Tumour-positive sentinel node findings in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ

Breast cancer: an up-to-date review and future perspectives

Breast cancer is the most common cancer worldwide. The occurrence of breast cancer is associated with many risk factors, including genetic and hereditary predisposition. Breast cancers are highly heterogeneous. Treatment strategies for breast cancer vary by molecular features, including activation of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), hormonal receptors (estrogen receptor [ER] and progesterone receptor [PR]), gene mutations (e.g., mutations of breast cancer 1/2 [BRCA1/2] and phosphatidylinositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-kinase catalytic subunit alpha [PIK3CA]) and markers of the immune microenvironment (e.g., tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte [TIL] and programmed death-ligand 1 [PD-L1]). Early-stage breast cancer is considered curable, for which local-regional therapies (surgery and radiotherapy) are the cornerstone, with systemic therapy given before or after surgery when necessary. Preoperative or neoadjuvant therapy, including targeted drugs or immune checkpoint inhibitors, has become the standard of care for most early-stage HER2-positive and triple-negative breast cancer, followed by risk-adapted post-surgical strategies. For ER-positive early breast cancer, endocrine therapy for 5-10 years is essential. Advanced breast cancer with distant metastases is currently considered incurable. Systemic therapies in this setting include endocrine therapy with targeted agents, such as CDK4/6 inhibitors and phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitors for hormone receptor-positive disease, anti-HER2 targeted therapy for HER2-positive disease, poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors for BRCA1/2 mutation carriers and immunotherapy currently for part of triple-negative disease. Innovation technologies of precision medicine may guide individualized treatment escalation or de-escalation in the future. In this review, we summarized the latest scientific information and discussed the future perspectives on breast cancer.

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Axillary lymph node status remains the most powerful prognostic indicator in invasive breast cancer. Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a non-invasive disease and does not spread to axillary lymph nodes. The presence of an invasive component to DCIS mandates nodal evaluation through sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Quantification of the necessity of upfront SLNB for DCIS requires investigation. The aim was to establish the likelihood of having a positive SLNB (SLNB+) for DCIS and to establish parameters predictive of SLNB+.

Methods

A systematic review was performed as per the PRISMA guidelines. Prospective studies only were included. Characteristics predictive of SLNB+ were expressed as dichotomous variables and pooled as odds ratios (o.r.) and associated 95 per cent confidence intervals (c.i.) using the Mantel–Haenszel method.

Results

Overall, 16 studies including 4388 patients were included (mean patient age 54.8 (range 24 to 92) years). Of these, 72.5 per cent of patients underwent SLNB (3156 of 4356 patients) and 4.9 per cent had SLNB+ (153 of 3153 patients). The likelihood of having SLNB+ for DCIS was less than 1 per cent (o.r. <0.01, 95 per cent c.i. 0.00 to 0.01; P < 0.001, I² = 93 per cent). Palpable DCIS (o.r. 2.01, 95 per cent c.i. 0.64 to 6.24; P = 0.230, I² = 0 per cent), tumour necrosis (o.r. 3.84, 95 per cent c.i. 0.85 to 17.44; P = 0.080, I² = 83 per cent), and grade 3 DCIS (o.r. 1.34, 95 per cent c.i. 0.80 to 2.23; P = 0.270, I² = 0 per cent) all trended towards significance in predicting SLNB+.

Conclusion

While aggressive clinicopathological parameters may guide SLNB for patients with DCIS, the absolute and relative risk of SLNB+ for DCIS is less than 5 per cent and 1 per cent, respectively. Well-designed randomized controlled trials are required to establish fully the necessity of SLNB for patients diagnosed with DCIS.

Registration number

CRD42021284194 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/)

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

Microinvasive breast cancer is an uncommon pathological entity. Owing to the rarity of this condition, its surgical axillary management and overall prognosis remain controversial.

METHODS

A database was analysed to identify patients with microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who had surgery for invasive breast cancer at the European Institute of Oncology, Milan, between 1998 and 2010. Women who had undergone axillary staging by sentinel lymph node biopsy were included in the study.

