Risk Factors for a False-Negative Result of Sentinel Node Biopsy in Patients with Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer

被引:10
|
作者
Lee, Seung Ah [1 ,2 ]
Lee, Hak Min [3 ]
Lee, Hak Woo [4 ]
Yang, Ban Seok [4 ]
Park, Jong Tae [4 ]
Ahn, Sung Gwe [4 ]
Jeong, Joon [4 ]
Kim, Seung Il [5 ]
机构
[1] CHA Univ, CHA Bundang Med Ctr, Dept Surg, Seongnam, South Korea
[2] Yonsei Univ, Grad Sch, Dept Med, Seoul, South Korea
[3] Catholic Kwandong Univ, Int St Marys Hosp, Dept Surg, Coll Med, Kangnung, South Korea
[4] Yonsei Univ, Gangnam Severance Hosp, Dept Surg, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea
[5] Yonsei Univ, Severance Hosp, Dept Surg, Coll Med, Seoul, South Korea
来源
CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT | 2018年 / 50卷 / 03期
关键词
False negative; Sentinel lymph node; Prognosis; Breast neoplasms; MULTICENTER TRIAL; AXILLARY; ULTRASOUND; ULTRASONOGRAPHY; NUMBER; METASTASIS; DISSECTION; RECURRENCE; THERAPY; IMPACT;
D O I
10.4143/crt.2017.089
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose Although sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) can accurately represent the axillary lymph node (ALN) status, the false-negative rate (FNR) of SLNB is the main concern in the patients who receive SLNB alone instead of ALN dissection (ALND). Materials and Methods We analyzed 1,886 patients who underwent ALND after negative results of SLNB, retrospectively. A logistic regression analysis was used to identify risk factors associated with a false-negative (FN) result. Cox regression model was used to estimate the hazard ratio of factors affecting disease-free survival (DFS). Results Tumor located in the upper outer portion of the breast, lymphovascular invasion, suspicious node in imaging assessment and less than three sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) were significant independent risk factors for FN in SLNB conferring an adjusted odds ratio of 2.10 (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.30 to 3.39), 2.69 (95% CI, 1.47 to 4.91), 2.59 (95% CI, 1.62 to 4.14), and 2.39 (95% CI, 1.45 to 3.95), respectively. The prognostic factors affecting DFS were tumor size larger than 2 cm (hazard ratio [HR], 1.86; 95% CI, 1.17 to 2.96) and FN of SLNB (HR, 2.51; 95% CI, 1.42 to 4.42) in SLN-negative group (FN and true-negative), but in ALN-positive group (FN and true-positive), FN of SLNB (HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.33 to 1.25) did not affect DFS. Conclusion In patients with risk factors for a FN such as suspicious node in imaging assessment, upper outer breast cancer, less than three harvested nodes, we need attention to find another metastatic focus in non-SLNs during the operation. It may contribute to provide an exact prognosis and optimizing adjuvant treatments.
引用
收藏
页码:625 / 633
页数:9
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] False-negative frozen section of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer
    Holck, S
    Galatius, H
    Engel, U
    Wagner, F
    Hoffmann, J
    BREAST, 2004, 13 (01): : 42 - 48
  • [22] Factors Predicting Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer [Response to Letter]
    AlSumai, Thuraya S.
    Alhefdhi, Amal
    BREAST CANCER-TARGETS AND THERAPY, 2023, 15 : 133 - 134
  • [23] Clinicopathologic factors associated with false-negative sentinel lymph-node biopsy in breast cancer
    Cody, Hiram S., III
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2006, 244 (02) : 324 - 324
  • [24] Clinicopathologic factors associated with false-negative sentinel lymph-node biopsy in breast cancer
    Martin, RCG
    Chagpar, A
    Scoggins, CR
    Edwards, MJ
    Hagendoorn, L
    Stromberg, AJ
    McMasters, KM
    ANNALS OF SURGERY, 2005, 241 (06) : 1005 - 1012
  • [25] False-negative sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma patients
    Manca, Gianpiero
    Rubello, Domenico
    Romanini, Antonella
    Mariani, Giuliano
    NUCLEAR MEDICINE COMMUNICATIONS, 2014, 35 (10) : 989 - 994
  • [26] Factors Associated with False-Negative Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Melanoma Patients
    Scoggins, Charles R.
    Martin, Robert C. G.
    Ross, Merrick I.
    Edwards, Michael J.
    Reintgen, Douglas S.
    Urist, Marshall M.
    Gershenwald, Jeffrey E.
    Sussman, Jeffrey J.
    Noyes, R. Dirk
    Goydos, James S.
    Beitsch, Peter D.
    Ariyan, Stephan
    Stromberg, Arnold J.
    Hagendoorn, Lee J.
    McMasters, Kelly M.
    ANNALS OF SURGICAL ONCOLOGY, 2010, 17 (03) : 709 - 717
  • [27] Factors Associated with False-Negative Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Melanoma Patients
    Charles R. Scoggins
    Robert C. G. Martin
    Merrick I. Ross
    Michael J. Edwards
    Douglas S. Reintgen
    Marshall M. Urist
    Jeffrey E. Gershenwald
    Jeffrey J. Sussman
    R. Dirk Noyes
    James S. Goydos
    Peter D. Beitsch
    Stephan Ariyan
    Arnold J. Stromberg
    Lee J. Hagendoorn
    Kelly M. McMasters
    Annals of Surgical Oncology, 2010, 17 : 709 - 717
  • [28] Sentinel lymph node biopsy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy in clinically node-negative breast cancer patients.
    Enokido, K.
    Nakamura, S.
    Tsugawa, K.
    Kojima, Y.
    Iwata, H.
    Ohno, S.
    Akiyama, F.
    Motomura, K.
    JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2011, 29 (27)
  • [29] The False-Negative Rate of Sentinel Node Biopsy in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis
    Pesek, Sarah
    Ashikaga, Taka
    Krag, Lars Erik
    Krag, David
    WORLD JOURNAL OF SURGERY, 2012, 36 (09) : 2239 - 2251
  • [30] The False-Negative Rate of Sentinel Node Biopsy in Patients with Breast Cancer: A Meta-Analysis
    Sarah Pesek
    Taka Ashikaga
    Lars Erik Krag
    David Krag
    World Journal of Surgery, 2012, 36 : 2239 - 2251