Comparison of the sentinel node procedure between patients with multifocal and unifocal breast cancer in the EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS Trial: identification rate and nodal outcome. Eur J Cancer. 2013;49:2093-2100. [PMID: 23522754 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2013.02.017]

Strict versus Liberal Use of Sentinel Node Biopsy in Breast Cancer Surgery: Any Clinical Outcome Differences? A 20-Year Clinical Experience

Introduction

As applied to early breast cancer (BC) patients, sentinel node biopsy (SNB) has undergone major changes over the years, especially concerning the widening of indication criteria or skipping systematic axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) after a positive SN. We aimed to ascertain whether a strict versus a more liberal use of SNB resulted in different clinical outcomes in our clinical experience.

Methods

We studied consecutive BC patients undergoing SNB between January 1, 2000, and March 31, 2020. There were 1,587 patients and 1,634 SNB procedures. Cases were divided into two study groups: the "strict" SNB group (unifocal tumors up to 35 mm in which ALND was always performed for a positive SN, amounting to 1,183 SNBs), and the "liberal" SNB group (extended tumor size up to selected T3 cases, as well as multifocal or bilateral disease, and patients with previous contralateral BC, not always followed by ALND after a positive SN, amounting to 451 SNBs). Patients were closely followed up to the end of the study.

Results

Clinico-pathological variables were strikingly different between study groups, with the liberal group showing a higher risk profile. Cox regression analysis for disease recurrence did not show significant differences in axillary, lymph node, or locoregional recurrence rates or distant relapse. There were no differences in survival between groups.

Conclusion

It seems reasonable to adopt the liberal SNB approach, as the goal of surgical management in early BC patients must be attaining optimal locoregional disease control, no matter the differences in distant metastatic spread rates across different BC risk profiles.

Lymph node metastasis in cancer progression: molecular mechanisms, clinical significance and therapeutic interventions

Lymph nodes (LNs) are important hubs for metastatic cell arrest and growth, immune modulation, and secondary dissemination to distant sites through a series of mechanisms, and it has been proved that lymph node metastasis (LNM) is an essential prognostic indicator in many different types of cancer. Therefore, it is important for oncologists to understand the mechanisms of tumor cells to metastasize to LNs, as well as how LNM affects the prognosis and therapy of patients with cancer in order to provide patients with accurate disease assessment and effective treatment strategies. In recent years, with the updates in both basic and clinical studies on LNM and the application of advanced medical technologies, much progress has been made in the understanding of the mechanisms of LNM and the strategies for diagnosis and treatment of LNM. In this review, current knowledge of the anatomical and physiological characteristics of LNs, as well as the molecular mechanisms of LNM, are described. The clinical significance of LNM in different anatomical sites is summarized, including the roles of LNM playing in staging, prognostic prediction, and treatment selection for patients with various types of cancers. And the novel exploration and academic disputes of strategies for recognition, diagnosis, and therapeutic interventions of metastatic LNs are also discussed.

Contrast-enhanced and indirect computed tomography lymphangiography accurately identifies the cervical lymphocenter at risk for metastasis in pet dogs with spontaneously occurring oral neoplasia

For dogs with oral tumors, cervical lymph node (LN) metastasis alters treatment and prognosis. It is therefore prudent to make an accurate determination of the clinical presence (cN+ neck) or absence (cN0 neck) of metastasis prior to treatment. Currently, surgical LN extirpation with histopathology is the gold standard for a diagnosis of metastasis. Yet, recommendations to perform elective neck dissection (END) for staging are rare due to morbidity. Sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping with indirect computed tomography lymphangiography (ICTL) followed by targeted biopsy (SLNB) is an alternative option to END. In this prospective study, SLN mapping followed by bilateral END of all mandibular LNs (MLNs) and medial retropharyngeal LNs (MRLNs) was performed in 39 dogs with spontaneously occurring oral neoplasia. A SLN was identified by ICTL in 38 (97%) dogs. Lymphatic drainage patterns were variable although most often the SLN was identified as a single ipsilateral MLN. In the 13 dogs (33%) with histopathologically confirmed LN metastasis, ICTL correctly identified the draining lymphocentrum in all (100%). Metastasis was confined to the SLN in 11 dogs (85%); 2 dogs (15%) had metastasis beyond the SLN ipsilaterally. Contrast enhanced CT features had good accuracy in predicting metastasis, with short axis measurements less than 10.5 mm most predictive. ICTL imaging features alone were unable to predict metastasis. Cytologic or histopathologic SLN sampling is recommended prior to treatment to inform clinical decision-making. This is the largest study to show potential clinical utility of minimally invasive ICTL for cervical LN evaluation in canine oral tumors.