RESULTS

Of 257 women with microinvasive breast cancer who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), 226 (87·9 per cent) had negative sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) and 31 had metastatic SLNs. Twelve patients had isolated tumour cells (ITCs), 14 had micrometastases and five had macrometastases in sentinel nodes. Axillary lymph node dissection was performed in 16 of the 31 patients with positive SLNs. After a median follow-up of 11 years, only one regional first event was observed in the 15 patients with positive SLNs who did not undergo axillary lymph node dissection. There were no regional first events in the 16 patients with positive SLNs who had axillary dissection.

CONCLUSION

Good disease-free and overall survival were found in women with positive SLNs and microinvasive DCIS. This study is in line with studies showing that SLNB in microinvasive DCIS may not be useful, and supports the evidence that less surgery can provide the same level of overall survival with better quality of life.

Expression of estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2, and Ki-67 in ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and DCIS with microinvasion

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) represents a heterogeneous disease in its histologic appearance and biological potential. Some women treated for DCIS subsequently develop invasive breast cancer. DCIS with microinvasion is considered as the interim stage in the progression from DCIS to invasive breast cancer. Analysis of the differences between DCIS and DCIS with microinvasion may aid in understanding the characteristic of DCIS with microinvasion and identifying biological factors determining progression of DCIS to invasive disease.Retrospective analysis of 219 cases between 2012 and 2018 was performed in our institution. The pathological results and axillary lymph nodes status were collected. Analysis of the expression of estrogen receptor (ER), progesterone receptor (PR), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER-2), and Ki-67 in pure DCIS (164 cases), and DCIS with microinvasion (55 cases) using immunohistochemistry.DCIS with microinvasion had a higher nuclear grade (P < .001) and was more likely to have sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) positivity (P = .039) than DCIS. Expression of ER, PR were significantly higher in DCIS compared with DCIS with microinvasion (P < .001, P < .001). While the expression of HER-2 in DCIS with microinvasion (56.4%) was significantly higher than in DCIS (36.6%, P = .01). Furthermore, DCIS with microinvasion was significantly more likely to have aggressive subtype (Triple-negative and HER2-enriched tumors, P = .005).Our results indicated that DCIS with microinvasion was different from pure DCIS in clinicopathologic characteristics and molecular alterations. It displayed a more aggressive biological nature than pure DCIS. It may be a distinct entity.

Is sentinel lymph node biopsy indicated in patients with a diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ? A systematic literature review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Recent discussion has suggested that some cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with high risk of invasive disease may require sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB).

METHODS

Systematic literature review identified 48 studies (9,803 DCIS patients who underwent SLNB). Separate analyses for patients diagnosed preoperatively by core sampling and patients diagnosed postoperatively by specimen pathology were conducted to determine the percentage of patients with axillary nodal involvement. Patient factors were analyzed for associations with risk of nodal involvement.

RESULTS

The mean percentage of positive SLNBs was higher in the preoperative group (5.95% vs 3.02%; P = .0201). Meta-regression analysis showed a direct association with tumor size (P = .0333) and grade (P = .00839) but not median age nor tumor upstage rate.

CONCLUSIONS

The SLNB should be routinely considered in patients with large (>2 cm) high-grade DCIS after a careful multidisciplinary discussion. In the context of breast conserving surgery, the SLNB is not routinely indicated for low- and intermediate-grade DCIS, high-grade DCIS smaller than 2 cm, or pure DCIS diagnosed by definitive surgical excision.

Is Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Indicated at Completion Mastectomy for Ductal Carcinoma In Situ?

BACKGROUND

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is recommended when mastectomy is performed for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The role of SLNB for women with DCIS who undergo mastectomy following one or more attempts at breast-conserving surgery (BCS) is uncertain. We examined the upgrade rate and SLNB yield in women who converted to mastectomy after one or more attempts at BCS for DCIS.

METHODS

All patients who underwent one or more attempts at BCS prior to conversion to mastectomy with SLNB for DCIS were identified. Margin status as the indication for mastectomy was confirmed, and comparisons were made between patients with/without upgrade on final pathology.

