De-escalation of axillary treatment in the event of a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy in cT1-2 N0 breast cancer treated with mastectomy: nationwide registry study (BOOG 2013-07).

BACKGROUND: Trials have demonstrated the safety of omitting completion axillary lymph node dissection in patients with cT1-2 N0 breast cancer operated with breast-conserving surgery who have limited metastatic burden in the sentinel lymph node. The aim of this registry study was to provide insight into the oncological safety of omitting completion axillary treatment in patients operated with mastectomy who have limited-volume sentinel lymph node metastasis. METHODS: Women diagnosed in 2013-2014 with unilateral cT1-2 N0 breast cancer treated with mastectomy, with one to three sentinel lymph node metastases (pN1mi-pN1a), were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, and classified by axillary treatment: no completion axillary treatment, completion axillary lymph node dissection, regional radiotherapy, or completion axillary lymph node dissection followed by regional radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was 5-year regional recurrence rate. Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free interval and overall survival, among others. RESULTS: In total, 1090 patients were included (no completion axillary treatment, 219 (20.1%); completion axillary lymph node dissection, 437 (40.1%); regional radiotherapy, 327 (30.0%); completion axillary lymph node dissection and regional radiotherapy, 107 (9.8%)). Patients in the group without completion axillary treatment had more favourable tumour characteristics and were older. The overall 5-year regional recurrence rate was 1.3%, and did not differ significantly between the groups. The recurrence-free interval was also comparable among groups. The group of patients who did not undergo completion axillary treatment had statistically significantly worse 5-year overall survival, owing to a higher percentage of non-cancer deaths. CONCLUSION: In this registry study of patients with cT1-2 N0 breast cancer treated with mastectomy, with low-volume sentinel lymph node metastasis, the 5-year regional recurrence rate was low and comparable between patients with and without completion axillary treatment.

Correlation between sentinel lymph node biopsy and non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in patients with cN0 breast carcinoma: comparison of invasive ductal carcinoma and invasive lobular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Some studies have suggested that axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) can be avoided in women with cN0 breast cancer with 1-2 positive sentinel nodes (SLNs). However, these studies included only a few patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC), so the validity of omitting ALDN in these patients remains controversial. This study compared the frequency of non-sentinel lymph nodes (non-SLNs) metastases in ILC and invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC). MATERIALS METHODS: Data relating to a total of 2583 patients with infiltrating breast carcinoma operated at our institution between 2012 and 2023 were retrospectively analyzed: 2242 (86.8%) with IDC and 341 (13.2%) with ILC. We compared the incidence of metastasis to SLNs and non-SLNs between the ILC and IDC cohorts and examined factors that influenced non-SLNs metastasis. RESULTS: SLN biopsies were performed in 315 patients with ILC and 2018 patients with IDC. Metastases to the SLNs were found in 78/315 (24.8%) patients with ILC and in 460 (22.8%) patients with IDC (p = 0.31). The incidence of metastases to non-SLNs was significantly higher (p = 0.02) in ILC (52/78-66.7%) compared to IDC (207/460 - 45%). Multivariate analysis showed that ILC was the most influential predictive factor in predicting the presence of metastasis to non-SLNs. CONCLUSIONS: ILC cases have more non-SLNs metastases than IDC cases in SLN-positive patients. The ILC is essential for predicting non-SLN positivity in macro-metastases in the SLN. The option of omitting ALND in patients with ILC with 1-2 positive SLNs still requires further investigation.

Omitting Axillary Dissection in Breast Cancer with Sentinel-Node Metastases.

