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
Meta-Analysis
. 2023 Jul 26;23(1):209.
doi: 10.1186/s12893-023-02101-8.

Efficacy and safety comparison between axillary lymph node dissection with no axillary surgery in patients with sentinel node-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yu-Jia Fan  1 , Jin-Cheng Li  2 , De-Miao Zhu  3 , Hai-Long Zhu  3 , Yi Zhao  3 , Xin-Bing Zhu  3 , Gang Wu  3 , Ting-Ting Bai  3
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Efficacy and safety comparison between axillary lymph node dissection with no axillary surgery in patients with sentinel node-positive breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Yu-Jia Fan et al. BMC Surg. .

Abstract

Background: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to study the evidence on the efficacy and safety of omitting axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for patients with clinically node-negative but sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive breast cancer using all the available evidence.

Methods: The Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Library databases were searched through February 25, 2023. Original trials that compared only the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) with ALND as the control group for patients with clinically node-negative but SLN-positive breast cancer were included. The primary outcomes were axillary recurrence rate, total recurrence rate, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS). Meta-analyses were performed to compare the odds ratio (OR) in rates and the hazard ratios (HR) in time-to-event outcomes between both interventions. Based on different study designs, tools in the revised Cochrane risk of bias tool were used for randomized trials and the risk of bias in nonrandomized studies of interventions to assess the risk of bias for each included article. Funnel plots and Egger's test were used for the publication's bias assessment.

Results: In total, 30 reports from 26 studies were included in the systematic review (9 reports of RCTs, 21 reports of retrospective cohort studies). According to our analysis, omitting ALND in patients with clinically node-negative but SLN-positive breast cancer had a similar axillary recurrence rate (OR = 0.95, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.76-1.20), DFS (HR = 1.02, 95% CI: 0.89-1.16), and OS (HR = 0.97, 95% CI: 0.92-1.03), but caused a significantly lower incidence of adverse events and benefited in locoregional recurrence rate (OR = 0.76, 95% CI: 0.59-0.97) compared with ALND.

Conclusion: For patients with clinically node-negative but SLN-positive breast cancer (no matter the number of the positive SLN), this review showed that SLNB alone had a similar axillary recurrence rate, DFS, and OS, but caused a significantly lower incidence of adverse events and showed a benefit for the locoregional recurrence compared with ALND. An OS benefit was found in the Macro subset that used SLNB alone versus complete ALND. Therefore, omitting ALND is feasible in this setting.

Trial registration: CRD 42023397963.

Keywords: Axillary lymph node dissection; Breast cancer; Sentinel lymph node biopsy.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA flow chart of the procedure for eligible study selection [50]
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Comparison of axillary recurrence rates between the SLNB alone and complete ALND: A forest plots; and B funnel plot
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
Comparison of total recurrence rates between SLNB alone and complete ALND: A forest plots; and B funnel plot
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
Comparison of DFS between the SLNB alone and complete ALND: A forest plots; and B funnel plot
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
Comparison of OS between the SLNB alone and complete ALND: A forest plots; and B funnel plot
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Magnoni F, Galimberti V, Corso G, Intra M, Sacchini V, Veronesi P. Axillary surgery in breast cancer: an updated historical perspective. Semin Oncol. 2020;47(6):341–352. doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2020.09.001. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Ashikaga T, Weaver DL, Miller BJ, Jalovec LM, Frazier TG, et al. Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(10):881–888. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70278-4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Manca G, Rubello D, Tardelli E, Giammarile F, Mazzarri S, Boni G, Chondrogiannis S, Marzola MC, Chiacchio S, Ghilli M, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: indications, contraindications, and controversies. Clin Nucl Med. 2016;41(2):126–133. doi: 10.1097/RLU.0000000000000985. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Motomura K, Inaji H, Komoike Y, Kasugai T, Nagumo S, Noguchi S, Koyama H. Sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer patients with clinically negative lymph-nodes. Breast Cancer. 1999;6(3):259–262. doi: 10.1007/BF02967180. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Gradishar WJ, Anderson BO, Abraham J, Aft R, Agnese D, Allison KH, Blair SL, Burstein HJ, Dang C, Elias AD, et al. Breast cancer, version 3.2020, nccn clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. 2020;18(4):452–478. doi: 10.6004/jnccn.2020.0016. - DOI - PubMed