RESULTS

From February 2006 to November 2012, a total of 233 patients underwent completion mastectomy following one or more attempts at BCS for positive/close margins (median age 50 years; range 34-84). The median number of BCS attempts was 1 (range 1-4). Overall, 20 (9 %) patients were upgraded on final pathology; 15 (6 %) stage I, and 5 (3 %) stage II (three micrometastasis, two macrometastasis). In two of five cases with a positive SLN, invasive carcinoma was not identified in the mastectomy specimen. The only factor associated with any upgrade was the presence of micropapillary DCIS (80 vs. 55 %, with and without upgrade; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of patients with DCIS who converted to mastectomy for positive/close margins after one or more attempts at BCS, 18 (8 %) would have required second-stage axillary surgery had an SLNB not been performed, and in two (1 %) patients, the SLN provided the only evidence of invasion. These findings support the recommendation for SLNB at the time of completion mastectomy.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with breast ductal carcinoma in situ: Chinese experiences

The axillary treatment of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) remains controversial. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the roles of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with breast DCIS. A database containing the data from 262 patients diagnosed with breast DCIS and 100 patients diagnosed with DCIS with microinvasion (DCISM) who received SLNB between January 2002 and July 2014 was retrospectively analyzed. Of the 262 patients with DCIS, 9 presented with SLN metastases (3 macrometastases and 6 micrometastases). Patients with large tumors diagnosed by ultrasound or with tumors of high histological grade had a higher positive rate of SLNs than those without (P=0.037 and P<0.0001, respectively). Of the 100 patients with DCISM, 11 presented with metastases. Younger patients had a higher positive rate of SLNs (P=0.028). According to the results of this study and the systematic review of recent studies, the indications of SLNB for patients with DCIS are as follows: SLNB should be performed in all DCISM patients and in those DCIS patients who received mastectomy, and could be avoided in those who received breast-conserving surgery. However, SLNB should be recommended to patients who have high risks of harboring invasive components. The risk factors include a large, palpable tumor, a mammographic mass or a high histological grade.

The Role of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Factors Associated with Invasion in Extensive DCIS of the Breast Treated by Mastectomy: The Cinnamome Prospective Multicenter Study

Background

When invasive components are discovered at mastectomy for vacuum-assisted biopsy (VAB)-diagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), the only option available is axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). The primary aim of this prospective multicenter trial was to determine the benefit of performing upfront sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy for these patients. The secondary aim was to determine DCIS factors associated with microinvasion or invasion.

Methods

The SLN procedure was performed during mastectomy, and for positive SLN an ALND was performed during the same intervention. A tissue microarray containing DCIS lesions from the mastectomy specimens was subsequently performed.

Results

From May 2008 to December 2010, 228 patients were enrolled from 14 French cancer centers, including 192 eligible patients with pure DCIS on VAB and successful SLN procedures. ALND was avoided for 51 [67 %; 95 % confidence interval (CI), 56–77 %] of all the patients who had microinvasive DCIS or DCIS associated with invasive carcinoma at mastectomy and a negative SLN. Of the 192 patients, 76 (39 %) with VAB-diagnosed DCIS were upgraded after mastectomy to micro (n = 20) or invasive disease (n = 56). The rate of positive SLN for patients with DCIS on VAB was 14 %. High nuclear grade of DCIS was associated with greater risk of microinvasion and invasion, and HER2-amplified DCIS was associated with greater risk of invasion.

Conclusions

Underestimation of invasive components is high when DCIS is diagnosed by VAB in patients undergoing mastectomy. Upfront SLN for patients with VAB-diagnosed extensive DCIS avoids unnecessary ALND for two-thirds of patients with micro or invasive disease on mastectomy.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1245/s10434-015-4476-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Re-evaluating the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in microinvasive breast carcinoma

The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in microinvasive breast carcinoma is unclear. We examined the incidence of lymph node metastasis in patients with microinvasive carcinoma who underwent surgery at our institution. Retrospective review of our pathology database was performed (1994-2012). Of 7000 patients surgically treated for invasive breast carcinoma, 99 (1%) were classified as microinvasive carcinoma. Axillary staging was performed in 81 patients (64, sentinel lymph node biopsy; 17, axillary lymph node excision). Seven cases (9%) showed isolated tumor/epithelial cells in sentinel nodes. Three of these seven cases showed reactive changes in lymph nodes, papillary lesions in the breast with or without displaced epithelial cells within biopsy site tract, or immunohistochemical (estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2) discordance between the primary tumor in the breast and epithelial cells in the lymph node, consistent with iatrogenically transported epithelial cells rather than true metastasis. The remaining four cases included two cases, each with a single cytokeratin-positive cell in the subcapsular sinus detected by immunohistochemistry only, and two cases with isolated tumor cells singly and in small clusters (<20 cells per cross-section) by hematoxylin and eosin and immunohistochemistry. The exact nature of cytokeratin-positive cells in the former two cases could not be determined and might still have represented iatrogenically displaced cells. In the final analysis, only two cases (3%) had isolated tumor cells. Three of these four cases had additional axillary lymph nodes excised, which were all negative for tumor cells. At a median follow-up of 37 months (range 6-199 months), none of these patients had axillary recurrences. Our results show very low incidence of sentinel lymph node involvement (3%), only as isolated tumor cells, in microinvasive carcinoma patients. None of our cases showed micrometastases or macrometastasis. We recommend reassessment of the routine practice of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with microinvasive carcinoma.

