Skip to main content

Advertisement

Springer Nature Link
Log in

Patterns of Axillary Surgical Care for Breast Cancer in the Era of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Population-based overall patterns of surgical management of the axilla in women with operable breast cancer during the era of adoption of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) were studied.

Methods

Women with operable breast carcinoma residing in 14 geographic areas of the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registries (1998–2004, n = 239,661) were assessed for axillary surgical patterns of care.

Results

Use of SLNB increased from 11 to 59%. Use of no axillary surgery decreased from 14 to 6.6%. In pathologic node-negative women, use of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) decreased from 94 to 36%. Independent factors most associated with failure to receive SLNB included diagnosis year (2000: 62%; 2004: 29%), surgery (mastectomy: 64%; breast-conserving surgery: 36%), tumor size (T3: 71%; T2: 56%; T1: 40%), age (≥70 years: 50%; <70 years: 45%), grade (high: 42%; low: 38%), urbanity (non-large metropolitan area: 49%; large metropolitan area: 42%), and, by quartile, poverty (highest: 47%; lowest: 35%), and white-collar employment (lowest: 56%; highest: 47%). In pathologic node-positive women who had SLNB, failure to undergo completion ALND increased from 20% in 1998 to 32% in 2004. Patients with smaller, lower-grade tumors, and those with smaller size of nodal metastasis, lack of extracapsular extension, age ≥70 years, increased linguistic isolation, African-American or Hispanic race/ethnicity, and white-collar employment were less likely to undergo completion ALND.

Conclusions

Management of the axilla changed dramatically during the period of rapid adoption of SLNB. Patterns of care suggest both appropriate and inappropriate selection for SLNB and ALND.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price includes VAT (Canada)

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Nemoto T, Vana J, Bedwani RN, et al. Management and survival of female breast cancer: results of a national survey by the American College of Surgeons. Cancer. 1980;45(12):2917–24.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Foster RS, Jr. The biologic and clinical significance of lymphatic metastases in breast cancer. Surg Oncol Clin North Am. 1996;5(1):79–104.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg. 1994;220(3):391–8; discussion 398–401.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Krag DN, Weaver DL, Alex JC, Fairbank JT. Surgical resection and radiolocalization of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer using a gamma probe. Surg Oncol. 1993;2(6):335–9; discussion 340.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(9):599–609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. A randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(6):546–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program (www.seer.cancer.gov) Limited-Use Data (1973–2004), National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program, Cancer Statistics Branch, released April 2007, based on the November 2006 submission.

  8. Surveillance Research Program, National Cancer Institute SEER*Stat software (www.seer.cancer.gov/seerstat) version 6.2.4, Accessed Jan 7, 2008.

  9. Zhang J, Yu KF. What’s the relative risk. A method of correcting the odds ratio in cohort studies of common outcomes. JAMA. 1998;280(19):1690–1.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Keynes G. Conservative treatment of cancer of the breast. BMJ. 1937;2(4004):643–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Baclesse F. Roentgen therapy as the sole method of treatment of cancer of the breast. Am J Roentgenol Radium Ther Nucl Med. 1949;62(3):311–9.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Peters MV. Carcinoma of the breast Stage II-radiation range Wedge resection and irradiation. An effective treatment in early breast cancer. JAMA. 1967;200(2):134–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Levene MB, Harris JR, Hellman S. Treatment of carcinoma of the breast by radiation therapy. Cancer. 1977;39(6 Suppl):2840–5.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTG). Effects of radiotherapy and of differences in the extent of surgery for early breast cancer on local recurrence and 15-year survival: an overview of randomized trials. Lancet. 2005;366(9503):2087–106.

    Google Scholar 

  15. NIH Consensus Development Conference on the Treatment of Early-Stage Breast Cancer. Bethesda, Maryland, June 18–21, 1990. J Natl Cancer Inst Monogr. 1992;(11):1–187.

