Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2023 Feb 28;12(2):140-151.
doi: 10.21037/gs-22-480. Epub 2023 Feb 2.

Accuracy of sentinel node mapping in patients with biopsy-proven metastatic axillary lymph nodes and upfront surgery: preliminary results of the Multimodal Targeted Axillary Surgery (MUTAS) trial

Affiliations

Accuracy of sentinel node mapping in patients with biopsy-proven metastatic axillary lymph nodes and upfront surgery: preliminary results of the Multimodal Targeted Axillary Surgery (MUTAS) trial

Maria Vernet-Tomás et al. Gland Surg. .

Abstract

Background: Some studies suggested that the patients included in the Z0011 trial may represent patients with ultrasound-negative axillary nodes and axillary invasion diagnosed by sentinel node (SN) biopsy. Nevertheless, the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines recommend SN mapping if 1 or 2 suspicious lymph nodes are identified on axillary ultrasound (AU). The aim of this preliminary phase of the Multimodal Targeted Axillary Surgery (MUTAS) trial was to establish the accuracy of SN mapping in patients with axillary involvement undergoing upfront surgery.

Methods: Between September 2019 and March 2022, we recruited patients with biopsy-proven metastatic axillary nodes and upfront surgery from a single center. We performed SN mapping in these patients before the surgical intervention, which included axillary lymph node dissection. The biopsy-proven metastatic node, SNs and the remaining axillary nodes were excised separately. SN status was considered representative of the status of the remaining axillary nodes. We calculated the sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value and positive predictive value of the SN, overall and in patients with palpable nodes, in those with non-palpable nodes and an AU leading to diagnosis of axillary involvement, in those with 1 or 2 suspicious nodes on AU, and in patients with a single suspicious node on AU. We evaluated clinical, imaging and pathology features as predictors of the status of the remaining axillary nodes, false-negatives, and false-positives.

Results: We included 25 patients in this phase. The false-negative rate of SN mapping was 28% overall, 21.42% for patients with palpable nodes, 36.36% for patients with non-palpable nodes and an AU diagnosis of axillary involvement, 28.75% for those with 1 or 2 suspicious nodes on AU, and 15.38% in patients with a single suspicious node on AU. The negative predictive value was highest in patients with a single suspicious node on AU (75%). The only significant predictive factor was that FN showed a higher Ki67 index score.

Conclusions: In this study, SN mapping was not reliable in patients with biopsy-proven metastatic axillary nodes and upfront surgery for any of the subgroups studied. Further research should elucidate the best staging pathways in these patients to avoid premature de-escalation.

Keywords: Breast cancer; biopsy-proven lymph nodes; false-negatives; non-palpable lymph nodes; sentinel nodes (SNs).

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest: All authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://gs.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/gs-22-480/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Representation of the number of patients with and without metastatic axillary LNs in each level. (A) Patients with palpable LNs, N=14. (B) Patients with non-palpable LNs and an ultrasound diagnosis of axillary involvement, N=11. LN, lymph node.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Representation of the number of patients with and without metastatic axillary LNs in each level. (A) Patients with 1 or 2 suspicious LNs on ultrasound, N=21. (B) Patients with a single suspicious LN on ultrasound, N=13. LN, lymph node.

Comment in

References

    1. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA 2011;305:569-75. 10.1001/jama.2011.90 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy as a staging procedure in breast cancer: update of a randomised controlled study. Lancet Oncol 2006;7:983-90. 10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70947-0 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2010;11:927-33. 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70207-2 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Giuliano AE, Ballman KV, McCall L, et al. Effect of Axillary Dissection vs No Axillary Dissection on 10-Year Overall Survival Among Women With Invasive Breast Cancer and Sentinel Node Metastasis: The ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA 2017;318:918-26. 10.1001/jama.2017.11470 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barco I, Chabrera C, García-Fernández A, et al. Role of axillary ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging, and ultrasound-guided fine-needle aspiration biopsy in the preoperative triage of breast cancer patients. Clin Transl Oncol 2017;19:704-10. 10.1007/s12094-016-1589-7 - DOI - PubMed