Is DCIS breast cancer, and how do I treat it?

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is a pre-invasive stage of breast cancer with a heterogeneous clinical behaviour. Since the introduction of mammographic screening programmes, the incidence of DCIS has shown a dramatic increase. Treatment should focus on the prevention of progression to invasive disease. If progression occurs, poorly differentiated DCIS frequently gives rise to grade III invasive breast cancer, whereas well differentiated DCIS more often recurs as grade I invasive disease. However, at present, validated diagnostic test are lacking to predict progression accurately. The majority of women with DCIS are suitable for breast conserving therapy. Obtaining clear surgical margins is the most important goal of a local excision. Radiotherapy is effective in reducing the risk of local recurrence with about 50 % in all subgroups of patients with DCIS. (Breast cancer specific) survival of women with DCIS is excellent, and radiotherapy does not further improve this. Future research should be directed in enabling to select women who have a high risk of--invasive--recurrence, so in which radiotherapy should be standard part of the breast conserving approach, and those women with a more indolent lesion, in which after surgery a watchful waiting approach can be followed.

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.

Role of RNA binding protein HuR in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

HuR is a ubiquitously expressed RNA-binding protein that modulates gene expression at the post-transcriptional level. It is predominantly nuclear, but can shuttle between the nucleus and the cytoplasm. While in the cytoplasm HuR can stabilize its target transcripts, many of which encode proteins involved in carcinogenesis. While cytoplasmic HuR expression is a marker of reduced survival in breast cancer, its role in precursor lesions of malignant diseases is unclear. To address this we explored HuR expression in atypical ductal hyperplasia (ADH) and in ductal in situ carcinomas (DCIS). We show that cytoplasmic HuR expression is elevated in both ADH and DCIS when compared to normal controls, and that this expression associated with high grade, progesterone receptor negativity and microinvasion and/or tumour-positive sentinel nodes of the DCIS. To study the mechanisms of HuR in breast carcinogenesis, HuR expression was silenced in an immortalized breast epithelial cell line (184B5Me), which led to reduction in anchorage-independent growth, increased programmed cell death and inhibition of invasion. In addition, we identified two novel target transcripts (CTGF and RAB31) that are regulated by HuR and that bind HuR protein in this cell line. Our results show that HuR is aberrantly expressed at early stages of breast carcinogenesis and that its inhibition can lead to suppression of this process. ArrayExpress Accession No. E-MEXP-3035.

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.

The management of ductal intraepithelial neoplasia (DIN): open controversies and guidelines of the Istituto Europeo di Oncologia (IEO), Milan, Italy

The management of ductal intraepithelial neoplasia (DIN) has substantially changed over the past 30 years, as its incidence has increased (from 2-3% to more than 20%), mainly due to the widespread use of mammography screening. This article describes not only the more widespread theoretical concepts on DIN but also the differences in the practical applications of the theory between different countries, different oncology specialists, and different cancer centers. Papers related to the international multicentre-randomized trials and retrospective studies were analyzed. We include articles and papers published between 1993 and 2010 related to patients with DIN, and abstracts and reports from MEDLINE and other sources were indentified. The standard of care for DIN consists of (a) breast conservative surgery (mastectomy is still indicated in large lesions--masses or microcalcifications--in about 30% of cases); (b) radiotherapy (RT) after conservative surgery, and (c) medical treatment in estrogen receptors-positive patients. However, most studies have shown significant differences between theory and practical application. Moreover, there are differences regarding (a) the indications of sentinel lymph node biopsy, (b) the definition and identification of low-risk DIN subgroups that can avoid RT and tamoxifen, and (c) the research into new alternative drugs in adjuvant medical therapy. A general agreement on the best management of DIN does not exist as yet. New large trials are needed in order to define the best management of DIN patients which is (in most respects) still complex and controversial.

