Sentinel node biopsy is not a standard procedure in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the experience of the European institute of oncology on 854 patients in 10 years. Ann Surg. 2008;247:315-319. [PMID: 18216539 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e31815b446b]

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Should Be Included with the Initial Surgery for High-Risk Ductal Carcinoma-In-Situ

Background. A proportion of those diagnosed preoperatively with ductal carcinoma-in-situ (DCIS) will be histologically upgraded to invasive carcinoma. Repeat surgery for sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy will be required if it had not been included with the initial surgery. We reviewed the outcome of SLN biopsy performed with the initial surgery based on a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS and aimed to identify patients at risk of histological upgrade. Methods. Retrospective review of 294 consecutive female patients diagnosed with DCIS was performed at our institute from January 1, 2001, to December 31, 2008. Results. Of the 294 patients, 132 (44.9%) underwent SLN biopsy together with the initial surgery. The SLN was positive for metastases in 5 patients, all of whom had tumours that were histologically upgraded. Histological upgrade also occurred in 43 of the 127 patients (33.9%) in whom the SLN was negative for metastases. On multivariate analysis, histological upgrade was more likely if a mass was detected on mammogram, if the preoperative diagnosis was obtained with core biopsy and if microinvasion was reported in the biopsy. Conclusion. Patients in whom a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS is likely to be upgraded to invasive carcinoma will benefit from SLN biopsy being performed with the initial surgery.

Nomogram for predicting invasion in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

Background

The aim of this study was to identify risk factors for invasive breast cancer in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) on a preoperative biopsy. These factors were used to develop a nomogram for predicting the risk of invasion in the preoperative setting.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of patients who underwent surgical treatment for DCIS diagnosed before surgery between 1997 and 2009. Multivariable analysis was used to identify clinical, radiological and histopathological factors that may predict upstaging. A nomogram was developed to predict the probability of invasion using multiple logistic regression analysis. This nomogram was subsequently validated using another cohort of patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS between 2010 and 2012.

Results

Upstaging to invasive cancer occurred in 123 (24.9 per cent) of 493 women treated between 1997 and 2009. A larger DCIS lesion (at least 15 mm), lack of hormone receptor expression, intermediate or high nuclear grade, diagnosis on core biopsy compared with vacuum-assisted biopsy, and non-cribriform subtype of DCIS were significantly associated with upstaging. A nomogram developed using these factors demonstrated good predictive performance (area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) 0·823, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·787 to 0·860). The nomogram showed similar predictive performance in the validation data set, based on another 149 women (AUC 0·700, 0·613 to 0·786).

Conclusion

Upstaging to invasive cancer in women with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS is common. A nomogram based on the five most significant factors related to upstaging accurately predicted invasive cancer. This nomogram may be useful when deciding whether to pursue axillary staging with sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with DCIS.

Utility of intraoperative frozen section examination of sentinel lymph nodes in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative frozen section (IFS) examination of sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) is useful in selecting patients with invasive breast cancer for immediate axillary lymph node dissection. However, whether IFS evaluation of the SLNs in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast has any value has not been previously assessed.

METHODS

Clinicopathologic data from patients with DCIS who underwent resection with SLN biopsy (2004-2010) were collected to assess the sensitivity, specificity, and accuracy of IFS, and its impact on axillary management.

RESULTS

A total of 267 patients with DCIS underwent resection with SLN biopsy and IFS evaluation. Preoperative pathology was DCIS (n = 231), DCIS with microinvasion (n = 24), and DCIS with other lesions (n = 12). Fifty-two (19.5%) patients had invasive breast cancer on final pathology. SLN metastases were identified in 13 (4.8%) patients; however, only 4 (1.5%) were IFS positive. IFS examination was negative in 263 (98.5%) patients. Among patients with SLN metastases, the most common pattern of metastases was either micrometastasis (n = 6) or immunohistochemistry-positive individual tumor cells (n = 4), whereas 3 patients had a macrometastasis. IFS examination was falsely negative in 9 of these 13 patients for a false-negative rate of 69.3%, and a sensitivity and specificity of 31% and 100% respectively. Nine of the 13 patients underwent axillary lymph node dissection and only 1 patient had further axillary metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

SLN metastases in DCIS is rare and most commonly involves SLN micrometastasis or immunohistochemistry-positive individual tumor cells. SLN IFS evaluation in DCIS has a low yield and sensitivity, and can be safely omitted to reduce operative duration and cost.