BACKGROUND: Trials evaluating the omission of completion axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer and sentinel-lymph-node metastases have been compromised by limited statistical power, uncertain nodal radiotherapy target volumes, and a scarcity of data on relevant clinical subgroups. METHODS: We conducted a noninferiority trial in which patients with clinically node-negative primary T1 to T3 breast cancer (tumor size, T1, ≤20 mm; T2, 21 to 50 mm; and T3, >50 mm in the largest dimension) with one or two sentinel-node macrometastases (metastasis size, >2 mm in the largest dimension) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to completion axillary-lymph-node dissection or its omission (sentinel-node biopsy only). Adjuvant treatment and radiation therapy were used in accordance with national guidelines. The primary end point was overall survival. We report here the per-protocol and modified intention-to-treat analyses of the prespecified secondary end point of recurrence-free survival. To show noninferiority of sentinel-node biopsy only, the upper boundary of the confidence interval for the hazard ratio for recurrence or death had to be below 1.44. RESULTS: Between January 2015 and December 2021, a total of 2766 patients were enrolled across five countries. The per-protocol population included 2540 patients, of whom 1335 were assigned to undergo sentinel-node biopsy only and 1205 to undergo completion axillary-lymph-node dissection (dissection group). Radiation therapy including nodal target volumes was administered to 1192 of 1326 patients (89.9%) in the sentinel-node biopsy-only group and to 1058 of 1197 (88.4%) in the dissection group. The median follow-up was 46.8 months (range, 1.5 to 94.5). Overall, 191 patients had recurrence or died. The estimated 5-year recurrence-free survival was 89.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 87.5 to 91.9) in the sentinel-node biopsy-only group and 88.7% (95% CI, 86.3 to 91.1) in the dissection group, with a country-adjusted hazard ratio for recurrence or death of 0.89 (95% CI, 0.66 to 1.19), which was significantly (P<0.001) below the prespecified noninferiority margin. CONCLUSIONS: The omission of completion axillary-lymph-node dissection was noninferior to the more extensive surgery in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer who had sentinel-node macrometastases, most of whom received nodal radiation therapy. (Funded by the Swedish Research Council and others; SENOMAC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02240472.).

Survival associated with the use of one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) to detect sentinel lymph node metastasis in cervical cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is part of surgical treatment of apparent early-stage cervical cancer. SLN is routinely analyzed by ultrastaging and immunohistochemistry. The aim of this study was to assess the survival of patients undergoing SLN analyzed by one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) compared with ultrastaging. METHODS: Single-center, retrospective, cohort study. Patients undergoing primary surgery and SLN mapping ( ±pelvic lymphadenectomy) for apparent early-stage cervical cancer between May 2017 and January 2021 were included. SLN was analyzed exclusively with OSNA or with ultrastaging. Patients with bilateral SLN mapping failure, with SLN analyzed alternatively/serially with OSNA and ultrastaging, and undergoing neo-adjuvant therapy were excluded. Baseline clinic-pathological differences between the two groups were balanced with propensity-match analysis. RESULTS: One-hundred and fifty-seven patients were included, 50 (31.8%) in the OSNA group and 107 (68.2%) in the ultrastaging group. Median follow up time was 41 months (95%CI:37.9-42.2). 5-year DFS in patients undergoing OSNA versus ultrastaging was 87.0% versus 91.0% (p = 0.809) and 5-year overall survival was 97.9% versus 98.6% (p = 0.631), respectively. No difference in the incidence of lymph node recurrence between the two groups was noted (OSNA 20.0% versus ultrastaging 18.2%, p = 0.931). In the group of negative SLN, no 5-year DFS difference was noted between the two groups (p = 0.692). No 5-year DFS and OS difference was noted after propensity-match analysis (87.6% versus 87.0%, p = 0.726 and 97.4% versus 97.9%, p = 0.998, respectively). CONCLUSION: The use of OSNA as method to exclusively process SLN in cervical cancer was not associated with worse DFS compared to ultrastaging. Incidence of lymph node recurrence in the two groups was not different.

Development and validation of a novel model to predict recurrence-free survival and melanoma-specific survival after sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma: an international, retrospective, multicentre analysis.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of adjuvant systemic treatment for patients with high-risk melanomas necessitates accurate staging of disease. However, inconsistencies in outcomes exist between disease stages as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (8th edition). We aimed to develop a tool to predict patient-specific outcomes in people with melanoma rather than grouping patients according to disease stage. METHODS: Patients older than 13 years with confirmed primary melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) between Oct 29, 1997, and Nov 11, 2013, at four European melanoma centres (based in Berlin, Germany; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; and Warsaw, Poland) were included in the development cohort. Potential predictors of recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival assessed were sex, age, presence of ulceration, primary tumour location, histological subtype, Breslow thickness, sentinel node status, number of sentinel nodes removed, maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis, and Dewar classification. A prognostic model and nomogram were developed to predict 5-year recurrence-free survival on a continuous scale in patients with stage pT1b or higher melanomas. This model was also calibrated to predict melanoma-specific survival. Model performance was assessed by discrimination (area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]) and calibration. External validation was done in a cohort of patients with primary melanomas who underwent SLNB between Jan 30, 1997, and Dec 12, 2013, at the Melanoma Institute Australia (Sydney, NSW, Australia). FINDINGS: The development cohort consisted of 4071 patients, of whom 2075 (51%) were female and 1996 (49%) were male. 889 (22%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3182 (78%) had sentinel node-negative disease. The validation cohort comprised 4822 patients, of whom 1965 (41%) were female and 2857 (59%) were male. 891 (18%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3931 (82%) had sentinel node-negative disease. Median follow-up was 4·8 years (IQR 2·3-7·8) in the development cohort and 5·0 years (2·2-8·9) in the validation cohort. In the development cohort, 5-year recurrence-free survival was 73·5% (95% CI 72·0-75·1) and 5-year melanoma-specific survival was 86·5% (85·3-87·8). In the validation cohort, the corresponding estimates were 66·1% (64·6-67·7) and 83·3% (82·0-84·6), respectively. The final model contained six prognostic factors: sentinel node status, Breslow thickness, presence of ulceration, age at SLNB, primary tumour location, and maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis. In the development cohort, for the model's prediction of recurrence-free survival, the AUC was 0·80 (95% CI 0·78-0·81); for prediction of melanoma-specific survival, the AUC was 0·81 (0·79-0·84). External validation showed good calibration for both outcomes, with AUCs of 0·73 (0·71-0·75) and 0·76 (0·74-0·78), respectively. INTERPRETATION: Our prediction model and nomogram accurately predicted patient-specific risk probabilities for 5-year recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival. These tools could have important implications for clinical decision making when considering adjuvant treatments in patients with high-risk melanomas. FUNDING: Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute.

Clinicopathological factors associated with sentinel lymph node detection in non-small-cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Mapping of the pulmonary lymphatic system by near-infrared (NIR) fluorescence imaging might not always identify the first lymph node relay. The aim of this study was to determine the clinicopathologic factors allowing the identification of sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) by NIR fluorescence imaging in thoracic surgery for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 92 patients treated for suspected or confirmed cN0 lung cancer with curative intent who underwent an intraoperative injection of indocyanine green (ICG) either by direct peritumoral injection or by endobronchial injection using electromagnetic navigational bronchoscopy (ENB). After exclusion of patients for technical failure, benign disease and metastasis, we analyzed the clinicopathologic findings of 65 patients treated for localized-stage NSCLC, comparing the group with identification of SLNs (SLN-positive group) with the group without identification of SLNs (SLN-negative group). RESULTS: Forty-eight patients (73.8%) were SLN-positive. Patients with SLN positivity were more frequently female (50%) than the SLN-negative patients were (11.8%) (p = 0.006). The mean value of diffusing capacity for carbon monoxide (DLCO) was lower among the patients in the SLN-negative group (64.7% ± 16.7%) than the SLN-positive group (77.6% ± 17.2%, p < 0.01). The ratio of forced expiratory volume in one second to forced vital capacity (FEV1/FCV) was higher in the SLN-positive group (69.0% vs. 60.8%, p = 0.02). Patients who were SLN-negative were characterized by a severe degree of emphysema (p = 0.003). There was no significant difference in pathologic characteristics. On univariate analyses, age, female sex, DLCO, FEV1/FVC, degree of emphysema, and tumor size were significantly associated with SLN detection. On multivariate analysis, DLCO > 75% (HR = 4.92, 95% CI: 1.27-24.7; p = 0.03) and female sex (HR = 5.55, 95% CI: 1.25-39.33; p = 0.04) were independently associated with SLN detection. CONCLUSIONS: At a time of resurgence in the use of the sentinel lymph node mapping technique in the field of thoracic surgery, this study enabled us to identify, using multivariate analysis, two predictive factors for success: DLCO > 75% and female sex. Larger datasets are needed to confirm our results.