Predicting invasion in patients with DCIS in the preoperative percutaneous biopsy

When ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is suspected in mammography, core needle biopsy or vacuum assisted biopsy is recommended. However, invasion remains undetected with percutaneous biopsy techniques in 10-20% of the patients. Our aim was to evaluate the prevalence of and predictive factors for invasion in the surgical specimen in patients with DCIS in the preoperative biopsy. Sixty-seven consecutive participants of the Helsinki City Mammography Screening program with DCIS in the preoperative percutaneous biopsy were included. The palpability, the mammographical size and appearance and the visibility of the lesion in breast ultrasound were evaluate as factors predictive for invasion, as well as the histopathological features of DCIS in the preoperative biopsy. Twenty patients had invasion in the surgical specimen. The only predictive factor for invasion was the visibility of the lesion in ultrasound, but even this finding failed to reach statistical significance. Thirteen of the 26 patients with lesions visible in US had invasion in their surgical specimens, while only seven of the 41 patients without such a lesion had invasive or microinvasive cancer, Pc = 0.0686. In conclusion, the visibility of the lesion in US may predict detecting invasion in the surgical specimen in patients with DCIS in the preoperative biopsy.

Recent advances and current controversies in the management of DCIS of the breast

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is commonly diagnosed today, mainly due to widespread use of screening mammography. Despite a better understanding of its biological behavior, many issues regarding its optimal management remain controversial. The biological behavior of DCIS has been associated with distinct molecular and histological features (such as expression of COX2, Ki67, c-erbB2, p53 mutation, presence or absence of comedonecrosis, nuclear grade, hormone receptor status, etc.). Recent advances in the diagnosis of DCIS include using magnetic resonance imaging, and the use of stereotactic-guided directional vacuum-assisted biopsy (DVAB). Ductoscopy and ductal lavage have a limited role in the management of DCIS. Surgical treatment of DCIS includes simple local excision to various forms of wider excision (segmental resection or quadrantectomy), or even mastectomy (either simple or skin-sparing). Radiotherapy following breast-conserving surgery significantly reduces local recurrence rates. Axillary lymph node dissection is not required for the management of DCIS; however, during the last decade, sentinel lymph node biopsy is increasingly used to exclude the presence of axillary metastases (when invasive disease is present within the DCIS). This approach has many advantages (including the avoidance of a second surgery if invasive disease is diagnosed within the DCIS) and should be considered when there is an increased probability for the presence of invasive breast cancer within the DCIS. The role of other minimally invasive methods (such as the "therapeutic" application of the DVAB technique, radiofrequency ablation, laser therapy, cryotherapy and brachytherapy) in the management of small DCIS remains unproven. Tamoxifen should be considered in the management of selected patients with DCIS, such as patients with hormone receptor positive DCIS, young patients, and patients without risk factors for potential side effects. Additionally, and controversial, there is evidence that aromatase inhibitors may be better than tamoxifen in the management of DCIS.

Meta-analysis of sentinel node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast

BACKGROUND

The need for sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is debated. Advocates recommend such biopsy based on a high incidence of SLN involvement in some series. Opponents discourage SLN biopsy based on a perceived low incidence of nodal involvement in this setting. These contradictory arguments are generally based on small studies. The present study is a meta-analysis of the reported data on the incidence of SLN metastasis in patients with DCIS.

METHODS

A search of electronic databases identified studies reporting the frequency of SLN metastases in DCIS. The random-effects method was used to combine data.

RESULTS

Twenty-two published series were included in the meta-analysis. The estimate for the incidence of SLN metastases in patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS was 7.4 (95 per cent confidence interval (c.i.) 6.2 to 8.9) per cent compared with 3.7 (95 per cent c.i. 2.8 to 4.8) per cent in patients with a definitive (postoperative) diagnosis of DCIS alone. This was a significant difference with an odds ratio of 2.11 (95 per cent c.i. 1.15 to 2.93).

CONCLUSION

Patients with a preoperative diagnosis of DCIS should be considered for SLN biopsy.

