Repeat Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Ipsilateral Breast Tumor Recurrence After Breast Conserving Surgery With Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy: Pooled Analysis Using Data From a Systematic Review and Two Institutions.

Introduction: Best surgical approach of axillary staging remains controversial in locally recurrent breast cancer. We evaluated the reliability of repeat sentinel lymph node biopsy (reSLNB) in patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR) after breast conserving surgery (BCS) with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in terms of identification rate (IR) and false negative rate (FNR). To address the FNR, we identified patients who underwent sequential axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) after reSLNB. Methods: A systematic search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library were conducted to identify patient-level data from articles. We searched for data of patients who underwent BCS with SLNB for primary breast cancer and who underwent sequential ALND after reSLNB due to local recurrence. Patients data was also identified by the same criteria at two institutions. Results: In total, 197 peer-reviewed publications were obtained, of which 20 included patients who met the eligibility criteria. Data from 464 patients were collected. From the two institutions, 31 patients were identified. A total of 495 patients were pooled. The IR of reSLNB was 71.9% (356/495). To address the FNR of reSLNB, 171 patients who underwent ALND after reSLNB were identified. The FNR and accuracy of reSLNB were 9.4% (5/53) and 97.1% (165/170), respectively. Conclusion: Our pooled data analysis showed that the FNR of reSLNB is lower than 10%, indicating that this operation is a reliable axillary surgery in patients with IBTR after they underwent BCS.

A nomogram constructed using intraoperative ex vivo shear-wave elastography precisely predicts metastasis of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a nomogram and validate its use for the intraoperative evaluation of nodal metastasis using shear-wave elastography (SWE) elasticity values and nodal size METHODS: We constructed a nomogram to predict metastasis using ex vivo SWE values and ultrasound features of 228 axillary LNs from fifty-five patients. We validated its use in an independent cohort comprising 80 patients. In the validation cohort, a total of 217 sentinel LNs were included. RESULTS: We developed the nomogram using the nodal size and elasticity values of the development cohort to predict LN metastasis; the area under the curve (AUC) was 0.856 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.783-0.929). In the validation cohort, 15 (7%) LNs were metastatic, and 202 (93%) were non-metastatic. The mean stiffness (23.54 and 10.41 kPa, p = 0.005) and elasticity ratio (3.24 and 1.49, p = 0.028) were significantly higher in the metastatic LNs than those in the non-metastatic LNs. However, the mean size of the metastatic LNs was not significantly larger than that of the non-metastatic LNs (8.70 mm vs 7.20 mm, respectively; p = 0.123). The AUC was 0.791 (95% CI, 0.668-0.915) in the validation cohort, and the calibration plots of the nomogram showed good agreement. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a well-validated nomogram to predict LN metastasis. This nomogram, mainly based on ex vivo SWE values, can help evaluate nodal metastasis during surgery. KEY POINTS: • A nomogram was developed based on axillary LN size and ex vivo SWE values such as mean stiffness and elasticity ratio to easily predict axillary LN metastasis during breast cancer surgery. • The constructed nomogram presented high predictive performance of sentinel LN metastasis with an independent cohort. • This nomogram can reduce unnecessary intraoperative frozen section which increases the surgical time and costs in breast cancer patients.

Immediate Breast Reconstruction Does Not Have a Clinically Significant Impact on Adjuvant Treatment Delay and Subsequent Survival Outcomes.

PURPOSE: The use of immediate breast reconstruction (IBR) has been debated because it may be a causative factor in adjuvant treatment delay and may subsequently increase the probability of recurrence. We investigated whether IBR was related to adjuvant treatment delay and survival outcomes. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed the duration from operation to adjuvant treatment administration and survival outcomes according to IBR status among patients with breast cancer who underwent mastectomy followed by adjuvant chemotherapy from January 2005 to December 2014. Propensity score matching was performed to balance the clinicopathologic baseline characteristics between patients who did and did not undergo IBR. RESULTS: Of 646 patients, 107 (16.6%) underwent IBR, and the median follow-up was 72 months. The median duration from surgery to adjuvant chemotherapy was significantly longer in patients who underwent IBR than in those who did not (14 vs. 12 days, respectively, p = 0.008). Based on propensity score matching, patients who underwent IBR received adjuvant therapy 3 days later than those who did not (14 vs. 11 days, respectively, p = 0.044). The duration from surgery to post-mastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) did not significantly differ between the 2 groups. Local recurrence-free survival, regional recurrence-free survival, systemic recurrence-free survival, and overall survival were also not significantly different between the 2 groups (p = 0.427, p = 0.445, p = 0.269, and p = 0.250, respectively). In the case-matched cohort, survival outcomes did not change. CONCLUSION: IBR was associated with a modest increase in the duration from surgery to chemotherapy that was statistically but not clinically significant. Moreover, IBR had no influence on PMRT delay or survival outcomes, suggesting that it is an acceptable option for patients with non-metastatic breast cancer undergoing mastectomy.