Is sentinel node biopsy reliable in large breast tumors?

Purpose: The value of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) in patients with larger breast tumors (diameter > 3 cm) has been questioned due to high false-negative rates reported from initial studies. The aim of this study was to analyze the safety and prognostic reliability of SNB in this group of patients. Methods: During a 6-year period (2001-2007), 84 women with mean age 51.7 ± 11.6 years diagnosed with a breast tumor larger than 3 cm in diameter on pathological analysis were retrospectively identified from the database of our institution. Sentinel node identification was performed after injection of blue dye subcutaneously at the subareolar area. The sentinel node specimen was sent for frozen section analysis. Regardless of the SNB results, all patients underwent completion axillary clearance. Results: Breast surgery consisted of mastectomy in 62 patients (73.8%) and partial mastectomy in 22 patients (26.2%). There were 69 invasive ductal cancers (82.1%), 14 lobular cancers (16.6%) and one case of anaplastic carcinoma (1.3%). Nine tumors (10.7%) were identified to be multifocal after the histopathological report. The mean number of sentinel nodes removed was 1.5 ± 0.7 (range 1-4) while SNB detection was not feasible in three patients (3.6%). Of 56 positive SNBs, seven (12.5%) were not identified by routine hematoxylin and eosin staining during frozen section analysis but were detected by subsequent immunohistochemistry on the final histopathological report. All patients with multifocal tumors presented nodal metastases on pathological analysis (100%), while the rate of nodal metastatic disease in patients with unifocal tumors was 16% (12 patients), although no statistical significance was documented. The overall false-negative rate, defined as the percentage of all nodepositive tumors in which the SNB was negative, was 14.3%. The false-negative rate was significantly higher for the group of patients with multifocal tumors (55.5%) compared to the group with unifocal tumors (9.3%) (p < 0.001). Conclusions: The present study indicates that sentinel node biopsy is feasible in patients with larger breast tumors (max. diameter > 3 cm), with comparable false-negative and sentinel detection rates (14.3% and 96.4%, respectively). Larger tumor size seems to be associated with increased inci-dence of nodal metastases while multifocality appears to be related to increased false-negative rates; hence completion axillary clearance should be initially considered for these cases.

Breast cancer; Sentinel lymph node; Multifocality.

[1] Smigal C., Jemal A., Ward E., Cokkinides V., Smith R., Howe H. L., Thun M.: “Trends in breast cancer by race and ethnicity: update 2006”. C.A. Cancer J. Clin., 2006, 56, 168.

[2] Schulze T., Mucke J., Markwardt J., Schlag P.M., Bembenek A.: “Long-term morbidity of patients with early breast cancer after sentinel lymph node biopsy compared to axillary lymph node dissection”. J. Surg. Oncol., 2006, 93, 109.

[3] Temple L.K., Baron R., Cody H.S. 3rd, Fey J.V., Thaler H.T., Borgen P.I. et al.: “Sensory morbidity after sentinel lymph node biopsy and axillary dissection: a prospective study of 233 women”. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 2002, 9, 654.

[4] Morton D.L., Wen D.R., Wong J.H., Economou J.S., Cagle L.A., Storm F.K. et al.: “Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma”. Arch. Surg., 1992, 127, 392.

[5] Smidt M.L., Janssen C.M., Kuster D.M., Bruggink E.D., Strobbe L. J.: “Axillary recurrence after a negative sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer: incidence and clinical significance”. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 2005, 12, 29.

[6] Veronesi U., Galimberti V., Mariani L., Gatti G., Paganelli G., Viale et al.: “Sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer: early results in 953 patients with negative sentinel node biopsy and no axillary dis-section”. Eur. J. Cancer, 2005, 41, 231.

[7] O’Hea B.J., Hill A.D., El-Shirbiny A.M., Yeh S.D., Rosen P.P., Coit D.G. et al.: “Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: initial experience at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center”. J. Am. Coll. Surg., 1998, 186, 423.

[8] Bedrosian I., Reynolds C., Mick R., Callans L.S., Grant C.S., Donohue J.H. et al.: “Accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy inpatients with large primary breast tumors”. Cancer, 2000, 88, 2540.

[9] Wong S.L., Chao C., Edwards M.J., Tuttle T.M., Noyes R.D., Carlson D.J. et al.: “Accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with T2 and T3 breast cancers”. Am. Surg., 2001, 67, 522.

[10] Leidenius M.H., Krogerus L.A., Toivonen T.S., von Smitten K.A.: “Sentinel node biopsy is not sensible in breast cancer patients with large primary tumours”. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol., 2005, 31, 364.

[11] Ozmen V., Karanlik H., Cabioglu N., Igci A., Kecer M., Asoglu O., et al.: “Factors predicting the sentinel and non-sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer”. Breast Cancer Res. Treat., 2006, 95, 1.

[12] Martin R.C. 2nd, Chagpar A., Scoggins C.R., Edwards M.J., Hagendoorn L., Stromberg A.J., McMasters K.M.: “Clinicopathologic factors associated with false-negative sentinel lymph-node biopsy in breast cancer”. Ann. Surg., 2005, 241, 1005.

[13] Bedrosian I., Reynolds C., Mick R., Callans L.S., Grant C.S., Donohue J.H. et al.: “Accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with large primary breast tumors”. Cancer, 2000, 88, 2540.

[14] Chung M.H., Ye W., Giuliano A.E.: “Role for sentinel lymph node dissection in the management of large ( 5 cm) invasive breast cancer”. Ann. Surg. Oncol., 2001, 8, 688.

[15] Bergkvist L., Frisell J.: “Swedish Breast Cancer Group, Swedish Society of Breast Surgeons. Multicentre validation study of sentinel node biopsy for staging in breast cancer”. Br. J. Surg., 2005, 92, 1221.

[16] Tousimis E., Van Zee K.J., Fey J.V., Hoque L.W., Tan L.K., Cody H.S. 3rd, et al.: “The accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy in multicentric and multifocal invasive breast cancers”. J. Am. Coll. Surg., 2003, 197, 529.

[17] Mansel R.E., Fallowfield L., Kissin M., Goyal A., Newcombe R.G., Dixon J.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, 599.

[18] Schüle J., Frisell J., Ingvar C., Bergkvist L.: “Sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer larger than 3 cm in diameter”. Br. J. Surg., 2007, 94, 948.

[19] Goyal A., Newcombe R.G., Mansel R.E., Chetty U., Ell P., Fallowfield L. et al.: “ALMANAC Trialists Group. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with multifocal breast cancer”. Eur. J. Surg. Oncol., 2004, 30, 475.

[20] Viale G., Zurrida S., Maiorano E., Mazzarol G., Pruneri G., Paganelli G. et al.: “Predicting the status of axillary sentinel lymph nodes in 4351 patients with invasive breast carcinoma treated in a single institution”. Cancer, 2005, 103, 492.

[21] Andea A.A., Bouwman D., Wallis T., Visscher D.W.: “Correlation of tumor volume and surface area with lymph node status in patients with multifocal/multicentric breast carcinoma”. Cancer, 2004, 100, 20.