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

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study is to assess the role of sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in patients with pure ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast (DCIS) as a rationale for recommending the best managing option for the treatment of such patients in daily practice.

SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA

DCIS cannot give rise to axillary metastases by definition. Axillary dissection is therefore not indicated. The role of SLN biopsy in the management of DCIS has not yet been established.

METHODS

From March 1996 to September 2006, 854 patients with pure DCIS underwent SLN biopsy at the European Institute of Oncology. Clinical and pathologic data were prospectively collected. When previous surgery or stereotactic biopsy had been performed elsewhere, all the histopathological preparations were reviewed. Patients with microinvasion were excluded from this investigation. Lymphatic mapping was performed using a radiocolloid technique.

RESULTS

SLN metastases were detected in 12 (1.4%) DCIS patients. In 7 cases, only micrometastases (<2 mm) were diagnosed and in 5 cases macrometastases. In addition, isolated tumoral cells (ITC) (<0.2 mm) were identified in 4 additional patients. Eleven patients underwent complete axillary dissection. None of these patients had additional positive axillary lymph nodes.

CONCLUSIONS

Because of the low prevalence of metastatic involvement, SLN biopsy should not be considered a standard procedure in the treatment of all patients with DCIS. The sole criteria for proposing SLN biopsy in DCIS should be when there exists any uncertainty regarding the presence of invasive foci at definitive histology.

Sentinel node biopsy with intraoperative diagnosis in patients undergoing skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate breast reconstruction

AIMS

False negative cases in the intraoperative assessment of sentinel node (SN) metastases in breast cancer prompt for a secondary axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Such ALND is technically demanding and prone to complications in patients with immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) if there is a microvascular anastomosis or the thoracodorsal pedicle of a latissimus dorsi flap in the axilla. This study aims to evaluate the feasibility of the intraoperative diagnosis of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in breast cancer patients undergoing IBR.

METHODS

Sixty-two consecutive breast cancer patients undergoing SNB with the intraoperative diagnosis of SN metastases simultaneously with mastectomy and IBR between 2004 and 2006 were included in this study. Results of the SNB and especially the false negative cases in the intraoperative diagnosis were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eleven patients had tumor positive SN. Nine of these cases were detected intraoperatively. The two false negative cases in the intraoperative diagnosis constituted of isolated tumor cells only.

CONCLUSIONS

Our present study suggests that SNB with intraoperative diagnosis of SN metastases is feasible in patients undergoing IBR if the risk of nodal metastasis is low and the sensitivity of intraoperative SNB diagnosis is high.

Sentinel node biopsy is important in mastectomy for ductal carcinoma in situ

BACKGROUND

There is uncertainty about the utility of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and its potential to avoid axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS.

METHODS

A review was conducted of 179 patients who underwent mastectomy with sentinel node biopsy for DCIS without invasion or microinvasion on premastectomy pathology review.

RESULTS

The sentinel node identification rate was 98.9% (177/179). Twenty (11.3%) of 177 mastectomies for DCIS had a positive SNB: two micrometastasis (pN1mi) and 18 isolated tumor cells [pN0(i+)]. Unsuspected invasive cancer was found in 20 (11.2%) of 179 mastectomies, eight T1mic, five T1a, three T1b, and four T1c tumors. Sentinel nodes were identified in 19 of 20 patients with invasive cancer and four were positive: one pN1mi and three pN0(i+). Eighteen of 19 patients with unsuspected invasive cancer were able to avoid axillary dissection on the basis of SNB results. Of the 159 patients whose final pathology revealed DCIS without invasion, a sentinel node was identified in 158 (99.4%). The SNB was positive in 16 patients (10.1%): one pN1mi and 15 pN0(i+). Three patients underwent ALND on the basis of positive SNBs and in each the SNB was the only positive node.

CONCLUSIONS

11% of patients undergoing mastectomy for DCIS were found to have invasive cancer on final pathology. The use of SNB during mastectomy for DCIS allowed nearly all such patients to avoid axillary dissection. These results support routine use of SNB during mastectomy for DCIS.

Outcomes for Women With Ductal Carcinoma-in-Situ and a Positive Sentinel Node: A Multi-Institutional Audit

BACKGROUND

A positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) has been reported in 6% to 13% of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). Although it is well established that nodal status for invasive disease is prognostically important, the clinical relevance of a positive SLN in patients with DCIS remains undetermined.

