Use Of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy In Patients Research Articles

Sentinel lymph node biopsy for head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma using the Brigham and Women's staging system: a cost analysis.

The objective is to determine the cost-effectiveness of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) according to the Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) Tumor Staging system. A decision analysis was utilized to examine costs and outcomes associated with the use of SLNB in patients with high-risk head and neck CSCC. Decision tree outcome probabilities were obtained from published literature. Costs were derived from Medicare reimbursement rates (US$) and effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with a willingness-to-pay set at $100,000 per QALY gained. SLNB was found to be a cost-effective tool for patients with T3 tumors, with an ICER of $18,110.57. Withholding SLNB was the dominant strategy for both T2a and T2b lesions, with ICERs of - $2468.99 and - $16,694.00, respectively. Withholding SLNB remained the dominant strategy when examining immunosuppressed patients with T2a or T2b lesions. In patients with head and neck CSCC, those with T3 or T2b lesionswith additional risk factors not accounted for in the staging system alone, may be considered for SLNB, while in other tumor stages it may be impractical. SLNB should only be offered on an individual patient basis.

Trends in Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsies in Patients With Inflammatory Breast Cancer in the US

The standard of care for inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is neoadjuvant chemotherapy, total mastectomy with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and postmastectomy radiation therapy. Existing studies suggest that sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) may not be reliable in IBC. The use and frequency of SLNB in women with IBC is not well characterized. To determine the frequency and temporal trend of SLNB in patients with IBC. This retrospective cohort study used the National Cancer Database, a nationwide hospital-based cancer registry, and included women who were diagnosed with nonmetastatic IBC and underwent axillary surgery from 2012 to 2017. Data were analyzed from January 2021 to May 2021. Any SLNB, including SLNB alone and SLNB followed by ALND, and ALND alone. Scatterplot fit with a linear regression model were used to evaluate the yearly increase of any SLNB use. Multivariable logistic regression models to evaluate the association of study variables with the outcome of any SLNB. This study included a total of 1096 women (mean [SD] age, 56.1 [12.9] years) who were 18 years or older with nonmetastatic IBC diagnosed between 2012 and 2017. Of the 186 of 1096 women (17%) who received any SLNB, 137 (73.7%) were White individuals; and of the 910 of 1096 women (83%) who received an ALND only, 676 (74.3%) were White individuals. Among women undergoing any SLNB, 119 of 186 (64%) did not undergo a completion ALND. There was a statistically significant increasing trend in the use of SLNB from 2012 to 2017 (22 of 205 patients [11%] vs 32 of 148 patients [22%]; P = .004). In multivariable analysis, the use of SLNB was associated with diagnosis year (2017 vs 2012; odds ratio [OR], 2.26; 95% CI, 1.26-4.20), clinical nodal status (cN3 vs 0; OR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.22-0.67), and receipt of reconstructive surgery (OR, 1.80; 95% CI, 1.09-2.96). The findings of this cohort study suggest that there is frequent and increasing use of SLNB in patients with IBC that is not evidence-based or supported by current treatment guidelines.

141 Poster - Hospital variation in the use of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for patients with a biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ

Background: For patients with the biopsy diagnosis Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) a Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB) can be considered, since 20% of these patients have occult invasive cancer. The indications for SLNB vary between guidelines; some guidelines advise against SLNB if it is possible to keep the lymph vessels draining the tumour bed intact and other guidelines consider the risk factors for underestimation of invasive breast cancer and aim at maximizing the use of SLNB in patients who turn out to have invasive breast cancer. In the Dutch guideline several risk factors are identified, however without any indication on how to balance these factors. We therefore aimed to determine the variation in the SLNB rate among Dutch hospitals and to assess the accuracy of the decision whether or not to perform SLNB.