Management of the Axilla in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) and ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations on the best strategies for the management and on the best timing and treatment (surgical and radiotherapeutic) of the axilla for patients with early-stage breast cancer.

METHODS

Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) and ASCO convened a Working Group and Expert Panel to develop evidence-based recommendations informed by a systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

This guideline endorsed two recommendations of the ASCO 2017 guideline for the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early-stage breast cancer and expanded on that guideline with recommendations for radiotherapy interventions, timing of staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and mapping modalities. Overall, the ASCO 2017 guideline, seven high-quality systematic reviews, 54 unique studies, and 65 corollary trials formed the evidentiary basis of this guideline.

RECOMMENDATIONS

Recommendations are issued for each of the objectives of this guideline: (1) To determine which patients with early-stage breast cancer require axillary staging, (2) to determine whether any further axillary treatment is indicated for women with early-stage breast cancer who did not receive NAC and are sentinel lymph node-negative at diagnosis, (3) to determine which axillary strategy is indicated for women with early-stage breast cancer who did not receive NAC and are pathologically sentinel lymph node-positive at diagnosis (after a clinically node-negative presentation), (4) to determine what axillary treatment is indicated and what the best timing of axillary treatment for women with early-stage breast cancer is when NAC is used, and (5) to determine which are the best methods for identifying sentinel nodes.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines.

Development and validation of nomograms for predicting axillary non-SLN metastases in breast cancer patients with 1-2 positive sentinel lymph node macro-metastases: a retrospective analysis of two independent cohorts

BACKGROUND

It is reported that appropriately 50% of early breast cancer patients with 1-2 positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) micro-metastases could not benefit from axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) or breast-conserving surgery with whole breast irradiation. However, whether patients with 1-2 positive SLN macro-metastases could benefit from ALND remains unknown. The aim of our study was to develop and validate nomograms for assessing axillary non-SLN metastases in patients with 1-2 positive SLN macro-metastases, using their pathological features alone or in combination with STMs.

METHODS

We retrospectively reviewed pathological features and STMs of 1150 early breast cancer patients from two independent cohorts. Best subset regression was used for feature selection and signature building. The risk score of axillary non-SLN metastases was calculated for each patient as a linear combination of selected predictors that were weighted by their respective coefficients.

RESULTS

The pathology-based nomogram possessed a strong discrimination ability for axillary non-SLN metastases, with an area under the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve (AUC) of 0.727 (95% CI: 0.682-0.771) in the primary cohort and 0.722 (95% CI: 0.653-0.792) in the validation cohort. The addition of CA 15-3 and CEA can significantly improve the performance of pathology-based nomogram in the primary cohort (AUC: 0.773 (0.732-0.815) vs. 0.727 (0.682-0.771), P < 0.001) and validation cohort (AUC: (0.777 (0.713-0.840) vs. 0.722 (0.653-0.792), P < 0.001). Decision curve analysis demonstrated that the nomograms were clinically useful.

CONCLUSION

The nomograms based on pathological features can be used to identify axillary non-SLN metastases in breast cancer patients with 1-2 positive SLN. In addition, the combination of STMs and pathological features can identify patients with patients with axillary non-SLN metastases more accurately than pathological characteristics alone.

