo an ALND that has no abnormality. In such patients, SN lymphadenectomy provides regional control without lymphedema.
It is clear, however, that some patients with SN metastases will have non-SN disease. Most surgeons, our own institutions included, would recommend that patients with bulky axillary disease be treated with a standard axillary dissection. Fortunately, this is usually not the case. Even if there is a reasonable chance that additional positive non-SNs are present in the axilla, additional nonsurgical treatment modalities are available. It is certainly possible, even likely, that breast radiation therapy, chemotherapy, and hormonal therapy will be effective in treating regional disease. Whole breast radiation therapy applied in opposing tangents treats low axillary nodes with the tail of the breast and may control any residual disease in low, level 1 lymph nodes. It is clear that present-day chemotherapy applied as a neoadjuvant can down-stage the extent of axillary metastases and in some cases even obliterate it. Doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide administered as a preoperative neoadjuvant have been shown to increase the incidence of pathologically negative axillary nodes by 37%.16 It is likely that such agents, perhaps given with a taxane in the post-SN biopsy setting, will have a similar effect.
Similarly, tamoxifen therapy consistently confers a statistically significant improvement in survival and relapse-free survival regardless of ER, nodal, or menopausal status.17 Hughes et al11 have reported that women aged 70 years and older with clinical stage I, ER-positive tumors randomized to either tamoxifen and breast radiation therapy or tamoxifen alone had an axillary failure rate of 2 (0.3%) of 636 with 28 months' median follow-up. Our study includes wider patient demographics and some more significant tumor histopathologic features without an axillary failure. The only patient in our study who failed systemically had an ER-/progesterone-receptor–negative primary tumor. For this reason, it seems to us that patients with ER-/progesterone-receptor–positive tumors are better candidates for axillary observation than those with more aggressive disease.
The axillary recurrence rate in patients who undergo no axillary surgery has been reported to be 2% to 18%, depending on the size of the primary tumor.18 For patients with positive nodes, ALND is a proven method of regional control, with regional recurrence rates of 1% to 2%.19 This regional failure rate is similar to our regional failure rate without ALND. Fisher et al20 in NSABP B-04 (National Surgical Breast and Bowel Adjuvant Project B-04) reported that the mean (SD) time to axillary recurrence was 14 (8) months, with a range of 2 to 49 months and a median of 12 months and nearly all axillary recurrences were within 24 months of total mastectomy. To date we have not noted a single axillary recurrence in this study cohort, with a median follow-up of 32 months. The lack of axillary recurrence and the duration of follow-up support our hypothesis that completion ALND may not be necessary for selected patients with positive SNs.
A therapeutic benefit of ALND has long been hypothesized but has never been proven conclusively. Controversy abounds regarding the effect of locoregional failure on overall survival. There are large studies that show no significant effect of locoregional control on survival; however, protocol violations and a lack of statistical power make some of them vulnerable to criticism.20-21 Conversely, some studies purported to show a locoregional effect on survival are weakened by retrospection,22 disproportional randomization,23 nonstandard axillary surgery,9, 24 and suboptimal radiation therapy.25 A definitive resolution of the therapeutic effect of ALND is beyond the scope of our study, but further information is likely to be gained by data from the ACOSOG study Z0011. This open study randomizes patients with positive SNs to either ALND or observation of the axilla, and prohibits additional axillary, internal mammary, or supraclavicular radiation therapy. The excellent regional control rates for the patients in our cohort treated without ALND supports the randomized enrollment of large numbers of patients in the ACOSOG study Z0011.
Much of our discussion has focused on offering counterpoints to the rationale for traditional ALND. It is apparent that there are patient and tumor characteristics that are harbingers of favorable outcomes, regional and systemic included. Our data attest to the safety of avoiding ALND for patients with small, ER-positive primary tumors and limited disease in the SN(s). In particular, we suggest that such patients with IHC-only positive nodes are ideal candidates for axillary surveillance. The natural history of true micrometastases also remains to be determined, but we have not seen an axillary recurrence in this subset of patients. We cannot yet recommend routine observation of the axilla for patients with SN macrometastases as the number of these patients7 is too low to be conclusive. In the absence of controlled data examining the effectiveness of nonsurgical regional therapies for patients with positive SNs, the question remains—do all patients with positive SNs require ALND? Our study supports entry into definitive clinical trials to answer this question.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding author and reprints: J. Michael Guenther, MD, Cranley Surgical Associates, 3747 W Fork Rd, Cincinnati, OH 45247.
Accepted for publication July 6, 2002.