Ductal carcinoma in situ: how should we treat it?

SUMMARY The observed incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has increased because of the increasing use of sensitive imaging modalities. While the clinical course of DCIS is quite variable, it is considered a precursor lesion to invasive breast cancer. The current focus of DCIS treatment is on the prevention of progression to invasive disease. However, at present, validated diagnostic tests to predict progression accurately are lacking. Additionally, important clinical questions arise during DCIS management. For example, optimal margins of excision or axillary lymph node sampling have not been addressed in randomized clinical trials. May whole-breast radiation after lumpectomy be omitted in selected patients? What is the role of adjuvant tamoxifen if it does not impact overall survival rates? This review aims to describe the natural history of DCIS and highlights the current therapeutic options and challenges in patient management.

Utilization of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ undergoing mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines suggest consideration of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) undergoing mastectomy. Our objective was to identify factors influencing the utilization of SLNB in this population.

METHODS

We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database to identify all women with breast DCIS treated with mastectomy from 2000 to 2008. We excluded patients without histologic confirmation, those diagnosed at autopsy, those who had axillary lymph node dissections performed without a preceding SLNB, and those for whom the status of SLNB was unknown. We used multivariate logistic regression reporting odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to evaluate the relationship of patient- and tumor-related factors to the likelihood of undergoing SLNB.

RESULTS

Of 20,177 patients, 51% did not receive SLNB. Factors associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving a SLNB included advancing age (OR 0.66; 95% CI 0.62-0.71), Asian (OR 0.75; CI 0.68-0.83) or Hispanic (OR 0.84; 95% CI 0.74-0.96) race/ethnicity, and history of prior non-breast (OR 0.57; 95% CI 0.53-0.61). Factors associated with an increased likelihood of receiving a SLNB included treatment in the east (OR 1.28; 95% CI 1.17-1.4), intermediate (OR 1.25; 95% CI 1.11-1.41), high (OR 1.84; 95% CI 1.62-2.08) grade tumors, treatment after the year 2000, and DCIS size 2-5 cm (OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.42-1.68) and >5 cm (OR 2.43; 95% CI 2.16-2.75).

CONCLUSIONS

SLNB is increasingly utilized in patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS, but disparities in usage remain. Efforts at improving rates of SLNB in this population are warranted.

Risk predictors of underestimation and the need for sentinel node biopsy in patients diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ by preoperative needle biopsy

BACKGROUND

Diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) by core needle biopsy showed a high rate of underestimation of invasiveness, and performing sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in DCIS patients was controversial.

METHODS

We analyzed 340 DCIS patients who were diagnosed by needle biopsies. Final pathology and clinicopathological features were reviewed. Predictors were accessed using the Chi-square test and a binary logistic regression model.

RESULTS

The overall DCIS underestimation rate was 42.6%. The underestimation was significantly related to the palpability, mass or calcification by ultrasonography, grade, suspicious microinvasion, and biopsy method in univariate analysis. In multivariate analysis, palpability, ultrasonographic calcification or mass, suspicious microinvasion, and core needle biopsy were independent predictors of underestimation of invasive cancer. In cases with one or no risk predictors, the underestimation rate was 14.3%, whereas, in those with five predictors, it increased to 90.9%. Among 144 invasive cancer patients who underwent axillary staging, 15.4% had node metastasis.

CONCLUSIONS

DCIS diagnosed by preoperative needle biopsy has a high probability of underestimation, and 15% of invasive cancer patients have node metastasis. SLNB may be justified in DCIS patients undergoing needle biopsies, and caution should be exercised in omitting SLNB in patients with one or no risk predictors.

Treatment outcomes and unfavorable prognostic factors in patients with occult breast cancer

AIMS

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the treatment outcomes and prognostic factors in patients with occult breast cancer (OBC).

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 95 patients with OBC who were treated at our facility between January 1998 and June 2010. Of the 95 patients, 64 underwent mastectomy plus axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) with or without post-mastectomy radiation (Mast + ALND group), 13 underwent ALND followed by ipsilateral breast radiotherapy (BR + ALND group) and the remaining 18 were treated with ALND (ALND group).