Practical consensus recommendations regarding the management of sentinel lymph node issues in early breast cancer

Axillary lymph node involvement is a very important poor prognostic factor in the clinical staging and management of breast cancer patients. Traditionally, axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) has been used for determining the status of the axillary lymph nodes. More recently the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) procedure has gained wider acceptance as the standard of care, having the advantage of being less invasivewhile providing good accuracy. This expert group used data from published literature, practical experience and opinion of a large group of academic oncologists to arrive at these practical consensus recommendations in regards with the use of the two different procedures and other issues in patients with early breast cancer for the benefit of community oncologists.

Evaluating the current evidence to support therapeutic mammoplasty or breast-conserving surgery as an alternative to mastectomy in the treatment of multifocal and multicentric breast cancers

The oncological safety of treating multiple ipsilateral breast cancers (MIBCs) with types of breast conserving surgery (BCS) compared to mastectomy remains uncertain. This is predicated on the absence of any randomised controlled trials or high-quality protocol defined prospective cohort studies. A single recently published systematic review by the first author, reports its summarised results in this review. Fundamentally the important question is the evaluation of clinical safety following BCS compared to mastectomy for treating MIBC, which is reported in only six studies. Consequently, current evidence doesn't support the latest St Gallen consensus suggesting the possibility of using BCS to treat all MIBC. There is minimal comparative outcomes data on multicentric (MC) cancers compared to multifocal (MF) cancers comparing BCS or mastectomy. There is also poor evidence of clinical outcomes following therapeutic mammoplasty (TM) for MIBC compared to mastectomy. The potential recommendation of two potential radiotherapy boosts to separate lumpectomy sites following BCS for MC cancers remains a novel treatment concept whose feasibility will be evaluated in the forthcoming NIHR funded randomised feasibility trial called MIAMI. This is a world first attempt to assess the feasibility of a randomised trial design alongside the on-going Alliance registry study (ACOSOG, American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z11102) in the USA, in which there is no comparative evaluation of mastectomy outcomes. The MIAMI trial aims to assess the clinical safety of multiple lumpectomies combined with TM compared to the standard of mastectomy in MIBC stratified by MF or MC cancers. There is limited evidence on the impacts of inter-tumoral heterogeneity relating to breast cancer subtypes in relation to individualised treatments and recommendations for types of breast surgery. Recent studies have highlighted the potential contributions of stromal epigenetic changes that are currently poorly understood regarding their contributions to either clinical unifocal or MF cancers.

Systematic review of the impact of breast-conserving surgery on cancer outcomes of multiple ipsilateral breast cancers

Background

The clinical effectiveness of treating ipsilateral multifocal (MF) and multicentric (MC) breast cancers using breast‐conserving surgery (BCS) compared with the standard of mastectomy is uncertain. Inconsistencies relate to definitions, incidence, staging and intertumoral heterogeneity. The primary aim of this systematic review was to compare clinical outcomes after BCS versus mastectomy for MF and MC cancers, collectively defined as multiple ipsilateral breast cancers (MIBC).

Methods

Comprehensive electronic searches were undertaken to identify complete papers published in English between May 1988 and July 2015, primarily comparing clinical outcomes of BCS and mastectomy for MIBC. All study designs were included, and studies were appraised critically using the Newcastle–Ottawa Scale. The characteristics and results of identified studies were summarized.

Results

Twenty‐four retrospective studies were included in the review: 17 comparative studies and seven case series. They included 3537 women with MIBC undergoing BCS; breast cancers were defined as MF in 2677 women, MC in 292, and reported as MIBC in 568. Six studies evaluated MIBC treated by BCS or mastectomy, with locoregional recurrence (LRR) rates of 2–23 per cent after BCS at median follow‐up of 59·5 (i.q.r. 56–81) months. BCS and mastectomy showed apparently equivalent rates of LRR (risk ratio 0·94, 95 per cent c.i. 0·65 to 1·36). Thirteen studies compared BCS in women with MIBC versus those with unifocal cancers, reporting LRR rates of 2–40 per cent after BCS at a median follow‐up of 64 (i.q.r. 57–73) months. One high‐quality study reported 10‐year actuarial LRR rates of 5·5 per cent for BCS in 300 women versus 6·5 per cent for mastectomy among 887 women.

