Evaluation of traditional targeted axillary dissection eligibility criteria for node-positive breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in a prospective multicenter registry.

INTRODUCTION: Targeted axillary dissection (TAD) is performed after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) to decrease the rate of non-therapeutic axillary dissection (ALND) for patients with node-positive breast cancer. In order to ensure the oncologic safety of TAD, eligibility criteria resulting in a low false negative rate (FNR) have been proposed. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of the traditional criteria. METHODS: Data was collected from a prospective multicenter registry. In order to ascertain FNRs, pathologic findings in the sentinel lymph nodes (LN)s, malignant clipped LN, and axillary contents were determined. The FNRs within TAD eligibility criterion groups were compared. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients underwent TAD and ALND, and were therefore eligible for analysis. TAD retained a low FNR in advanced clinical T-N stage compared with earlier disease (T stage: 95% CI 0.00-11.93, p = 0.42; N stage: 95% CI 0.00-8.76, p = 0.31). Presentation with ≥4 abnormal LNs on axillary ultrasound did not predict a high TAD FNR (95% CI 0.00-5.37, p = 0.16). No significant differences were noted in TAD FNR when single was compared with dual tracer (blue dye vs dual tracer 95% CI 0.72-52.49, p = 0.13; radiotracer vs dual tracer 0.04-20.11, p = 0.51). Excision of the clipped LN and only one SLN was as accurate as excision of the clipped LN and ≥2 SLNs (95% CI 0.00-10.61, p = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: TAD retained a low FNR among patients traditionally considered ineligible for this technique. However, excision of the clipped LN and at least one SLN remained essential to a low FNR.

Intraoperative Fluorescence Guidance for Breast Cancer Lumpectomy Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although lumpectomy and mastectomy provide equivalent survival for patients with breast cancer, local recurrence after lumpectomy increases breast cancer mortality. Positive lumpectomy margins, which imply incomplete tumor removal, are the strongest predictor of local recurrence and are identified days after surgery, necessitating a second surgery. METHODS: In this prospective trial, we assessed margin status with or without pegulicianine fluorescence-guided surgery (pFGS) for stages 0 to 3 breast cancers. To prevent surgeons from performing smaller than standard lumpectomies in anticipation of pFGS assistance, patients were randomly assigned 10:1 to pFGS or control groups, thus randomization was not designed to provide a control group for evaluating device performance. In patients undergoing pFGS, additional pFGS-guided cavity margins were excised at sites of pegulicianine signal. We evaluated three coprimary end points: the percentage of patients for whom pFGS-guided margins contained cancer, sensitivity, and specificity. RESULTS: Overall, 406 patients received 1.0 mg/kg intravenous pegulicianine followed by lumpectomy. Among 392 patients randomly assigned, 316 had invasive cancers, and 76 had in situ cancers. In 27 of 357 patients undergoing pFGS, pFGS-guided margins removed tumor left behind after standard lumpectomy, 22 from cavity orientations deemed negative on standard margin evaluation. Second surgeries were avoided by pFGS in 9 of 62 patients with positive margins. On per-margin analysis, pFGS specificity was 85.2%, and sensitivity was 49.3%. Pegulicianine administration was stopped for adverse events in six patients. Two patients had grade 3 serious adverse events related to pegulicianine. CONCLUSIONS: The use of pFGS in breast cancer surgery met prespecified thresholds for removal of residual tumor and specificity but did not meet the prespecified threshold for sensitivity. (Funded by Lumicell, Inc. and the National Institutes of Health; Clinicaltrials.gov number, NCT03686215.)