Risk factors and prognosis of sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast-conserving breast cancer: A retrospective study based on the SEER database.

At present, the risk factors and prognosis of sentinel lymph node metastasis (SLNM) are analyzed based on the study of axillary lymph node metastasis, but whether there is a difference between the two is unclear. Therefore, an accurate and appropriate predictive model needs to be proposed to evaluate patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for breast cancer. We selected 16983 women with breast cancer from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. They were randomly assigned to two cohorts, one for development (n = 11891) and one for validation (n = 5092). multi-factor logistics regression was used to distinguish risk factors affecting SLNM. The potential prognostic factors were identified using the COX regression analysis. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) were calculated for all results. Multiple Cox models are included in the nomogram, with a critical P value of .05. In order to evaluate the model's performance, Concordance index and receiver operating characteristic curves were used. Six independent risk factors affecting SLNM were screened out from the Logistic regression, including tumor location, number of regional lymph nodes (2-5), ER positive, PR positive, tumor size (T2-3), and histological grade (Grade II-III) are independent risk factors for SLNM in patients (P < .05). Eight prognostic factors were screened out in the multivariate COX regression analysis (P < .05): Age: Age 60 to 79 years, Age ≥ 80 years; Race; Histological grading: Grade II, Grade III; No radiotherapy; Tumor size: T2, T3; ER positive:, sentinel lymph node positive, married. Histological grade, tumor location, T stage, ER status, PR status and the number of SLNB are significantly correlated with axillary SLNM. Age, ethnicity, histological grade, radiotherapy, tumor size, ER status, SLN status, and marital status were independent risk factors for Breast cancer specific survival (BCSS). Moreover, the survival rate of patients with 3 positive SLNs was not significantly different from that with one or two positive SLNs, We concluded that patients with stage N1 breast cancer were exempt from axillary lymph node dissection, which is worthy of further study.

Long-term outcomes after amputation and sentinel node biopsy for subungual melanoma: A single-institution series.

BACKGROUND: Subungual melanoma (SUM) is a rare tumor with historically poor outcomes. Thus, the benefit of proximal versus distal amputation in SUM remains unclear. METHODS: We performed a retrospective review of our prospectively-maintained institutional melanoma database, including SUM and non-subungual acral melanoma (AM) patients who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) between 1999 and 2022. All SUMs had distal joint or proximal amputations. Primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and recurrence free survival (RFS). Kaplan-Meier estimates, and Cox univariate and multivariate analyses were performed. Tests were repeated on propensity score matched (PSM) populations in a 2:1 ratio. RESULTS: 123 patients underwent resection with SLNB for SUM (n â€‹= â€‹27) and AM (n â€‹= â€‹96). Median follow-up was 9.2 years. Unadjusted median OS was 149.1 months for AM and 198.1 months for SUM. In the PSM comparison, median OS and RFS remained comparable between SUM and AM (149.5 months versus 198.1 months; p â€‹= â€‹0.612). Sentinel node positivity was associated with significantly worse overall survival outcome (Hazard Ratio 5.49; CI (1.59-18.97), p â€‹= â€‹0.007). In the PSM population, male sex was also associated with a significant hazard of death (HR 3.00, CI (1.03-8.71), p â€‹= â€‹0.043). Proximal amputations were associated with significantly worse OS (p â€‹< â€‹0.002) and RFS (p â€‹< â€‹0.01) compared to distal amputations in SUM. CONCLUSION: SUM was well-treated with distal amputations, and had better OS and RFS compared to SUM treated with proximal amputations. Sentinel lymph node status is an important prognostic factor for SUMs and AMs. SUMs can be treated similarly to AMs with comparably good long-term outcomes.