Conclusion

The available studies were mainly of moderate quality, historical and underpowered, with limited follow‐up and biased case selection favouring BCS rather than mastectomy for low‐risk patients. The evidence was inconclusive, weakening support for the St Gallen consensus and supporting a future randomized trial.

Personal history of proliferative breast disease with atypia and risk of multifocal breast cancer

BACKGROUND

A history of proliferative breast disease with atypia (PBDA) may be indicative of an increased risk not just of breast cancer but also of a more aggressive form of breast cancer.

METHODS

Multifocal breast cancer (MFBC), defined as 2 or more tumors in the same breast upon a diagnosis of cancer, is associated with a poorer prognosis than unifocal (single-tumor) breast cancer. PBDA, including atypical ductal hyperplasia and atypical lobular hyperplasia, is a known risk factor for breast cancer. Using New Hampshire Mammography Network data collected for 3567 women diagnosed with incident breast cancer from 2004 to 2014, this study assessed the risk of MFBC associated with a previous diagnosis of PBDA.

RESULTS

Women with a history of PBDA were found to be twice as likely to be subsequently diagnosed with MFBC as women with no history of benign breast disease (BBD; odds ratio [OR], 2.23; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.08-4.61). Ductal carcinoma in situ on initial biopsy was associated with a 2-fold increased risk of MFBC in comparison with invasive cancer (OR, 2.13; 95% CI, 1.58-2.88). BBD and proliferative BBD without atypia were not associated with MFBC.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with a history of previous PBDA may be at increased risk for MFBC. Women with a history of PBDA may benefit from additional presurgical clinical workup. Cancer 2018;124:1350-7. © 2017 American Cancer Society.

Characterisation of multifocal breast cancer using the 70-gene signature in clinical low-risk patients enrolled in the EORTC 10041/BIG 03-04 MINDACT trial

BACKGROUND

In multifocal breast cancer, guidelines recommend basing adjuvant systemic treatment decisions on characteristics of the largest lesion, disregarding multifocality as an independent prognosticator. We assessed the association between multifocal disease and both the 70-gene signature (70-GS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in clinical low-risk breast cancer patients enrolled in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer 10041/BIG 03-04 Microarray In Node-negative and 1 to 3 positive lymph node Disease may Avoid ChemoTherapy (MINDACT) trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The analysed population consisted of enrolled patients in the MINDACT trial with clinical low-risk disease, defined by a modified Adjuvant! Online cut-off for the 10-year risk of recurrent disease or death. Eligibility criteria of MINDACT dictate that patients with multifocal disease could be included if the different lesions had similar pathological characteristics. The presence of multifocal disease was deducted from the case report form (CRF)-question for sum of diameter for all invasive tumour foci. Clinicopathological characteristics and gene expression of patients with unifocal and multifocal (largest lesion) disease were compared. Subsequently, the association between multifocal disease and the 70-GS was evaluated as well as the association between multifocality and 5-year DMFS.

RESULTS

The study included 3090 clinical low-risk patients with unifocal and 238 patients with multifocal disease. Apart from a higher prevalence of lobular tumours (21.8% versus 10.8%, by local pathology), we did not observe differences in baseline characteristics between multifocal and unifocal tumours. Patients with multifocal tumours were more likely to be at high genomic risk as compared to patients with unifocal tumours (22.7% versus 17.3%, odds ratio [OR] 1.45, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.02-2.07, P = 0.038). We did not find a significant association between tumour focality and DMFS (97.1% for unifocal versus 96.9% for multifocal, hazard ratio [HR] = 1.55, 95% CI 0.68-3.46, P = 0.172), nor a signal for a potential interaction between the prognostic effect of the 70-GS and focality of the tumour regarding DMFS.

CONCLUSION

In the group of clinical low-risk MINDACT patients, multifocal tumours were more likely to have a high-risk 70-GS profile compared to unifocal tumours. We did not observe a significant interaction between multifocality and the 70-GS with respect to survival without distant metastasis in these patients.