  16. Lazovich D, Solomon CC, Thomas DB, et al. Breast conservation therapy in the United States following the 1990 National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference on the treatment of patients with early stage invasive breast carcinoma. Cancer. 1999;86(4):628–37.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, et al. The sentinel node in breast cancer—a multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(14):941–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Fisher B. From Halsted to prevention and beyond: advances in the management of breast cancer during the twentieth century. Eur J Cancer. 1999;35(14):1963–73.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Cady B. Lymph node metastases. Indicators, but not governors of survival. Arch Surg. 1984;119(9):1067–72.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Schwartz GF, Giuliano AE, Veronesi U. Proceedings of the consensus conference on the role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in carcinoma of the breast, April 19–22, 2001, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Cancer. 2002;94(10):2542–51.

    Google Scholar 

  21. 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(12):983–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, 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):881–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Barone JE, Tucker JB, Perez JM, Odom SR, Ghevariya V. Evidence-based medicine applied to sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with breast cancer. Am Surg. 2005;71(1):66–70.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Bembenek A, Fischer J, Albrecht H, et al. Impact of patient- and disease-specific factors on SLNB in breast cancer patients. Are current guidelines justified? World J Surg. 2007;31(2):267–75.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lelievre L, Houvenaeghel G, Buttarelli M, et al. Value of the sentinel lymph node procedure in patients with large size breast cancer. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(2):621–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23(30):7703–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Garreau JR, Nelson J, Cook D, et al. Geographic variation in sentinel node adaptation by practicing surgeons in Oregon. Am J Surg. 2005;189(5):616–6; discussion 619–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Conn CA, McMasters KM, Edwards MJ, Martin RC. Acceptance of sentinel lymph node biopsy of the breast by all general surgeons in Kentucky. Breast J. 2005;11(4):231–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Chua B, Olivotto IA, Donald JC, Hayashi AH, Davis N, Rusnak CH. Practice patterns of lymph-node mapping and sentinel-node biopsy for breast cancer in British Columbia. Can J Surg. 2003;46(4):273–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Chen AY, Halpern MT, Schrag NM, Stewart A, Leitch M, Ward E. Disparities and trends in sentinel lymph node biopsy among early-stage breast cancer patients. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2008;100(7):462–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Wong JS, Taghian AG, Bellon JR, et al. Tangential radiotherapy without axillary surgery in early-stage breast cancer: results of a prospective trial. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2008; in press.

  32. Schlembach PJ, Buchholz TA, Ross MI, et al. Relationship of sentinel and axillary level I-II lymph nodes to tangential fields used in breast irradiation. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2001;51(3):671–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Park J, Fey JV, Naik AM, Borgen PI, Van Zee KJ, Cody HS 3rd. A declining rate of completion axillary dissection in sentinel lymph node-positive breast cancer patients is associated with the use of a multivariate nomogram. Ann Surg. 2007;245(3):462–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Hwang RF, Gonzalez-Angulo AM, Yi M, et al. Low locoregional failure rates in selected breast cancer patients with tumor-positive sentinel lymph nodes who do not undergo completion axillary dissection. Cancer. 2007;110:723–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Rescigno J, Taylor LA, Aziz MS, et al. Predicting negative axillary lymph node dissection in patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy: can a subset of patients be spared axillary dissection? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2005;94(Supp 1):S35–6.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Degnim AC, Reynolds C, Pantvaidya G, et al. Nonsentinel node metastasis in breast cancer patients: assessment of an existing and a new predictive nomogram. Am J Surg. 2005;190:543–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hughes KS, Schnaper LA, Berry D, et al. Lumpectomy plus tamoxifen with or without irradiation in women 70 years of age or older with early breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:971–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Veronesi U, Orecchia R, Zurrida S, et al. Avoiding axillary dissection in breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial to assess the role of axillary radiotherapy. Ann Oncol. 2005;16(3):383–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Radiation Oncology, St. Vincent’s Cancer Center, New York, NY, 10011, USA

    John Rescigno MD

  2. Department of Surgery, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, 10016, USA

    Jamie C. Zampell MD & Deborah Axelrod MD

Authors
  1. John Rescigno MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jamie C. Zampell MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Deborah Axelrod MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John Rescigno MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Rescigno, J., Zampell, J.C. & Axelrod, D. Patterns of Axillary Surgical Care for Breast Cancer in the Era of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 16, 687–696 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0195-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0195-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation