Prognostic impact of repeat sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence.

BACKGROUND: Ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR) has an unfavourable prognosis, with a significant subsequent risk of distant recurrence. Repeat sentinel lymph node biopsy (rSLNB) has recently been demonstrated to be technically feasible and useful in tailoring adjuvant treatment plans in patients with IBTR. The prognostic impact of rSLNB in patients with IBTR remains unclear. This study analysed the risk of distant recurrence after IBTR, and evaluated the prognostic impact of rSLNB and other patient and tumour characteristics on distant recurrence-free survival. METHODS: Data were obtained from the SNARB (Sentinel Node and Recurrent Breast Cancer) study. Cox proportional hazards analyses were performed to assess the prognostic effect of tumour, patient and treatment factors on distant recurrence-free survival. RESULTS: Of the 515 included patients, 230 (44·7 per cent) had a tumour-negative rSLNB and 46 (8·9 per cent) a tumour-positive rSLNB. In 239 patients (46·4 per cent) the rSLNB procedure was unsuccessful. After a median follow-up of 5·1 years, 115 patients (22·3 per cent) had developed a recurrence. The overall 5-year distant recurrence-free survival rate was 84·2 (95 per cent c.i. 80·7 to 87·7) per cent. An interval of less than 2 years between primary breast cancer treatment and ipsilateral recurrence (P = 0·018), triple-negative IBTR (P = 0·045) and absence of adjuvant chemotherapy after IBTR (P = 0·010) were independently associated with poor distant recurrence-free survival. The association between the outcome of rSLNB and distant recurrence-free survival was not statistically significant (P = 0·682). CONCLUSION: The outcome of rSLNB is not an important prognostic factor for distant recurrence, and its value as a staging tool in patients with IBTR seems disputable.

Management of the axilla after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for clinically node positive breast cancer: A nationwide survey study in The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: Axillary pathologic complete response (pCR) to neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is achieved in a substantial part of clinically node positive breast cancer patients. Treatment of the axilla after NAC varies widely, and new techniques to spare patients from an axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) are being introduced. METHODS: This Dutch nationwide survey regarding treatment of the initially clinically node positive axilla in patients receiving NAC was conducted amongst 148 surgical oncologists during November 2014-June 2015, to survey the diagnostic work-up, axillary mapping and willingness to omit ALND. RESULTS: Axillary ultrasound was considered a standard procedure in the diagnostic work-up by 99% of participants. The majority of 70% of participants stated that ALND could possibly be omitted in node positive patients with a favourable response to NAC. A positive correlation was observed between the total amount of patients treated, versus patients receiving NAC (P < 0.01). A total of 93 respondents performed axillary response evaluation after NAC, using imaging (72%), excision of localized lymph nodes (56%) or sentinel node biopsy (SNB; 45%). Decision-making in omitting ALND was influenced by the presence of N2-3 disease, patient age and type of breast surgery. Multivariable analysis showed that clinicians who administered NAC more often, were more likely to omit ALND (P < 0.01). DISCUSSION: The majority of surgeons are inclined to omit ALND in case of an axillary pCR. A large variety of techniques is being used to identify a pCR. The lack of consensus on this topic indicates the need for guidelines based on the best available evidence.

Differences in Response and Surgical Management with Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy in Invasive Lobular Versus Ductal Breast Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This study was conducted to determine the impact of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) on the likelihood of breast-conserving surgery (BCS) performed for patients with invasive lobular breast carcinoma (ILC) and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). METHODS: Female patients with a diagnosis of ILC or IDC in The Netherlands between July 2008 and December 2012 were identified through the population-based Netherlands Cancer Registry. RESULTS: A total of 466 ILC patients received NAC compared with 3622 IDC patients. Downstaging by NAC was seen in 49.7 % of the patients with ILC and in 69.6 % of the patients with IDC, and a pathologic complete response (pCR) was observed in 4.9 and 20.2 % of these patients, respectively (P < 0.0001). Breast-conserving surgery was performed for 24.4 % of the patients with ILC receiving NAC versus 39.4 % of the patients with IDC. In the ILC group, 8.2 % of the patients needed surgical reinterventions after BCS due to tumor-positive resection margins compared with 3.4 % of the patients with IDC (P < 0.0001). Lobular histology was independently associated with a higher mastectomy rate (odds ratio 1.91; 95 % confidence interval 1.49-2.44). Among the patients with clinical T2 and T3 disease, BCS was achieved more often when NAC was administered in ILC as well as IDC. CONCLUSION: The patients with ILC receiving NAC were less likely to experience a pCR and less likely to undergo BCS than the patients with IDC. With regard to BCS, the impact of NAC for ILC patients was lower than for patients receiving surgery without NAC. However, despite the high number to treating in order to achieve BCS, a small subset of ILC patients, especially cT2 and cT3 patients, still may benefit from NAC.

Repeat sentinel node biopsy should be considered in patients with locally recurrent breast cancer.

