Search

Background: Trials have demonstrated the safety of omitting completion axillary lymph node dissection in patients with cT1-2 N0 breast cancer operated with breast-conserving surgery who have limited metastatic burden in the sentinel lymph node. The aim of this registry study was to provide insight into the oncological safety of omitting completion axillary treatment in patients operated with mastectomy who have limited-volume sentinel lymph node metastasis. Methods: Women diagnosed in 2013-2014 with unilateral cT1-2 N0 breast cancer treated with mastectomy, with one to three sentinel lymph node metastases (pN1mi-pN1a), were identified from the Netherlands Cancer Registry, and classified by axillary treatment: no completion axillary treatment, completion axillary lymph node dissection, regional radiotherapy, or completion axillary lymph node dissection followed by regional radiotherapy. The primary endpoint was 5-year regional recurrence rate. Secondary endpoints included recurrence-free interval and overall survival, among others. Results: In total, 1090 patients were included (no completion axillary treatment, 219 (20.1%); completion axillary lymph node dissection, 437 (40.1%); regional radiotherapy, 327 (30.0%); completion axillary lymph node dissection and regional radiotherapy, 107 (9.8%)). Patients in the group without completion axillary treatment had more favourable tumour characteristics and were older. The overall 5-year regional recurrence rate was 1.3%, and did not differ significantly between the groups. The recurrence-free interval was also comparable among groups. The group of patients who did not undergo completion axillary treatment had statistically significantly worse 5-year overall survival, owing to a higher percentage of non-cancer deaths. Conclusion:In this registry study of patients with cT1-2 N0 breast cancer treated with mastectomy, with low-volume sentinel lymph

Background: In node-positive (cN+) breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant systemic therapy, combining sentinel lymph node biopsy and targeted lymph node excision, that is targeted axillary dissection, increases accuracy. Targeted axillary dissection procedures differ in terms of the targeted lymph node excision technique. This systematic review aimed to provide an overview of targeted axillary dissection procedures regarding definitive marker type and timing of placement: before neoadjuvant systemic therapy (1-step procedure) or after neoadjuvant systemic therapy adjacent to a clip placed before the neoadjuvant therapy (2-step procedure). Methods: PubMed and Embase were searched, to 4 July 2023, for RCTs, cohort studies, and case-control studies with at least 25 patients. Studies of targeted lymph node excision only (without sentinel lymph node biopsy), or where intraoperative localization of the targeted lymph node was not attempted, were excluded. For qualitative synthesis, studies were grouped by definitive marker and timing of placement. The targeted lymph node identification rate was reported. Study quality was assessed using a National Institutes of Health quality assessment tool.Results: Of 277 unique records, 51 studies with a total of 4512 patients were included. Six definitive markers were identified: wire, 125I-labelled seed, 99mTc, (electro)magnetic/radiofrequency markers, black ink, and a clip. Fifteen studies evaluated one-step procedures, with the identification rate of the targeted lymph node at surgery varying from 8 of 13 to 47 of 47. Forty-one studies evaluated two-step procedures, with the identification rate of the clipped targeted lymph node on imaging after neoadjuvant systemic therapy varying from 49 to 100%, and the identification rate of the targeted lymph node at surgery from 17 of 24 to 100%. Most studies (40 of 51) were rated as being of fair quality.

Background: Node positive breast cancer (cN+) patients with an axillary pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NST) are not expected to benefit from axillary lymph node dissection (ALND). Therefore, less invasive axillary staging procedures have been introduced to establish response-guided treatment. However, evidence is lacking with regard to their oncologic safety and impact on quality of life (QoL). We hypothesize that if response-guided treatment is given, less invasive staging procedures are non-inferior to standard ALND in terms of oncologic safety, and superior to standard ALND in terms of QoL. Patients and Methods: MINIMAX is a Dutch multicenter registry study that includes patients with cN1-3M0 unilateral invasive breast cancer, who receive NST, followed by axillary staging and treatment according to local protocols. In a retrospective registry of ±4000 patients, the primary endpoint is oncologic safety at 5 and 10 years (disease-free, breast-cancer-specific and overall survival, and axillary recurrence rate). In a prospective multicenter registry, the primary endpoints are QoL at 1 and 5 years, and we aim to verify the 5-year oncologic safety. With an estimated 5-year disease-free survival of 72.5% and anticipated loss to follow-up of 10%, a sample size of 549 is needed to have 80% power to detect non-inferiority (with a 10% margin) of less invasive staging procedures. Conclusion: In cN+ patients treated with NST, less invasive axillary staging procedures are already implemented globally. Evidence is needed to support the assumed oncologic safety and superior QoL of such procedures. This study will contribute to evidence-based guidelines.

Background: There is a trend towards de-escalating axillary staging and treatment in breast cancer patients. On account of neoadjuvant systemic therapy, node-positive breast cancer patients can achieve a pathological complete response of the axilla. It is hypothesized that these patients do not benefit from an axillary lymph node dissection (ALND), and thus may be spared the risk of severe post-surgical morbidity. In an effort to omit standard ALND, less invasive axillary staging procedures are being implemented to establish response-guided treatment. However, it is unclear which less invasive staging procedure is most accurate, and long-term data are missing with regard to their oncologic safety. Summary: This article provides an overview of the literature on currently used less invasive axillary staging procedures, the accuracy and feasibility of these procedures in clinical practice, important issues concerning axillary treatment, and issues to be addressed in ongoing or future studies. Key messages: More evidence is needed regarding the safety of replacing standard ALND by less invasive axillary staging procedures in terms of long-term prognosis. These less invasive staging procedures not only serve to select patients who may benefit from treatment de-escalation, but also to select patients who may benefit from treatment escalation.