This paper was presented at the 73rd Annual Meeting of the Pacific Coast Surgical Association, Las Vegas, Nev, February 16, 2001, and is published after peer review and revision.
From the Kaiser Los Angeles Medical Center, Los Angeles, Calif (Drs Guenther, DiFronzo, Collins, and O'Connell), and the Joyce Eisenberg Keefer Breast Center at St John's Hospital, Santa Monica, Calif (Drs Hansen, Giuliano, and Grube).
REFERENCES
| |
1. Cabanas RM. An approach for the treatment of penile carcinoma. Cancer. 1977;39:456-466.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
2. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 1992;127:392-399.
FREE FULL TEXT
3. Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg. 1994;220:391-401.
ISI
| PUBMED
4. Krag DN, Weaver DL, Alex JC, Fairbanks JT. Surgical resection and radiolocalization of the sentinel node in breast cancer using a gamma probe. Surg Oncol. 1993; 2:335-340.
5. Giuliano AE, Dale PS, Turner RR, Morton DL, Evans SW, Krasne DL. Improved axillary staging of breast cancer with sentinel lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg. 1995;222:394-401.
ISI
| PUBMED
6. Guenther JM, Krishnamoorthy M, Tan LR. Sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer in a community managed care setting. Cancer J Sci Am. 1997;3:336-340.
ISI
| PUBMED
7. Martin II RCG, Edwards MJ, Wong SL, et al for the University of Louisville Breast Cancer Study Group. Practical guidelines for optimal gamma probe detection of sentinel nodes in breast cancer: results of a multi-institutional study. Surgery. 2000;128:139-144.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
8. National Institute of Health Consensus Conference. Treatment of early breast cancer. JAMA. 1991;265:391-395.
FREE FULL TEXT
9. Overgaard M, Hansen PS, Overgaard J, et al for the Danish Breast Cancer Cooperative Group 82b Trial. Postoperative radiotherapy in high-risk premenopausal women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:949-955.
FREE FULL TEXT
10. Fisher ER. Prognostic and therapeutic significance of pathological features of breast cancer. NCI Monogr. 1986;(1):29-34.
11. Hughes KS, Schnaper L, Berry D, et al. Comparison of lumpectomy plus tamoxifen with and without radiotherapy (RT) in women 70 years of age or older who have clinical stage I, estrogen receptor positive (ER+) breast carcinoma [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2001;20:24a. Abstract 93.
12. Hansen NM Jr, Grube FJ, Brennan ML, et al. Clinical significance of axillary micrometastases in breast cancer: how small is too small [abstract]? Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2001;20:24a. Abstract 91.
13. Chu KU, Turner RR, Hansen NM, Brennan MB, Bilchik A, Giuliano AE. Do all patients with sentinel node metastasis from breast carcinoma need complete axillary node dissection? Ann Surg. 1999;229:536-541.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
14. Albertini JJ, Lyman GH, Cox C, et al. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in the patient with breast cancer. JAMA. 1996;276:1818-1822.
FREE FULL TEXT
15. Chu KU, Turner RR, Hansen NM, Brennan MB, Giuliano AE. Sentinel node metastasis in patients with breast carcinoma accurately predicts immunohistochemically detectable nonsentinel node metastasis. Ann Surg Oncol. 1999;6:756-761.
ABSTRACT
16. Fisher B, Brown A, Mamounas E, et al. Effect of preoperative chemotherapy on local-regional disease in women with operable breast cancer: findings from National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project B-18. J Clin Oncol. 1997;15:2483-2493.
FREE FULL TEXT
17. Bartlett K, Eremin O, Hutcheon A, et al. Adjuvant tamoxifen in the management of operable breast cancer: the Scottish trial. Lancet. 1987;2:171-175.
PUBMED
18. Greco M, Agresti R, Cascinelli N, et al. Breast cancer patients treated without axillary surgery: clinical implications and biologic analysis. Ann Surg. 2000;232:1-7.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
19. Ivens D, Hoe AL, Podd TJ, et al. Assessment of morbidity from complete axillary dissection. Br J Cancer. 1992;66:136-138.
ISI
| PUBMED
20. Fisher B, Montague E, Redmond C, et al. Comparison of radical mastectomy with alternative treatments for primary breast cancer: a first report of results from a prospective randomized clinical trial. Cancer. 1977;39(suppl 6):2827-2839.
21. Fisher B, Redmond C, Poisson R, et al. Eight-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing total mastectomy and lumpectomy with and without irradiation in the treatment of breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1989;320:822-828.