RESULTS

Patients who underwent Mast + ALND or BR + ALND had significantly improved rates of locoregional recurrence-free survival (LRFS) and recurrence/metastasis-free survival (RFS) than patients who only underwent ALND (p < 0.05). There were no significant differences in the LRFS (p = 0.718), RFS (p = 0.935) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) (p = 0.991) rates between the patients who underwent Mast + ALND compared with those who received BR + ALND. Multivariate analysis revealed that patients with four or more involved lymph nodes had significantly worse outcomes (p = 0.042, HR = 4.63, 95% CI = 1.66-32.47 for BCSS and p = 0.038, HR = 3.62, 95% CI = 1.08-20.77 for RFS).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with OBC who received ALND and subsequent breast radiotherapy had similar outcomes to patients who underwent mastectomy. The presence of four or more involved lymph nodes may independently predict poor outcomes of OBC.

Ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a surgical perspective

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is a heterogeneous neoplasm with invasive potential. Risk factors include age, family history, hormone replacement therapy, genetic mutation, and patient lifestyle. The incidence of DCIS has increased due to more widespread use of screening and diagnostic mammography; almost 80% of cases are diagnosed with imaging with final diagnosis established by biopsy and histological examination. There are various classification systems used for DCIS, the most recent of which is based on the presence of intraepithelial neoplasia of the ductal epithelium (DIN). A number of molecular assays are now available that can identify high-risk patients as well as help establish the prognosis of patients with diagnosed DCIS. Current surgical treatment options include total mastectomy, simple lumpectomy in very low-risk patients, and lumpectomy with radiation. Adjuvant therapy is tailored based on the molecular profile of the neoplasm and can include aromatase inhibitors, anti-estrogen, anti-progesterone (or a combination of antiestrogen and antiprogesterone), and HER2 neu suppression therapy. Chemopreventive therapies are under investigation for DCIS, as are various molecular-targeted drugs. It is anticipated that new biologic agents, when combined with hormonal agents such as SERMs and aromatase inhibitors, may one day prevent all forms of breast cancer.

[Predictive factors of invasion with initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ based on core biopsy]

INTRODUCTION

Previous studies suggest that sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) should not be performed in case of pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) routinely. In order to avoid a second operation for invasive cancer detected postoperatively the chance of invasion need to be determined preoperatively. The purpose of our retrospective study was to evaluate the sensitivity of core biopsy and determine the predictive value of clinical and histological factors of invasion in cases when DCIS diagnosed preoperatively.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Between January 2006 and December 2011, 1311 patients were treated for breast cancer in our institute, of whom preoperative core biopsy showed DCIS in 50 cases. Wide excision or quadrantectomy was performed in 41 cases, re-excision was necessary in 6 cases for positive surgical margins and mastectomy was carried out in four patients for multicentricity. In further 9 cases extensive tumour size indicated mastectomy straight away. SLNB was carried out in 31 patients, axillary block dissection (ABD) in 8 patients, while ABD for positive sentinel nodes in another two cases. Pathology showed invasion in 17 (34,7 %) cases.

RESULTS

Multivariate analysis showed that tumour grade, symptomatic disease, patients' age were significant predictors of invasion. Although preoperative tumour size also showed correlation with invasiveness, this was statistically not significant.

CONCLUSION

Evaluation of a larger patient population might be helpful to identify women who should undergo tumour excision and SLNB as a single step operation due to increased risk of invasive disease despite the preoperative diagnosis of DCIS.

Predictors of invasive breast cancer and lymph node involvement in ductal carcinoma in situ initially diagnosed by vacuum-assisted breast biopsy: experience of 733 cases

OBJECTIVE

To predict presence of invasive component and nodal involvement in women diagnosed preoperatively with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) by vacuum-assisted breast biopsy (VABB).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 733 patients with preoperatively diagnosed DCIS, investigating the association of clinical-radiological variables with invasive component and nodal involvement.

RESULTS

Mammographic size >20 mm and residual lesion on post-VABB mammogram were related to invasive component (both p < 0.0001) and nodal involvement (p = 0.001, p = 0.03). Age <40 years was associated with presence of invasive component (p = 0.003). By multivariate analysis residual disease was associated with invasive component, and mammographic tumor size >20 mm with nodal involvement, both highly significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Older age, lesion <20 mm, and no residual lesion predict absence of invasion and no nodal involvement in VABB-diagnosed DCIS. However it would be imprudent to routinely forego sentinel node biopsy in such patients as non-negligible proportions of them have invasive disease.