Sentinel lymph node risk prognostication in primary cutaneous melanoma through tissue-based profiling, potentially redefining the need for sentinel lymph node biopsy.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The role of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) is pivotal in the contemporary staging of cutaneous melanoma. In this review, we examine advanced molecular testing platforms like gene expression profiling (GEP) and immunohistochemistry (IHC) as tools for predicting the prognosis of sentinel lymph nodes. We compare these innovative approaches with traditional staging assessments. Additionally, we delve into the shared genetic and protein markers between GEP and IHC tests and their relevance to melanoma biology, exploring their prognostic and predictive characteristics. Finally, we assess alternative methods to potentially obviate the need for SLNB altogether. RECENT FINDINGS: Progress in adjuvant melanoma therapy has diminished the necessity of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) while underscoring the importance of accurately identifying high-risk stage I and II melanoma patients who may benefit from additional anti-tumor interventions. The clinical application of testing through gene expression profiling (GEP) or immunohistochemistry (IHC) is gaining traction, with platforms such as DecisionDx, Merlin Assay (CP-GEP), MelaGenix GEP, and Immunoprint coming into play. Currently, extensive validation studies are in progress to incorporate routine molecular testing into clinical practice. However, due to significant methodological limitations, widespread clinical adoption of tissue-based molecular testing remains elusive at present. SUMMARY: While various tissue-based molecular testing platforms have the potential to stratify the risk of sentinel lymph node positivity (SLNP), most suffer from significant methodological deficiencies, including limited sample size, lack of prospective validation, and limited correlation with established clinicopathological variables. Furthermore, the genes and proteins identified by individual gene expression profiling (GEP) or immunohistochemistry (IHC) tests exhibit minimal overlap, even when considering the most well-established melanoma mutations. However, there is hope that the ongoing prospective trial for the Merlin Assay may safely reduce the necessity for SLNB procedures if successful. Additionally, the MelaGenix GEP and Immunoprint tests could prove valuable in identifying high-risk stage I-II melanoma patients and potentially guiding their selection for adjuvant therapy, thus potentially reducing the need for SLNB. Due to the diverse study designs employed, effective comparisons between GEP or IHC tests are challenging, and to date, there is no study directly comparing the clinical utility of these respective GEP or IHC tests.

Sentinel node mapping in high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer: Analysis of 5-year oncologic outcomes.

OBJECTIVE: To assess 5-year oncologic outcomes of apparent early-stage high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer undergoing sentinel node mapping versus systematic lymphadenectomy. METHODS: This is a multi-institutional retrospective, propensity-matched study evaluating data of high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer (according to ESGO/ESTRO/ESP guidelines) undergoing sentinel node mapping versus systematic pelvic lymphadenectomy (with and without para-aortic lymphadenectomy). Survival outcomes were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazard methods. RESULTS: Overall, the charts of 242 patients with high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer were retrieved. Data on 73 (30.1%) patients undergoing hysterectomy plus sentinel node mapping were analyzed. Forty-two (57.5%) and 31 (42.5%) patients were classified in the high-intermediate and high-risk groups, respectively. Unilateral sentinel node mapping was achieved in all patients. Bilateral mapping was achieved in 67 (91.7%) patients. Three (4.1%) patients had site-specific lymphadenectomy (two pelvic areas only and one pelvic plus para-aortic area), while adjunctive nodal dissection was omitted in the hemipelvis of the other three (4.1%) patients. Sentinel nodes were detected in the para-aortic area in eight (10.9%) patients. Twenty-four (32.8%) patients were diagnosed with nodal disease. A propensity-score matching was used to compare the aforementioned group of patients undergoing sentinel node mapping with a group of patients undergoing lymphadenectomy. Seventy patient pairs were selected (70 having sentinel node mapping vs. 70 having lymphadenectomy). Patients undergoing sentinel node mapping experienced similar 5-year disease-free survival (HR: 1.233; 95%CI: 0.6217 to 2.444; p = 0.547, log-rank test) and 5-year overall survival (HR: 1.505; 95%CI: 0.6752 to 3.355; p = 0.256, log-rank test) than patients undergoing lymphadenectomy. CONCLUSIONS: Sentinel node mapping does not negatively impact 5-year outcomes of high-intermediate and high-risk endometrial cancer. Further prospective studies are warranted.

Clipping a Positive Lymph Node Improves Accuracy of Nodal Staging After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer Patients, but Does It Drive Management Changes?

BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy for cN+ breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is controversial because the false-negative rate (FNR) is high. Identification of three or more SLNs with a dual tracer improves these results, and inclusion of a clipped lymph node (CLN) (targeted axillary dissection [TAD]) may be even more effective. METHODS: A retrospective, single-institution analysis of consecutive cN+ patients undergoing NAC from 2019 to 2021 was performed. Patients routinely underwent placement of a clip in the positive lymph node before NAC, and TAD was performed after completion of therapy. RESULTS: The study analyzed 73 patients, and the identification rate for CLN was 98.6% (72/73). A complete response in the lymph nodes was achieved for 43 (59%) of the 73 patients. Overall, the CLN was not a SLN in 18 (25%) of 73 cases, and for women who had one or two and those who had three or more SLNs identified, this occurred in 11 (32%) and 7 (21%) of 34 cases, respectively. Failure of SLN or TAD to identify a positive residual lymph node status after NAC occurred in 10 (15%) of 69 and 2 (3%) of 73 cases, respectively (p = 0.01). In four cases, a SLN was not retrieved (5.5%), and two of these cases had a positive CLN. In three cases, the CLN was the only positive node and did not match with a SLN, directing lymphadenectomy and oncologic management change in two cases. Therefore, 7 (10%) of 73 cases had a change in surgical or oncologic management with TAD. CONCLUSIONS: For a conservative axillary treatment in this setting, TAD is an effective method. It is more accurate than SLN alone and allows management changes. Further studies are warranted.

Germinal centres within tumour positive sentinel lymph nodes are positively associated with tumour infiltrating lymphocytes and tertiary lymphoid structures in breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Stromal tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (sTILs) and presence of tertiary lymphoid structures have been proposed as indicators of tumour-related immune response in breast cancer. An increased number of germinal centres (GCs) in lymph nodes is considered a sign of humoral immune reactivity. AIMS: It is unclear whether a relationship exists between number and size of GCs within tumour positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNpos), sTILs and tertiary lymphoid structures within matched primary breast cancer and breast cancer subtype. METHODS: Axillary SLNpos from 175 patients with breast cancer were manually contoured in digitized haematoxylin and eosin stained sections. Total SLN area, GC number and GC area were measured in SLNpos with the largest metastatic area. To correct for SLN size, GC number and GC area were divided by SLN area. sTILs and presence of tertiary lymphoid structures were assessed in the primary breast cancer. RESULTS: A higher GC number and larger GC area were found in patients with high sTILs (≥2%) (both P < 0.001) and in patients with presence of tertiary lymphoid structures (PGC number = 0.034 and PGC area = 0.016). Triple negative and HER2-positive (N = 45) breast cancer subtypes had a higher GC number and higher sTILs compared to hormone receptor positive, HER2-negative breast cancer (N = 130) (PGC number < 0.001 and PsTILs= 0.001). CONCLUSION: This study suggests GCs measured within SLNpos might be useful indicators of the humoral anti-tumour immune response in breast cancer. Future studies are needed investigating underlying biological mechanisms and prognostic value of GCs in SLNs.

Magnetically guided surgery after primary systemic therapy for breast cancer: implications for enhanced axillary mapping.

BACKGROUND: Superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles perform comparably to radioisotope ± blue dye for sentinel lymph node detection in breast cancer, even when injected up to 8 weeks before surgery. Using superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles for sentinel lymph node detection after primary systemic therapy, and the maximum time frame of superparamagnetic iron nanoparticle administration have not been investigated. METHODS: This cohort study included cN0/1-to-ycN0 patients undergoing sentinel lymph node detection or targeted axillary dissection. All patients received superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles either before primary systemic therapy or before surgery, and radioisotope on the day of surgery. RESULTS: For 113 patients analysed, superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles were injected a median of 3 (range 0-248) days before surgery, with a 97.4% detection rate compared with 91.2% for radioisotope (P = 0.057). Concordance for radioisotope was 97.1% and this was not affected by timing of superparamagnetic iron nanoparticle injection (Kendall's tau 0.027; P = 0.746). The median sentinel lymph node yield was 3 (interquartile range (i.q.r.) 2-3) for superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles and 2 (i.q.r. 2-3) for radioisotope (P < 0.001). In targeted axillary dissection, detection was 100% for superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles and 81.8% for radioisotope (P = 0.124). The index node was magnetic in 93.9% and radioactive in 66.7% (P = 0.007), an outcome that was not affected by any factors. For patients with metastases, superparamagnetic iron nanoparticle detection was 100% and radioisotope-based detection was 84.2% (P = 0.083), with superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles detecting more metastatic sentinel lymph nodes (median of 1 (i.q.r. 1-2) for superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles compared with a median of 1 (i.q.r. 0-1) for radioisotope; P = 0.005). CONCLUSION: Injection before primary systemic therapy is feasible and does not affect concordance with radioisotope. Superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles perform comparably to radioisotope, but detect more sentinel lymph nodes and have a higher rate of detection of metastatic sentinel lymph nodes.