Most patients with locally recurrent breast cancer undergo axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). However, repeat sentinel node biopsy (SNB) could provide regional nodal staging and obviate the need for standard ALND. The Sentinel Node and Recurrent Breast Cancer (SNARB) study is a Dutch nationwide registration study conducted to determine feasibility, aberrant drainage rates, and clinical consequences of repeat SNB. A total of 536 patients with locally recurrent non-metastatic breast cancer underwent lymphatic mapping and repeat SNB in 29 Dutch hospitals. A repeat sentinel node (SN) was identified in 333 of 536 patients (62.1 %) and surgically harvested in 287 patients (53.5 %). Aberrant lymph drainage was observed in 180 (54.1 %) of the 333 patients, more often after previous ALND (81.9 %) than SNB (28.4 %; P < 0.001). In 230 patients (80.1 %), the retrieved SN was tumor negative; 17 SNs (5.9 %) contained a micrometastasis and 29 (10.1 %) a macrometastasis. Confirmation ALND in 31 repeat SN-negative patients revealed a macrometastasis in two patients (6.5 %). The negative predictive value (NPV) of repeat SNB was 93.6 %, and ALND was omitted in 109 of the 248 patients (44.0 %) with a negative repeat SN. In 29 of the 44 patients (63.0 %) with a positive SN, adjuvant treatment plans were altered based on the repeat SNB. Repeat SNB is a feasible procedure with a high NPV, leading to a change in management in a substantial proportion of patients. Therefore, repeat SNB should replace routine ALND and serve as the standard of care in recurrent breast cancer.

Improving the Success Rate of Repeat Sentinel Node Biopsy in Recurrent Breast Cancer.

PURPOSE: Repeat sentinel node biopsy (SNB) is an alternative to axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for axillary staging in recurrent breast cancer. This study was conducted to determine factors associated with technical success of repeat SNB. METHODS: A total of 536 patients with locally recurrent nonmetastatic breast cancer underwent lymphatic mapping (LM) and repeat SNB in 29 Dutch hospitals. RESULTS: A total of 179 patients previously underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS) with SNB, 262 patients BCS with ALND and 61 patients mastectomy, 35 with SNB and 26 with ALND. Another 34 patients underwent breast surgery without axillary interventions. A repeat sentinel node (SN) was identified in 333 patients (62.1 %) and was successfully removed in 235 (53.5 %). The overall repeat SN identification rate was 62.1 %, varying from 35 to 100 % in the participating hospitals. Previous radiotherapy of the breast [odds ratio (OR) 0.16; 95 % confidence interval (CI) 0.03-0.84], subareolar tracer injection (OR 0.34; 95 % CI 0.16-0.73), and a 2-day LM protocol (OR 0.57; 95 % CI 0.33-0.97) after previous BCS were independently associated with failure of SN identification. Injection of a larger amount of tracer (>180 MBq) led to a higher identification rate (OR 4.40; 95 % CI 1.45-13.32). CONCLUSIONS: Repeat SNB is a technically feasible procedure for axillary staging in recurrent breast cancer patients. Previous radiotherapy appears to be associated with failure of SN identification. Injection with a larger amount of tracer (>180 MBq) leads to a higher identification rate; subareolar injection and a 2-day LM protocol after previous BCS appear to be less adequate.

Contralateral lymph node recurrence in breast cancer: Regional event rather than distant metastatic disease. A systematic review of the literature.

AIMS: After treatment for breast cancer, some patients experience a contralateral lymph node recurrence (CLNR). Traditionally, contralateral nodes are considered a distant site. However, aberrant lymph drainage after previous surgery is common. This might indicate that CLNR is a regional event. This study aimed to review the literature to determine prognosis after CLNR. METHODS: PubMed was searched up until July 2014. Articles on CLNR with or without ipsilateral breast tumour recurrence (IBTR), and repeat sentinel node (SN) studies reporting on positive contralateral nodes were included. Exclusion criteria were synchronous contralateral breast cancer and synchronous distant events. RESULTS: 24 articles were included, describing 48 patients. Of these 48, 26 patients had an isolated CLNR, 7 IBTR and clinically detected CLNR, and 15 IBTR with a positive contralateral repeat SN. Isolated CLNR occurred earlier (45.9 months) than IBTR with CLNR (126.6 months, p < 0.001) or with a positive contralateral repeat SN (217.2, p = 0.02). Surgical treatment was described for 38 patients, and consisted of axillary lymph node dissection for 34 (89.5%). Information on adjuvant therapy was available for 27 patients, 21 (77.8%) received chemotherapy. Follow-up information after CLNR was available for 23 patients (47.9%). Mean follow-up was 50.3 months. Overall survival and disease-free survival were 82.6% [95% CI 67.1-98.1] and 65.2% [45.7-84.7] respectively at last follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: Although observed in a small population, the survival of CLNR is not comparable to distant disease. Most patients received locoregional and systemic treatment suggesting a curative approach. This indicates that CLNR should be regarded as a regional event.