METHODS

SLN biopsy was performed on 470 high-risk patients with DCIS (22% of all patients with DCIS) at 3 institutions. Of these, 43 (9%) had SLN metastases. Pathology findings of positive cases were reviewed, and follow-up was obtained. At 2 of the 3 institutions, data were also collected on DCIS patients who had negative findings on SLN biopsy. For these 414 patients, univariate analyses of tumor characteristics were performed to identify factors associated with node positivity.

RESULTS

Extensive disease requiring mastectomy (p = 0.02) and the presence of necrosis (p = 0.04) were associated with an increased risk of nodal positivity. Three (7%) of the 43 SLN-positive patients had macrometastases (pN1), 4 (9%) had micrometastases (pN1mi), and 36 (84%) had single tumor cells or small clusters (pN0(i+)). Of the 25 women that underwent completion axillary dissection, one was found to have a macrometastasis. On pathological review of the primary lesion, 2 (5%) of 43 patints were found to have microinvasion, and 2 (5%) lymphovascular invasion. Nine of 43 (21%) high-risk DCIS patients with a positive SLN and 9/470 (2%) of all high-risk DCIS patients were upstaged to AJCC stage I or II as a result of the SLN biopsy. At a median (range) follow-up of 27 (3-88) months, 1 patient had developed hepatic metastases. This patient had immunohistochemistry detected isolated tumor cells in her SLN (N0(i+)), and upon pathologic review, was found to have high-grade DCIS with microinvasion.

CONCLUSION

SLN biopsy for high-risk DCIS patients is a mean of detecting those who may have unrecognized invasive disease and therefore are at risk for distant disease.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in staging small (up to 15 mm) breast carcinomas. Results from a European multi-institutional study

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has become the preferred method for the nodal staging of early breast cancer, but controversy exists regarding its universal use and consequences in small tumors. 2929 cases of breast carcinomas not larger than 15 mm and staged with SLN biopsy with or without axillary dissection were collected from the authors' institutions. The pathology of the SLNs included multilevel hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining. Cytokeratin immunohistochemistry (IHC) was commonly used for cases negative with HE staining. Variables influencing SLN involvement and non-SLN involvement were studied with logistic regression. Factors that influenced SLN involvement included tumor size, multifocality, grade and age. Small tumors up to 4 mm (including in situ and microinvasive carcinomas) seem to have SLN involvement in less than 10%. Non-SLN metastases were associated with tumor grade, the ratio of involved SLNs and SLN involvement type. Isolated tumor cells were not likely to be associated with further nodal load, whereas micrometastases had some subsets with low risk of non-SLN involvement and subsets with higher proportion of further nodal spread. In situ and microinvasive carcinomas have a very low risk of SLN involvement, therefore, these tumors might not need SLN biopsy for staging, and this may be the approach used for very small invasive carcinomas. If an SLN is involved, isolated tumor cells are rarely if ever associated with non-SLN metastases, and subsets of micrometastatic SLN involvement may be approached similarly. With macrometastases the risk of non-SLN involvement increases, and further axillary treatment should be generally indicated.

Is there an indication for sentinel node biopsy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast? A review

Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast is defined as a proliferation of malignant epithelial cells within breast ducts without evidence of invasion through the basement membrane. The detection rate of DCIS of the breast has dramatically increased since the mid-1980s as the result of the widespread use of screening mammography. DCIS currently represents about 15-25% of all breast cancers detected in population screening programmes. Although inherently a non-invasive disease, occult invasion with the potential of lymph node metastases may occur. Where performing an axillary lymph node dissection-or-not for DCIS used to be an important dilemma, the same now holds for the sentinel node biopsy. This article reviews the potential role of the sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in patients with DCIS. We conclude that based on the current literature, there is in general no role for a SNB in DCIS. A SNB should only be considered in patients with an excisional biopsy diagnosis of high risk DCIS (grade III with palpable mass or large tumour area by imaging) as well as in patients undergoing mastectomy after a core or excisional biopsy diagnosis of DCIS, although SNB may be contraindicated in many of the latter patients because of lesion size and/or multifocality. Even in these patients the value of a positive SN, containing mostly isolated tumour cells, is questionable.