Isolated melanoma cells in sentinel lymph node in stage IIIA melanoma correlate with a favorable prognosis similar to stage IB.

BACKGROUND: The American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition (AJCC v8) defines sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) containing any tumor cells as positive SLN. Consequently, even thin melanomas with isolated tumor cells (ic) in SLN are classified as stage IIIA, making them candidates for adjuvant therapy. OBJECTIVES AND ENDPOINTS: We aimed to evaluate survival outcomes of melanoma stage IIIA (ic) and compare them with stage IIIA with lymph node (LN) metastases > 0.1 mm. Primary endpoints were relapse-free survival (RFS) and distant metastases-free survival (DMFS). Secondary endpoint was melanoma specific survival (MSS). RESULTS: The discovery cohort from the Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tuebingen, included 237 patients; confirmation cohort included 143 patients from the DeCOG trial. The Tuebingen cohort included 95 patients with stage IIIA (ic) and 142 patients with stage IIIA. The DeCOG trial included 39 patients with stage IIIA (ic) and 104 patients with stage IIIA. In the Tuebingen cohort, 10-year RFS rates for stage IIIA (ic) and IIIA were 84% (95% CI 75-94) and 49% (95% CI 39-59), respectively (p < 0.001). 10-year DMFS rates for stage IIIA (ic) and IIIA were 89% (95% CI 81-97) and 56% (95% CI 45-67), respectively; (p < 0.001). In the DeCOG cohort, 10-year RFS for stage IIIA (ic) and stage IIIA were 88% (95% CI 78-99) and 35% (95% CI 7-62), respectively; (p = 0.009). 10-year DMFS for stage IIIA (ic) and IIIA was 88% (95% CI 77-99) and 60% (95% CI 39-80), respectively (p = 0.061). CONCLUSION: Stage IIIA (ic) melanoma exhibits a prognosis similar to stage IB. Recommendation of adjuvant therapy in Stage IIIA (ic) warrants thorough discussion.

Identifying safe diagnostic algorithms for sentinel lymph node mapping in high-risk endometrial cancer: The SENTIREC-endo study.

INTRODUCTION: It is unclear if sentinel node (SLN) mapping can replace pelvic- (PLD) and paraaortic lymphadenectomy (PALD) for high-risk endometrial cancer (EC). A diagnostically safe surgical algorithm, taking failed mapping cases into account, is not defined. We aimed to investigate the diagnostic accuracy of SLN mapping algorithms in women with exclusively high-risk EC. METHODS: We undertook a prospective national diagnostic cohort study of SLN mapping in women with high-risk EC from March 2017 to January 2023. The power calculation was based on the negative predictive value (NPV). Women underwent SLN mapping, PLD and PALD besides removal of suspicious and any FDG/PET-positive lymph nodes. Accuracy analyses were performed for five algorithms. RESULTS: 170/216 included women underwent SLN mapping, PLD and PALD and were included in accuracy analyses. 42/170 (24.7%) had nodal metastasis. The algorithm SLN and PLD in case of failed mapping, demonstrated a sensitivity of 86% (95% CI 74-100) and an NPV of 96% (95% CI 91-100). The sensitivity increased to 93% (95% CI 83-100) and the NPV to 98% (95% CI 94-100) if PLD was combined with removal of any PET-positive lymph nodes. Equivalent results were obtained if PLD and PALD were performed in non-mapping cases; sensitivity 93% (95% CI 83-100) and NPV 98% (95% CI 95-100). CONCLUSION: SLN-mapping is a safe staging procedure in women with high-risk EC if strictly adhering to a surgical algorithm including removal of any PET-positive lymph nodes independent of location and PLD or PLD and PALD in case of failed mapping.