Is breast conservative surgery a reasonable option in multifocal or multicentric tumors?

The incidence of multifocal (MF) and multicentric (MC) carcinomas varies widely among clinical studies, depending on definitions and methods for pathological sampling. Magnetic resonance imaging is increasingly used because it can help identify additional and conventionally occult tumors with high sensitivity. However, false positive lesions might incorrectly influence treatment decisions. Therefore, preoperative biopsies must be performed to avoid unnecessary surgery. Most studies have shown higher lymph node involvement rates in MF/MC tumors than in unifocal tumors. However, the rate of local recurrences is usually low after breast conservative treatment (BCT) of MC/MF tumors. It has been suggested that BCT is a reasonable option for MC/MF tumors in women aged 50-69 years, with small tumors and absence of extensive ductal carcinoma in situ. A meta-analysis showed an apparent decreased overall survival in MC/MF tumors but data are controversial. Surgery should achieve both acceptable cosmetic results and negative margins, which requires thorough preoperative radiological workup and localization of lesions. Boost radiotherapy techniques must be evaluated since double boosts might result in increased toxicity, namely fibrosis. In conclusion, BCT is feasible in selected patients with MC/MF but the choice of surgery must be discussed in a multidisciplinary team comprising at least radiologists, surgeons and radiotherapists.

Conservative surgery for multifocal/multicentric breast cancer

Multifocal (MF) and multicentric (MC) breast cancer is regularly considered a relative contraindication for breast-conserving therapy (BCT). There are two reasons for this wide spread notion: However, we concur that if optimal 'cytoreductive surgery' is achieved this will result in good local control (i.e. in-breast relapse <10% at 10 years). This can only be achieved on the basis of the right imaging, image guidance for non-palpable foci, and tumor free (invasive as well as ductal carcinoma in situ) margins after adequate pathological assessment. Surgery must then be followed by whole breast irradiation and systemic treatments as indicated by primary cancer biology. Careful planning and adaptive application of oncoplastic techniques will result in an optimal cosmetic results. The meticulous work of Roland Holland and coworkers(1) in the early 1980's on whole breast specimen showed invasive foci at more then 2 cm distance from the invasive primary cancer in more then 40% of specimen. Although multiple tumor foci may occur in up to 60% of mastectomy specimens, equivalent survival outcomes were observed in prospective trials comparing BCT and mastectomy for clinically unifocal lesions, suggesting that the majority of these foci are not, or do not become, biologically relevant or clinically significant with appropriate treatment. As diagnostic tools advance, MF and MC tumors are more commonly diagnosed. Cancers that previously would have been classified as unifocal now can be detected as MF or MC. In addition, locoregional treatment modalities have improved significantly over the past decade. More recent studies reflect these advances in diagnosis and treatment. Studies evaluated staging MRI showed that up to 19% of woman with diagnosed breast cancer harbor a second malignant ipsilateral lesion. These findings should only have consequences when additional lesions are proven cancer. Multiple enhancing lesions on MRI are in itself not an indication for a mastectomy. The Z0011 trial and the AMAROS trial demonstrated a similar phenomenon for axillary treatment; less surgery does not necessarily lead to inferior local control or survival outcomes. Recent studies supplement the growing evidence that treatment of patients with MF/MC breast cancer with BCS, radiotherapy, and adjuvant systemic therapy can result in low rates of in-breast recurrence.

[Relevance of the sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast multifocal and multicentric cancer]

OBJECTIVES

The sentinel lymph node biopsy is a gold standard in the management of breast cancer. Its role in multifocal or multicentric tumors is still evolving. The aim of this study is to assess the feasibility and pertinence of sentinel lymph node biopsy in multifocal and multicentric tumors based on a systematic review of literature.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted searching in the following electronic databases PubMed using "sentinel lymph node biopsy", "breast cancer", "multifocal tumor", "multicentric tumor" and "multiple tumor" as keywords. We included original articles published between 2000 and 2014, both French and English, studying feasibility of sentinel lymph node biopsy in invasive breast cancer, multicentric and/or multifocal tumors. The first end point was success rate and false negative rate.