Utilization of lymph node assessment in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with lumpectomy

BACKGROUND

Lymph node assessment (LNA), including sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), is controversial in patients undergoing lumpectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Our goal was to identify factors influencing LNA in these patients.

METHODS

We used the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results database to identify all female patients treated with lumpectomy for DCIS from 2000 to 2008. We excluded patients without histologic confirmation, including those diagnosed at autopsy, and those for whom LNA status was unknown. Multivariate logistic regression models predicted use of LNA. Likelihood of undergoing LNA was reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

A total of 62,935 patients met inclusion criteria. Approximately 15% (N = 9726) had regional LNA at the time of lumpectomy, with 12% (N = 7294) undergoing SLNB. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of undergoing LNA included treatment in the Southeast (OR 1.25, CI 1.04-1.22); treatment after the year 2000; grade II (OR 2.71, CI 2.48-2.96), III (OR 2.38, CI 2.18-2.59), or IV (OR 2.61, CI 2.37-2.88) tumors; DCIS size 2-5 cm (OR 1.49, CI 1.37-1.62) or >5 cm (OR 2.16, CI 1.78-2.61), and estrogen receptor-negative (OR 1.29, CI 1.16-1.43) or progesterone receptor-negative (OR 1.22, CI 1.11-1.33) tumors. Factors associated with a decreased likelihood of undergoing regional LNA were age >60 (OR 0.83, CI 0.79-0.87), and Asian race (OR 0.88, CI 0.81-0.96). Factors predictive of LNA in general were also predictive of SLNB.

CONCLUSIONS

Although LNA is controversial for patients undergoing lumpectomy for DCIS, it is used in 15% of cases. Further research establishing for the benefit of LNA in DCIS patients treated with lumpectomy is needed.

MRI of the breast in patients with DCIS to exclude the presence of invasive disease

OBJECTIVES

Core biopsy underestimates invasion in more than 20% of patients with preoperatively diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) without evidence of invasion (pure DCIS). The aim of the current study was to evaluate the efficacy of preoperative magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) to discriminate between patients with DCIS who are at high risk of invasive breast cancer and patients at low risk.

METHODS

One hundred and twenty-five patients, preoperatively diagnosed with pure DCIS (128 lesions; 3 bilateral) by core-needle biopsy, were prospectively included. Clinical, mammographic, histological (core biopsy) and MRI features were assessed. All patients underwent breast surgery. Analyses were performed to identify features associated with presence of invasion.

RESULTS

Eighteen lesions (14.1%) showed invasion on final histology. Seventy-three lesions (57%) showed suspicious enhancement on MRI with a type 1 (n = 12, 16.4%), type 2 (n = 19, 26.0%) or type 3 curve, respectively (n = 42, 57.5%). At multivariate analysis, the most predictive features for excluding presence of invasive disease were absence of enhancement or a type 1 curve on MRI (negative predictive value 98.5%; A(Z) 0.80, P = 0.00006).

CONCLUSION

Contrast medium uptake kinetics at MRI provide high negative predictive value to exclude presence of invasion and may be useful in primary surgical planning in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of pure DCIS.

KEY POINTS

It is important to determine invasion in breast DCIS. • MRI contrast medium uptake kinetics can help exclude the presence of invasion. • However, the positive predictive value for the presence of invasion is limited. • MRI features were more accurate at predicting invasion than mammographic features alone.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Pure DCIS: Is It Necessary?

Introduction. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has been a matter of debate due to very low rate of axillary metastases. We therefore aimed to identify factors in a single institutional series to select patients who may benefit from SLNB. Material and Methods. Patients, diagnosed with pure DCIS (n = 63) between July 2000 and March 2011, were reviewed. All the sentinel lymph nodes were examined by serial sectioning (50 μm) of the entire lymph node and H&E staining, and by cytokeratin immunostaining in suspicious cases. Results. Median age was 51 (range, 30-79). Of 63 patients, 40 cases (63.5%) with pure DCIS underwent SLN, and 2 of them had a positive SLN (5%). In both 2 cases with SLN metastases, only one sentinel lymph node was involved with tumor cells. Patients who underwent SLNB were more likely to have a tumor size >30 mm or DCIS with intermediate and high nuclear grade or a mastectomy in univariate and multivariate analyses. Conclusion. In our series, we found a slightly higher rate of SLNB positivity in patients with pure DCIS than the large series reported elsewhere. This may either be due to the meticulous examination of SLNs by serial sectioning technique or due to our patient selection criteria or both.