217P - The routine use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in high risk DCIS lesions is not justified

BackgroundThe use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) during breast surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is controversial. It is accepted in high risk lesions (high histological grade, palpable, large >25mm, and multifocal lesions) since it avoids a second operation if the definitive diagnosis reveals infiltrating ductal carcinoma (IDC) and its recommended due to some technical obligations in patients with planned total mastectomy or with tumor localization to the upper outer quadrant.. We aimed to evaluate the use of SLNB in patients with preoperative diagnosis of high risk DCIS lesions. MethodsA monocentric retrospective study was conducted on 467 patients with primary diagnosed DCIS operated for partial or total mastectomy with or without SLNB. The frequency of each risk factor, and the incidence of IDC were calculated in the overall series. The predictive value of each risk factor is calculated by comparing these factors in the groups depending to the definitive pathology (IDC vs DCIS) using the chi square test. A value of p<0.05 was considered significant. ResultsBreast surgery was done within a median of 42 ± 23 days of DCIS diagnosis. Median age was 57± 10 years. High risk DCIS lesions accounted for 73.1% of all cases (342/468). Grade III lesion, multifocal, palpable and larger than 25mm lesions were present in 263 (56.3%), 61 (13.1%), 86 (18.4%) and 99 (21.2%) respectively. IDC was diagnosed in 95/468 patients (20.3%) in the global series and in 75patients/342 (22%) in the patients with high risk lesions. A palpable lesions and a tumor diameter >25mm were associated with higher risk of invasive carcinoma (p=0.007 and p=0.017 respectively).Overall SLNB was done in 383 patients (82%), of which 318 patients (83%) had high risk lesions. A Positive SLN was detected in overall 5 patients (1.3%), all of which had high risk lesions (5/318: 1.6%). ConclusionsIn our study, the preoperative classification of high risk lesion showed a 79% sensitivity (75/95) and a 22% specificity (75/342) of detecting IDC. A positive SLN was found in only 1.6% of patients with high risk CDIS lesions operated for SLNB. The use of SLNB in patients with high risk DCIS avoids reoperation in 22% of cases. Nevertheless the low risk of positive SLN finding in this setting cannot justify its routine use. Legal entity responsible for the studyJean Marie Nogaret. FundingHas not received any funding. DisclosureAll authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Should Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Be Performed for All T1b Melanomas in the New 8th Edition American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging System?

In the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system, the T1b category has been redefined based solely on thickness and ulceration. National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend consideration of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for all patients with T1b melanomas (0.8 to 1.0 mm thick). We hypothesized that the new staging system would lead to excessive use of SLNB in patients with non-ulcerated T1b melanomas with a low risk of positive sentinel lymph nodes. The National Cancer Database 2015 Melanoma Public Use File was used to select patients undergoing SLNB for thin T1 cutaneous melanoma from 2010 to 2015. Clinicopathologic risk factors for having a positive SLNB were evaluated. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression models and classification and regression tree analysis were performed to identify groups with high and low risk of positive SLNB. We selected patients undergoing SLNB without ulceration with thickness 0.75 to 1.04 mm, staged T1b in the new 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer by thickness criteria alone (6,894 patients). Independent risk factors for a positive sentinel lymph node were age 56 years or younger (odds ratio [OR] 1.74; 95% CI 1.38 to 2.17), thickness 1.0 vs 0.8 to 0.9 mm (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.70), female sex (OR 1.36; 95% CI 1.09 to 1.69), and mitotic rate ≥1/mm2 (OR 2.01; 95% CI 1.54 to 2.64). Classification and regression tree analysis identified 2 groups based on age, mitotic rate, and thickness with a risk of positive SLNB <5%. These 2 groups made up 55% of T1b, nonulcerated melanoma patients who underwent SLNB. The new 8th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system T1b category should not be used to determine use of SLNB in thin melanoma, as more than one half of T1b lesions without ulceration have a low risk of positive sentinel lymph nodes.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy for early stage tongue cancer—a 14-year single-centre experience

This study was performed to report the usage of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in clinical stage I or II tongue cancer patients with cN0 necks seen over a 14-year period. Data were collected prospectively, and a retrospective analysis was performed of 41 patients with early stage oral squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue and a cN0 neck. Sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive patients underwent elective neck dissection, whereas SLN-negative patients were kept under careful observation. Seven of the 41 (17%) patients enrolled in the study were found to have occult metastases. The patients were followed up for a mean duration of 92 months (range 60–144 months). The neck recurrence rate for SLN-positive patients was 0% and for SLN-negative patients was 3%. The authors recommend the routine use of SLNB in patients with early stage oral squamous cell carcinoma of the tongue and a cN0 neck. Furthermore, special focus should be placed on isolated tumour cells, as their presence is of high clinical relevance.