RESULTS

Twenty-six articles were included in this literature review, with 2212 cases (782 multifocal, 737 multicentric and 693 multiple tumors). Percentage of tumors whose stage was higher than stage T2 ranged from 0 to 86.3%. Success rate average was 83.1%. False negative average was 8.2%. False negative rate was less than 10% in 15 articles. Mean of sentinel lymph node biopsy was 2 (1-9). The average rate of sentinel lymph node positive was 50.6%. Axillary recurrence rate was 0.5%.

CONCLUSION

Despite the methodological biases of the studies included in this review of literature, the false negative rate of sentinel node biopsy in multifocal and multicentric breast cancers are less than 10% with a low rate of axillary recurrence. Despite the lack of randomized study, this procedure can be routinely performed in accordance with rigorous technical process.

Feasibility of Day Surgery in Patients With Breast Conservation and Sentinel Node Biopsy: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background and Aims:

The aim of this study was to analyze feasibility of day surgery in breast cancer patients with breast conserving surgery and sentinel node biopsy.

Material and Methods:

The study was a randomized controlled trial comparing day surgery with one night hospital stay in breast cancer patients with breast conserving surgery and sentinel node biopsy. A total of 40 patients with ⩽3-cm tumor and clinically N0 were randomized to one night stay group and 38 patients to day surgery group. Within discharge, patients and their relatives were given questionnaires in order to evaluate their experience regarding the duration of hospital stay.

Results:

Randomized groups were similar regarding patient age and tumor stage. A total of 18 (47%) day surgery group patients were discharged the same day. The most common reason for overnight hospital stay was axillary clearance, 9 (24%). None of the patients in the day surgery group, but 2 patients in the overnight hospital stay group had re-operation due to complications. Perception and preference results were analyzed both according to randomization and actual treatment groups. Patients in both groups had rather similar experiences on the first postoperative day. Also, spouse’s or relative’s perception after discharge was similar in both groups.

Conclusion:

Day surgery was well received by the patients and their relatives. Day surgery appears as feasible in patients with breast conservation and sentinel node biopsy.

Predictive Factors for Non-Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients With Clinically Node-Negative Ipsilateral Multiple Breast Cancer Treated With Total Mastectomy

BACKGROUND

Recent clinical trials have shown that axillary lymph node dissection can be omitted even with positive sentinel nodes (SN) unless the patient undergoes total mastectomy without irradiation. The aim of our study was to identify predictive factors for non-SN metastasis among patients with solitary or multiple breast cancer treated with total mastectomy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Clinically node-negative breast cancer patients with pathologically node-positive disease treated with total mastectomy and axillary dissection after SN biopsy were retrospectively analyzed. Significant pathologic predictive factors for positive non-SN metastasis were also examined.

RESULTS

There were 47 multiple and 143 solitary breast cancer patients. Pathologic diagnosis demonstrated that smaller invasion size but larger tumor size, including adjacent noninvasive cancer, was observed in multiple breast cancer. The number of involved SNs and the rate of non-SN metastasis were similar between the multiple and solitary groups. Regarding predictive factors for non-SN metastasis, lymphatic invasion and SN macrometastasis were significant factors in the solitary group, and pathologic invasion size > 2 cm was the only significant factor in the multiple group.

CONCLUSION

Larger pathologic invasion size was important for predicting non-SN metastasis in multiple breast cancer.

Clinical outcomes after sentinel lymph node biopsy in clinically node-negative breast cancer patients

Purpose

To evaluate non-sentinel lymph node (LN) status after sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) in patients with breast cancer and to identify the predictive factors for disease failure.

Materials and Methods

From January 2006 to December 2007, axillary lymph node (ALN) dissection after SNB was performed for patients with primary invasive breast cancer who had no clinical evidence of LN metastasis. A total of 320 patients were treated with breast-conserving surgery and radiotherapy.