Ductal carcinoma in situ and sentinel lymph node biopsy

PURPOSE

Axillary lymph node status is the strongest prognostic indicator of survival for women with breast cancer. The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is required in patients with an initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed of 78 patients with an initial diagnosis of DCIS between December 2002 and April 2010 and who proceeded to have either SLNB or axillary node dissection performed as part of their primary surgical procedure. The study focused on the rates of axillary node metastasis and the underestimation of invasive carcinoma at an initial diagnosis.

RESULTS

Forty-eight patients underwent SLNB and 18 patients underwent axillary node dissection. Only 1 of 66 patients (1.5%) had a positive sentinel lymph node. After definite surgery, the final diagnosis was changed to invasive ductal carcinoma (IDC) in 12 patients and DCIS with microinvasion in 2 patients; 14 of 78 patients (17.9%) were therefore underestimated at preoperative histological examinations. In 35 patients who were diagnosed DCIS by core needle biopsy (CNB), 13 patients (37.1%) were upstaged into IDC or DCIS with microinvasion in the final diagnosis. The statistically significant factors predictive of invasive breast cancer were a large tumor size and HER2 overexpression.

CONCLUSION

The rates of SLNB positivity in pure DCIS are very low, and there is continuing uncertainty about its clinical importance. However in view of the high rate of underestimation of invasive carcinoma in patients with an initial diagnosis of DCIS, SLNB appears to be appropriate in these patients, especially in the case when DCIS is diagnosed by a core needle biopsy. In patients with an initial diagnosis of DCIS by CNB, SLNB should be considered as part of the primary surgical procedure, when preoperative variables show a tumor larger than 2.35 cm and with HER2 overexpression.

Indication for sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer when core biopsy shows ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

The use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is controversial.

METHODS

A total of 103 primary breast cancer patients who were diagnosed with DCIS by needle biopsy preoperatively and underwent initial SLNB were analyzed retrospectively.

RESULTS

No sentinel nodal metastasis was detected in 66 patients with the final diagnosis of DCIS. However, 2 (5.4%) of 37 patients with invasive ductal carcinoma at final diagnosis had positive sentinel nodes. Multivariate logistic regression analysis identified 2 independent significant predictors of existence of invasive components: presence of a palpable tumor (odds ratio, 4.091; 95% confidential interval, 1.399-11.959; P = .010) and tumor size of 2.0 cm or larger on magnetic resonance imaging (odds ratio, 4.506; 95% confidence interval, 1.322-15.358; P = .016).

CONCLUSIONS

Initial SLNB should be considered for patients diagnosed with DCIS by needle biopsy when they have a high risk for harboring invasive ductal cancer preoperatively.

Clinical applications of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: a dilemma

Breast cancer is the fifth most common cause of cancer deaths in the world, which often spreads first to the axillary lymph nodes (ALN) from the primary tumor. ALN helps clinician stage breast cancer. In addition, it is one of the key prognostic factors for patients with invasive breast cancer. The sentinel lymph node (SLN) is defined as the first regional lymph node to receive lymphatic fluid from a malignant tumor. As a result, it seems possible to assess the complete nodal status with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), which is attractive and reliable approach for identifying lymph node metastasis. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is the most common type of non-invasive breast cancer. However, the role of SLNB in DCIS is controversial because DCIS does not cause invasion and metastasis theoretically. In this review, clinical applications of SLNB in DCIS will be discussed. The potential benefit of accurately upstaging patients with DCIS and the minimal invasiveness of SLNB justify use of SLNB in selected high-risk DCIS patients. At least DSIS with microinvasion, have DCIS of sufficient extent on mammography or MRI, or indicated invasive or microinvasive focus by final histological examination, are recommended for SLNB. Moreover, large randomized trials to evaluate the usefulness of SLNB in DCIS patients after long-term follow-up on local control and survival are required for further evaluation.