Axillary lymph node surgical treatment

Nowadays, the overall attention is focused on de-escalating treatments for breast cancer (BC) including surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy. The introduction of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has led to less invasive surgical approaches for accurately staging the axilla, with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) progressively confined to a limited group of patients. One of the goal of surgery in de-escalating approaches is to reduce surgical morbidity by restricting or avoiding axillary surgery with no effect on survival. In this context the importance of imaging study for preoperative identification of axillary metastasis, in order to reduce axillary surgery, is gradually improving while the role of intraoperative assessment of sentinel nodes is progressively becoming limited to restricted groups of patients. According to the results of the ACOSOG Z0011 and following the most important guidelines, ALND can be safely omitted in selected patients treated with breast conserving surgery (BCS) with one or two positive SLNB while the adoption of SLNB positive alone in patients undergoing mastectomy is not yet defined. The increased employment of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) and the use of SLNB in patients after NAC plays an important role in de-escalation of axillary surgery in this group of patients. However current studies on this topic are still controversial, mainly about clinically positive lymph nodes (cN+) pre NAC patients or how to manage positive SLNB in post NAC patients. Some authors have collected predictive factors of positive non sentinel lymph nodes (NSLNs) in nomograms, considered an useful tool to avoid unnecessary further surgery. Elderly women represent specific group of patients where the axillary approach needs to be properly resized. The management of axilla in BC is in continuous evolution and ongoing studies could make even SLNB useless in the next future.

The use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in the treatment of breast ductal carcinoma in situ: A Danish population-based study

ObjectivesThe risk of axillary metastases in breast cancer patients with only ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is low. Thus, axillary staging with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) should only be used according to the current guidelines to avoid over-treatment and unnecessary morbidity. In the present study, the use of SLNB in patients with DCIS was evaluated nationally and compared across Danish departments. Material and methodsA register-based study was conducted using the Danish Breast Cancer Group database. The use of SLNB in DCIS patients according to year of diagnosis, age at diagnosis, size of lesion, Van Nuys classification, palpability, location and department of surgery was evaluated. The chi-squared test was used to test differences between the groups. ResultsData from 2618 Danish female patients diagnosed with DCIS between 2004 and 2015 were included; 54.3% of patients underwent SLNB. The use of SLNB increased from 26.6% in 2004 to 65.1% in 2015. A total of 1877 (71.7%) patients underwent breast-conserving surgery (BCS), and 577 (22.0%) underwent mastectomy, of which 43.9% and 86.0% respectively had a concomitant SLNB. The SLNB was performed in 23.8% of 454 patients not included by the guidelines. The use of SLNB in combination with BCS differed significantly between departments ranging from 19.7% to 63.8%. A significant difference in the use of SLNB with BCS and mastectomy according to department capacity (high-volume departments versus low-volume departments) was observed. ConclusionThe use of SLNB in patients with DCIS and adherence to the Danish national guidelines varies among Danish breast surgery departments. To optimise the axillary treatment of patients with DCIS, an improved compliance to the national DCIS guidelines is necessary.

Management of the Axilla After Neoadjuvant Therapy: Current Data and Controversies

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is the standard treatment for patients with locally advanced breast cancer or inoperable breast cancer and is administered with the intention of downstaging the tumor. Until recently, axillary staging for invasive breast cancer was performed by complete axillary lymph node dissection for all patients presenting with a breast cancer diagnosis. However, with the development of lymphatic mapping techniques, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has become the accepted standard of care for axillary staging of breast cancers. It diminishes the potential morbidity of an axillary dissection, including paresthesias and lymphedema, but involves the risks of an operative procedure. Despite its use, there is tremendous debate about the use of SLNB in patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Management of the axilla in the face of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is addressed in this article.

Abstract P1-01-04: Nodal patterns of care in patients with invasive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy: Results of a secondary analysis of TBCRC 017

Abstract Background: Neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) to downstage locally advanced tumors and potentially allow breast conservation has increased. In parallel, the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) and axillary node dissection has evolved. This analysis reports patterns of care for axillary evaluation at 8 NCI Comprehensive Cancer Centers in women receiving NCT. Methods: Between 2002 and 2010, 770 women were retrospectively identified as having received NCT, 758 of who had nodal imaging either before or after NCT. Clinical, pathologic, and treatment data were collected. Univariate and multivariate analyses of covariates associated with axillary management were performed using logistic regression (SAS 9.2, Proc Logistic). Results: Between 2002 and 2010, the odds of receiving a post-NCT SNB increased by 8% per year (p&amp;lt;0.001). Rates of post-NCT SNB were significantly different in only one of eight institutions (p&amp;lt;0.001), where pre-NCT nodal evaluation was made by SNB. The remainder of institutions used SNB following NCT. Of those who underwent post-NCT SNB, regardless of nodal status pre-NCT, 55% (171/314) had axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Prior to NCT, 74% (564/758) of patients exhibited at least one abnormal lymph node on pretreatment imaging. Imaging modalities used pretreatment to assess axillary lymph nodes Suspicious Nodes N (%)Ultrasound24 (4.3)Ultrasound+MRI218 (38.7)Ultrasound +MRI+CT103 (18.3)Ultrasound+MRI+CT+PET39 (6.9)Ultrasound+MRI+PET9 (1.6)Ultrasound+CT12 (2.1)Ultrasound+CT+PET8 (1.4)Ultrasound+PET3 (0.5)MRI36 (6.4)MRI+CT58 (10.3)MRI+CT+PET21 (3.7)MRI+PET9 (1.6)CT18 (3.2)CT+PET3 (0.5)CT+PET3 (0.5)TOTAL564 (100) Of those, 52% (291/564) of the lymph nodes were sampled using fine needle aspiration (FNA) and 27% (149/564) were sampled with CNB. Odds of undergoing a core needle biopsy (CNB) at presentation for radiographically or clinically suspicious lymph nodes increased by 27% per year (p&amp;lt;0.001). 57% (322/564) of all sampled lymph nodes were positive for malignant cells by either FNA or CNB. Of those with confirmed positive nodes at diagnosis, 26% (83/322) had nodal sampling with SNB after NCT. Of the 462 patients with pretreatment MRI suggesting an abnormal lymph node, 155 (33.5%) had a complete imaging response in the lymph nodes by MRI. Of those patients 32% (49/155) had SNB as their initial axillary evaluation after NCT, of which 45% (22/49) of those exhibited persistently positive nodes and underwent completion axillary node dissection. Conclusions: Among a contemporary cohort of women receiving NCT, a significant trend was observed towards increased use of needle biopsy for patients with abnormal pretreatment nodal imaging at presentation and sentinel lymph node biopsy after NCT nodal evaluation. A trend was also observed over time towards greater use of post-NCT SNB in patients with confirmed pathologic positive nodes at presentation. These data demonstrate a trend towards less invasive assessment of suspicious lymph nodes both before and after NCT. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2013;73(24 Suppl): Abstract nr P1-01-04.

Sentinel lymph node status as most important prognostic factor in patients with high-risk cutaneous melanomas (tumour thickness &gt;4.00 mm): outcome analysis from a single institution

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is considered the most powerful prognostic indicator of survival in patients with cutaneous melanoma of intermediate thickness (1-4 mm). The use of SLNB in patients with melanoma with a tumour thickness >4.0 mm is still controversial. The purpose of the current study was to determine the prognostic value of SLNB in patients with thick cutaneous melanomas (tumour thickness >4.0 mm) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). A retrospective single-centre study was performed at the Department of Dermatology and Allergy, University of Bonn, and the Department of Nuclear Medicine, University of Bonn, based on data collected between September 2000 and January 2010. A total of 142 patients with cutaneous melanoma of thickness >4.00 mm were identified, and 63 of these patients underwent SLNB. Of the 63 patients in whom SLNB was performed, 25 (39.7 %) had a positive SLN. Ulceration was more frequent in SLN-positive patients (44 %) than in SLN-negative patients (18.4 %). The mean follow-up time for the 63 patients was 50.7 months. Positive SLN status predicted a significantly reduced life expectancy in the analyses of PFS and OS. In SLN-positive patients 5-year OS was 76 % and in SLN-negative patients was 84.2 % (p = 0.048). Patients with a combination of ulcerated tumour and positive SLN had the worst prognosis. On the basis of our follow-up data, SLNB has to be recommended in patients with a tumour thickness >4.00 mm after exclusion of lymph node macrometastases or distant metastases. SLN status is the most significant prognostic factor in this group of patients.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma patients

Appropriate surgical management of regional lymph nodes is critical in patients with cutaneous melanoma. The use of intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has increased significantly in the past decade. SLNB is performed as minimally invasive procedure that provides accurate staging of melanoma patients with no clinically detectable nodal disease. In many melanoma units across the world, it became the standard for detection of occult regional node metastasis in patients with intermediate-thickness primary melanoma. Use of SLNB in patients with thin melanomas is still under evaluation. Although SLNB has been established as staging procedure in melanoma patients, its therapeutic role is still not clear. Large-scale ongoing randomized trials should elucidate whether SLNB with complete lymphadenectomy has a survival benefit in melanoma patients with early lymph node metastases compared to 'watch-and-wait' policy (observation).