ABSTRACT
22. White RE, Vezeridis MP, Konstadoulakis M, Cole BF, Wanebo HJ, Bland KI. Therapeutic options and results for the management of minimally invasive carcinoma of the breast: influence of axillary dissection for treatment of T1a and T1b lesions. J Am Coll Surg. 1996;183:575-582.
ISI
| PUBMED
23. Cabanes PA, Salmon RJ, Vilcoq JR, et al for the Breast Carcinoma Collaborative Group of the Institut Curie. Value of axillary dissection in addition to lumpectomy and radiotherapy in early breast cancer. Lancet. 1992;339:1245-1248.
FULL TEXT
|
ISI
| PUBMED
24. Ragaz J, Jackson SM, Le N, et al. Adjuvant radiotherapy and chemotherapy in node-positive premenopausal women with breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 1997;337:956-962.
FREE FULL TEXT
25. Hayward J. The surgeon's role in primary breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1981;1:27-32.
FULL TEXT
| PUBMED
 CiteULike  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati
What's this?
THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES
|
Comparison of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Alone and Completion Axillary Lymph Node Dissection for Node-Positive Breast Cancer
Bilimoria et al.
JCO 2009;27:2946-2953.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Non-Sentinel Lymph Node Metastases Associated With Isolated Breast Cancer Cells in the Sentinel Node
van Deurzen et al.
JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2008;100:1574-1580.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Breast Sentinel Lymph Node Dissection Before Preoperative Chemotherapy
Grube et al.
Arch Surg 2008;143:692-700.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Management of the Axilla in Women With Breast Cancer: Current Clinical Practice and a New Selective Targeted Approach
Samphao et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2008;15:1282-1296.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Axillary and Extra-axillary Lymph Node Recurrences after a Tumor-Negative Sentinel Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer Using Intralesional Tracer Administration
van der Ploeg et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2008;15:1025-1031.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Sentinel Node Biopsy: Interpretation and Management of Patients With Immunohistochemistry-Positive Sentinel Nodes and Those With Micrometastases
Rutgers
JCO 2008;26:698-702.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Role of lymphadenectomy in surgical treatment of solid tumors: an update on the clinical data.
Gervasoni et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2007;14:2443-2462.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Management of Breast Cancer, Part 1: Prevention and Diagnosis
Pruthi et al.
Mayo Clin Proc. 2007;82:999-1012.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Evaluation of Three Scoring Systems Predicting Non Sentinel Node Metastasis in Breast Cancer Patients with a Positive Sentinel Node Biopsy
Dauphine et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2007;14:1014-1019.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Surgeon Characteristics and Variations in Treatment for Early-Stage Breast Cancer
Gilligan et al.
Arch Surg 2007;142:17-22.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Application of intraoperative ultrasound to nonsentinel node assessment in primary breast cancer.
Hsu et al.
Clin. Cancer Res. 2006;12:3746-3753.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Axillary Ultrasonography to Detect Recurrence After Sentinel Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer
Snider et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2006;13:501-507.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Practical Value of Prediction: A Semireliable Assistant
Mabry and Giuliano
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2006;13:282-284.
FULL TEXT
An evaluation of molecular markers for improved detection of breast cancer metastases in sentinel nodes.
Abdul-Rasool et al.
J. Clin. Pathol. 2006;59:289-297.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Comprehensive Examination of Sentinel Lymph Node in Breast Cancer: A Solution Without a Problem?
Falconieri et al.
INT J SURG PATHOL 2006;14:1-8.
ABSTRACT
Case 35-2005 -- A 56-Year-Old Woman with Breast Cancer and Isolated Tumor Cells in a Sentinel Lymph Node
Davidson et al.
NEJM 2005;353:2177-2185.
FULL TEXT
Lymphatic Mapping and Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer Patients
Newman
J Oncol Pract 2005;1:130-133.
FULL TEXT
American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Recommendations for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer
Lyman et al.
JCO 2005;23:7703-7720.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
The Effect of Sentinel Node Tumor Burden on Non-Sentinel Node Status and Recurrence Rates in Breast Cancer
Fan et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2005;12:705-711.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Axillary Recurrence After Sentinel Node Biopsy
Jeruss et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2005;12:34-40.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Sentinel Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer Patients: Triple Technique as a Routine Procedure
Torrenga et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2004;11:231S-235S.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Outcomes After Localized Axillary Node Recurrence in Breast Cancer
Wright et al.
Ann. Surg. Oncol. 2003;10:1054-1058.
ABSTRACT
| FULL TEXT
Patients With Breast Cancer and Positive Sentinel Nodes: Axillary Dissection or Axillary Radiotherapy?
Zippel and Papa
Arch Surg 2003;138:1159-1159.
FULL TEXT
|