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast: perspectives on biology and controversies in current management

The incidence of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has increased because of increasing use of sensitive imaging modalities. MRI is commonly used for the detection of breast cancer but has not yet been validated in randomized trials. There have not been randomized trials addressing optimal margins of excision or axillary sampling. Whole breast radiation after lumpectomy decreases the risk of recurrence but may be omitted in selected patients. Adjuvant Tamoxifen reduces the risk of recurrence but has no impact on overall survival rates.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early Breast Cancer: The Experience of the European Institute of Oncology in Special Clinical Scenarios

BACKGROUND: While axillary nodal status is still one of the most important prognostic factors in breast cancer, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has evolved as a main procedure to strongly reduce postsurgical morbidity improving early and long-term quality of life. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Between 1996 and 2010, we performed 18,884 SLNBs for breast cancer, successfully confirming the validity of this technique and its positive impact on patients' quality of life, even though decision-making processes for adjuvant treatment strongly depend on biological features. RESULTS: This paper summarizes published data mainly collected in our institute considering special clinical scenarios such as ductal intraepithelial neoplasia, intramammary sentinel nodes, multicentric breast cancer, prior breast surgery, previous breast aesthetic surgery, second axillary SLNB, pregnant patients, primary chemotherapy, and male patients. CONCLUSIONS: In general, we believe that SLNB represents the standard procedure for axillary staging in virtually all clinical situations, even in those which were previously considered a contraindication for this procedure. At the moment, the only contraindication to SLNB is the presence of documented axillary metastases.

Identifying gaps in the locoregional management of early breast cancer: highlights from the Kyoto Consensus Conference

A consensus conference was held to investigate issues related to the local management of early breast cancer. Here, we highlight the major topics discussed at the conference and propose ideas for future studies. Regarding axillary management, we examined three major issues. First, we discussed whether the use of axillary reverse mapping could clarify the lymphatic system of breast and whether the ipsilateral arm might help avoid lymphedema. Second, the use of an indocyanine green fluorescent navigation system was discussed for intraoperative lymphatic mapping. These new issues should be examined further in practice. Finally, some agreement was reached on the importance of "four-node diagnosis" to aid in the diagnostic accuracy of sentinel nodes. Regarding breast treatment, there was general agreement that the clinical value of surgical margins in predicting local failure was dependent on the tumor's intrinsic biology and subtypes. For patients treated with preoperative chemotherapy, less extensive excision may be feasible in those who respond to systemic therapy in an acceptable manner. Most trials of preoperative chemotherapy lack outcome data on local recurrence. Therefore, there is a need for such data for overview analysis. We also agreed that radiation after mastectomy may be beneficial in node-positive cases where more than four nodes are involved. Throughout the discussions for both invasive and noninvasive disease, the investigation of nomograms was justified for major issues in the decision-making process, such as the presence or absence of microinvasion and the involvement of nonsentinel nodes in sentinel node-positive patients.

Preoperative sentinel node identification with ultrasound using microbubbles in patients with breast cancer

OBJECTIVE

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is the standard procedure for axillary staging in early breast cancer. Lymphatic imaging after peritumoral microbubble injection has been described in animal models. The aim of this study was to identify and localize SLNs preoperatively by contrast-enhanced sonography after intradermal injection of microbubbles in patients with breast cancer.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Eighty consecutive consenting patients with primary breast cancer were recruited. Patients received a periareolar intradermal injection of microbubble contrast agent. Breast lymphatics were visualized by sonography and followed to the axilla to identify SLNs. A guidewire was deployed to localize the SLN. The next day, patients underwent standard tumor excision and SLN biopsy.

RESULTS

In 71 (89%) of the 80 patients, SLNs were identified and guidewires were inserted. In these patients, operative findings using conventional radioisotope and blue dye techniques confirmed that the wired nodes were SLNs. Fourteen patients were found to have metastases in SLNs. In these patients, the SLNs were identified correctly and were localized with guidewires before surgery.

CONCLUSION

SLNs may be identified and localized before surgery using contrast-enhanced sonography after injection of microbubbles.

The sentinel node procedure in breast cancer: nuclear medicine as the starting point

Axillary node status is a major prognostic factor in early breast cancer. Staging with sentinel node biopsy (SNB) leads to a substantial reduction in surgical morbidity. Recent multiinstitutional studies revealed SNB false-negative rates ranging from 5.5% to 16.7%, higher than the target (<5%) set by the 2005 guidelines of the American Society of Clinical Oncology. These alarming data point to the necessity of optimization. Dual mapping with radiotracer and blue dye, combining 2 different injection sites, and routinely using lymphoscintigraphy may improve accuracy. Factors associated with decreased sensitivity, such as prior excisional biopsy or neoadjuvant chemotherapy, should be recognized. The use of SNB in situations with a high prevalence of node positivity (large tumor, multifocality) is controversial. The risk of missed disease after negative SNB ranges from 1% to 4% in patients with T1 tumor and up to 15% in patients with T3. With peritumoral injection, internal mammary drainage is seen in about 20% of cases. Patients combining internal mammary drainage with a positive axillary sentinel node have close to a 50% probability of internal mammary involvement. Lymphoscintigraphy might thus be helpful in selecting patients for whom internal mammary radiation has a high benefit-to-risk ratio.