Feasibility and Accuracy of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Clinically Node Negative Patients after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy for Breast Cancer – A Systematic Review and Metaanalysis.

Abstract BackgroundThe sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has become an accepted alternative to the axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) for pathologic evaluation of the axillary lymph node status in patients with early breast cancer and a clinically negative axilla. Patients with a negative sentinel lymph node are spared the ALND and its associated morbidities.Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of SLNB in patients who have received neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), and treatment of the axilla after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is an ALND.The use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy is increasing, and NAC has been shown to downstage both the primary tumour and axillary lymph nodes. Potentially, an additional proportion of patients who are node negative after NAC may be spared a full ALND and its attendant morbidities.AimsTo determine the feasibility and accuracy of SLNB in patients who have a clinically negative axilla after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer.MethodsA systematic review of the English literature of SLNB in patients who have had neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) was conducted and meta analyses performed. Studies selected had an identifiable group of patients with breast cancer who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and were clinically node negative. These patients had a SLNB prior to the standard ALND regardless of outcome of the SLNB.ResultsTen studies that met the eligibility criteria were identified. A total of 449 patients were studied. Pooled analysis using the fixed effects model was used to calculate successful identification rate and accuracy parameters. The summary rate of identification of SLN was 94% [95% CI: 91.6% – 96.7%]. The pooled sensitivity of SLNB after NAC was 93% [95% CI: 88.5% – 96.8%] and the false negative rate 7.0% [95% CI: 3.2% – 11.5%].ConclusionSLNB in patients with a clinically node negative axilla after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is feasible and accurate. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2009;69(24 Suppl):Abstract nr 1013.

Is there a role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ?: analysis of 587 cases

The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with a core needle-biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has been intensely debated. Core needle-biopsy has an inherent sampling error leading to histologic underestimation of invasive disease. If SLNB is not performed at the time of the definitive operative procedure, patients found to have an invasive cancer, will require a second operative procedure. The study was designed to determine when the risk of finding invasive disease on final pathology in patients with an initial diagnosis of DCIS was sufficiently high to justify the use of SLNB. We identified 587 women with an initial core needle-biopsy diagnosis of DCIS in the prospective Breast Test Wales (BTW) database from 1995 through 2005. A variety of clinical, mammographic and histologic features were identified and correlated with the presence of invasion at excision using univariate and multivariate analyses. Median age of patients at the time of diagnosis was 58 years (range 41 to 83 years). 201 patients (36%) were treated by mastectomy and 354 (64%) by breast conservation surgery. 220 of 587 patients (38%) were found to have invasive disease on final pathology. On univariate analysis, the rate of upstaging was related to the presence of a clinically palpable mass and size of the mass (both p<0.0001, Mann-Whitney test); mammographic presence of a mass and size of the mass (both p<0.0001, Mann-Whitney test). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed 2 independent predictors of invasive cancer on final pathology: mass on clinical examination (odds ratio [OR], 5.09; p<0.0001) and mammographic mass (OR, 7.37; p<0.0001). Age, grade of DCIS, microinvasion and presence of comedonecrosis did not help in distinguishing between patients with DCIS and those upstaged to invasive carcinoma at definitive surgery. Axillary nodal staging (four node sampling or clearance) was done at the time of surgery in 269 patients. Axillary nodal metastases were found in 35 of 269 patients (13%). All 35 patients had invasive carcinoma on final pathology. The indiscriminate use of SLNB in patients with DCIS seems excessive. Our study suggests that patients with a mass on clinical examination or mammogram have an increased risk of invasive disease at the time of definitive operative procedure and should undergo SLNB at the initial procedure. In addition, SLNB should be performed in patients undergoing mastectomy because mastectomy precludes SLNB if invasive disease is subsequently discovered.