Results

The median age of patients was 48 years, and the median follow-up time was 72.8 months. Close resection margin (RM) was observed in 13 patients. The median number of dissected SNB was two, and that of total retrieved ALNs was 11. Sentinel node accuracy was 94.7%, and the overall false negative rate (FNR) was 5.3%. Eleven patients experienced treatment failure. Local recurrence, regional LN recurrence, and distant metastasis were identified in 0.9%, 1.9%, and 2.8% of these patients, respectively. Sentinel LN status were not associated with locoregional recurrence (p > 0.05). Close RM was the only significant factor for disease-free survival (DFS) in univariate and multivariate analysis. The 5-year overall survival, DFS, and locoregional DFS were 100%, 96.8%, and 98.1%, respectively.

Conclusion

In this study, SNB was performed with high accuracy and low FNR and high locoregional control was achieved.

Management of operable primary breast cancer in older women

A considerable number of breast cancer diagnoses are made in older women. Differing physiological needs of older patients and biology of tumors compared with younger patients may alter treatment options between surgery and nonsurgical primary approaches. Adjuvant therapies may benefit these patients; however, concerns about toxicity and physical demands of treatment may affect patient choice regarding treatment. Furthermore, quality of life may be more important to the older individual than curative treatment alone. Growing evidence is emerging for employing Comprehensive Geriatric Assessment to determine other factors that may contribute to treatment decision-making in the older population. The way geriatric oncology is delivered varies, bringing the importance of the multidisciplinary team to the forefront of care delivery in this age group. Future research in this area should include combined consideration of tumor biology and geriatric needs.

Evolving paradigms in multifocal breast cancer

The 7th edition of the TNM defines multifocal breast cancer as multiple simultaneous ipsilateral and synchronous breast cancer lesions, provided they are macroscopically distinct and measurable using current traditional pathological and clinical tools. According to the College of American Pathologists (CAP), the characterization of only the largest lesion is considered sufficient, unless the grade and/or histology are different between the lesions. Here, we review three potentially clinically relevant aspects of multifocal breast cancers: first, the importance of a different intrinsic breast cancer subtype of the various lesions; second, the emerging awareness of inter-lesion heterogeneity; and last but not least, the potential introduction of bias in clinical trials due to the unrecognized biological diversity of these cancers. Although the current strategy to assess the lesion with the largest diameter has clearly its advantages in terms of costs and feasibility, this recommendation may not be sustainable in time and might need to be adapted to be compliant with new evolving paradigms in breast cancer.

[Sentinel node biopsy in patients with multifocal and multicentric breast cancer: A 5-year follow-up]

OBJECTIVE

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) as a staging procedure in multiple breast cancer is a controversial issue. We have aimed to evaluate the efficacy of sentinel node (SN) detection in patients with multifocal or multicentric breast cancer as well as the safety of its clinical application after a long follow-up.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective descriptive study was performed. Eighty-nine patients diagnosed of multiple breast cancer (73 multifocal; 16 multicentric) underwent SLNB. These patients were compared to those with unifocal neoplasia. Periareolar radiocolloid administration was performed in most of the patients. Evaluation was made at an average of 67.2 months of follow-up (32-126 months).

RESULTS

Scintigraphic and surgical SN localization in patients with multiple breast cancer were 95.5% and 92.1%, respectively. A higher percentage of extra-axillary nodes was observed than in the unifocal group (11.7% vs 5.4%) as well as a significantly higher number of SN per patient (1.70 vs 1.38). The rate of SN localization in multicentric cancer was slightly lower than in multifocal cancer (87.5% vs 93.1%), and the finding of extra-axillary drainages was higher (20% vs 10%). Number of SN per patient was significantly higher in multicentric breast cancer (2.33 vs 1.57). No axillary relapses have been demonstrated in the follow-up in multiple breast cancer patients group.

CONCLUSIONS

SLNB performed by periareolar injection is a reliable and accurate staging procedure of patients with multiple breast cancer, including those with multicentric processes.