The impact of sentinel lymph node biopsy and magnetic resonance imaging on important outcomes among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ

The objective of this systematic review was to determine the impact of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy and breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) on important outcomes for patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. We identified no study that directly evaluated important outcomes for SLN biopsy. So, we determined the incidence of SLN metastases among patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Using American Joint Committee on Cancer criteria, the incidence of pN1 and pN1(mic) SLN metastases were 0.9% and 1.5%, respectively. Because the incidence of SLN metastasis is very low, SLN biopsy is not likely to affect important outcomes. We identified one study that directly evaluated important outcomes after breast MRI. In this study, the use of MRI did not affect local recurrence rates after breast-conserving surgery and radiation. Although MRI may identify occult multicentric or contralateral breast cancer in some patients, it may also lead to unnecessary biopsies and overtreatment.

Ductal carcinoma in situ with microinvasion: prognostic implications, long-term outcomes, and role of axillary evaluation

PURPOSE

To compare the clinical-pathologic features and long-term outcomes for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) vs. DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM) treated with breast conservation therapy (BCT), to assess the impact of microinvasion.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 393 patients with DCIS/DCISM from our database were analyzed to assess differences in clinical-pathologic features and outcomes for the two cohorts.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 8.94 years, and the mean age was 55.8 years for the entire group. The DCISM cohort was comprised of 72 of 393 patients (18.3%). Surgical evaluation of the axilla was performed in 58.3% (n = 42) of DCISM vs. 18.1% (n = 58) of DCIS, with only 1 of 42 DCISM (2.3%) vs. 0 of 58 DCIS with axillary metastasis. Surgical axillary evaluation was not an independent predictor of local-regional relapse (LRR), distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), or overall survival (OS) in Cox proportional hazards analysis (p > 0.05). For the DCIS vs. DCISM groups, respectively, the 10-year breast relapse-free survival was 89.0% vs. 90.7% (p = 0.36), DRFS was 98.5% vs. 97.9% (p = 0.78), and OS was 93.2% vs. 95.7% (p = 0.95). The presence of microinvasion did not correlate with LRR, age, presentation, race, family history, margin status, and use of adjuvant hormonal therapy (all p > 0.05). In univariate analysis, pathology (DCIS vs. DCISM) was not an independent predictor of LRR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58-4.30; p = 0.36), DRFS (HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.07-6.95; p = 0.77), or OS (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 0.28-3.82; p = 0.95).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data imply that the natural history of DCISM closely resembles that of DCIS, with a low incidence of local-regional and distant failures. On the basis of our large dataset, the incidence of axillary metastasis in DCISM appears to be small and not appear to correlate to outcomes, and thus, microinvasion alone should not be the sole criterion for more aggressive treatment.

Preoperative cytological and histological diagnosis of breast lesions: A critical review

BACKGROUND

Non-operative pathology diagnoses constitute an essential part of the work-up of breast lesions. With fine needle aspiration (FNA) and core needle biopsy (CNB) both having unique advantages, there is an increasing acceptance of CNB. This paper aims to outline the scientific basis of this trend. Additionally, we provide an update on novel techniques that derive cytological specimens from CNB (i.e., touch imprint (TI) and core wash (CW) cytology) in an attempt to get the best of both worlds.

METHODS

In addition to using the authors' experience, we performed a search of the Medline database combining the search terms "breast cancer diagnosis", "core needle biopsy", "fine needle aspiration", "touch imprint cytology", "core wash cytology" and "complications". We defined a conclusive non-operative diagnosis as "malignant" in lesions that were malignant on follow-up and "benign" in lesions that were benign on follow-up.

RESULTS

CNB was more often conclusive than FNA in benign and malignant lesions in 4 prospective studies. Although the more rapid diagnoses by FNA result in less patient anxiety during diagnostic work-up, CNB allows for fairly reliable estimation of invasion, histological type, grade, and receptor expression. CW and TI cytology seem promising techniques with conclusiveness rates that are roughly comparable to that of FNA.

CONCLUSIONS

All new suspicious breast lesions require careful non-operative investigation by CNB. However, additional cytological assessment by FNA can still be useful as a same-day diagnosis decreases patient anxiety and facilitates surgical treatment planning. TI and CW cytology techniques are promising same-day diagnosis modalities.

Current status of sentinel lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer

Axillary node status is the most important prognostic indicator for patients with invasive breast cancer. Sentinel lymph-node biopsy (SLNB) is widely accepted and the preferred procedure for identifying lymph-node metastasis. SLNB allows focused excision and pathological examination of the most likely axillary lymph nodes to receive tumor metastases while avoiding morbidities associated with complete axillary nodal dissection. Since its introduction in the early 1990s, the process of SLNB has undergone continual modification and refinement; however, the procedure varies between institutions and controversies remain. In this review, we examine the technical issues that influence the success of lymph node mapping, discuss the controversies, and summarize the indications and contraindications for axillary node mapping and biopsy in clinical practice.

Ductal carcinoma in situ and sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer

Background

The impact of sentinel lymph node biopsy on breast cancer mimicking ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a matter of debate.

Methods

We studied the rate of occurrence of sentinel lymph node metastasis in 255 breast cancer patients with pure DCIS showing no invasive components on routine pathological examination. We compared this to the rate of occurrence in 177 patients with predominant intraductal-component (IDC) breast cancers containing invasive foci equal to or less than 0.5 cm in size.

Results

Most of the clinical and pathological baseline characteristics were the same between the two groups. However, peritumoral lymphatic permeation occurred less often in the pure DCIS group than in the IDC-predominant invasive-lesion group (1.2% vs. 6.8%, p = 0.002). One patient (0.39%) with pure DCIS had two sentinel lymph nodes positive for metastasis. This rate was significantly lower than that in patients with IDC-predominant invasive lesions (6.2%; p < 0.001).

Conclusions

Because the rate of sentinel lymph node metastasis in pure DCIS is very low, sentinel lymph node biopsy can safely be omitted.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy and management of the axilla in ductal carcinoma in situ

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast historically has been a disease detected by physical examination, diagnosed by open surgical biopsy, and treated by mastectomy and axillary dissection. It is now increasingly detected by screening mammography, diagnosed by needle core biopsy, and treated by lumpectomy, with axillary dissection having been abandoned and sentinel node biopsy being used in axillary staging. However, outcomes related to sentinel node biopsy in DCIS have not been validated in well-controlled clinical trials. Current guideline recommendations are to use sentinel node biopsy when needle core biopsy is highly suspicious for invasive cancer or where there is a high-risk DCIS when lumpectomy identifies invasive breast cancer with the DCIS, or when mastectomy is performed for extensive DCIS. Routine use of sentinel node biopsy for DCIS is not supported.

The sentinel node in breast cancer

Biopsy of the sentinel lymph node now forms part of routine management in many centres dealing with early stage breast cancer. This article seeks to discuss developments over the past number of years and to summarise current practice.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in women with pT1a or "microinvasive" breast cancer

The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in pT1a and "microinvasive" breast cancer has not been extensively studied. We report our experience with SLNB in patients with "minimal" breast cancer to determine the incidence and type of SLN metastases, and to study the potential impact on their surgical or oncological management. Among some 3387 women operated upon for primary breast cancer who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy at nine institutions participating in the Rome Breast Cancer Study Group, 251 were staged pT1a or pT1mic (7.4%). There were 13 cases of sentinel lymph node metastases identified in this group of patients (5.2%), seven macrometastases and six micrometastases. Additionally, ITC were diagnosed by immunohistochemistry in four cases (1.6%). The incidence of SLN metastases was 7/174 (4%) and 6/77 (7.8%) in patients with pT1a and pT1mic tumors, respectively (p=0.2). Age and histological grade were predictive factors for SLN metastases. Chemotherapy was seldom directed by axillary node status (8/38 patients). As the incidence of SLN metastases in these patients is very small, particularly in the pT1a group, the indications for even a minimally invasive procedure, such as sentinel lymph node biopsy, should be probably individualized.