Breast cancer in patients with prior augmentation: presentation, stage, and lymphatic mapping.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether breast cancer patients who had prior breast augmentation presented at a more advanced stage than nonaugmented breast cancer patients, and to determine the mode of presentation and effectiveness of lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in this same group of patients. A total of 4186 breast cancer patients from 1987 to 2002 were reviewed. Patients who had augmentation before their diagnosis of breast cancer were compared with a control group of nonaugmented breast cancer patients. The Wilcoxon rank sum test was used to compare tumor size, node positivity, and stage. The patient's age at presentation was also compared by the two-sided pooled t test. Seventy-six patients who previously underwent augmentation were identified with 78 breast cancers. Seventy percent (48 of 69) were initially detected by palpation, whereas 30 percent (21 of 69) were initially identified mammographically. Fifty-three percent (n = 41) underwent mastectomy and 47 percent (n = 37) underwent a lumpectomy. This compares with a 63.6 percent (2615 of 4110) breast conservation rate in the nonaugmented population during the same time period. The two groups did not differ regarding (tumor) size (p = 0.77), nodal positivity (p = 0.32), or stage (p = 0.34). The mean time between implant placement and a diagnosis of breast cancer was 14 years. The average age of the patients who had previously undergone augmentation at breast cancer diagnosis was 49.5 years (SD, 9.0 years) versus 57.1 years (SD, 13.5 years) for the nonaugmented patients (p < 0.0001). Forty-nine of the patients underwent lymphatic mapping, with a 100 percent success rate in identifying the sentinel lymph node. There have been no clinically detected axillary recurrences in the patients who had a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy. Breast cancer patients who have undergone previous augmentation are more likely to present with a palpable mass. This initial mode of detection does not appear to translate into a larger tumor size or worse prognosis. Breast conservation and lymphatic mapping can be performed successfully in previously augmented patients.

Superficial femoral lymph node dissection after positive sentinel lymphadenectomy for early-stage melanoma of the lower extremity.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate retrospectively the value of a subsequent superficial femoral lymph node dissection for patients with early melanoma of the lower extremity after a positive sentinel lymphadenectomy. During a 6-year period at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center & Research Institute, 16 consecutive patients with clinical stage I or stage II melanoma of the lower extremity underwent subsequent superficial femoral lymph node dissections after positive sentinel lymphadenectomies and wide local excisions of the primary lesions. Fifteen patients (94%) were found to have no additional positive lymph nodes from their superficial femoral lymph node dissection specimens. In contrast, only 1 patient (6%) with a thick primary lesion (7.5 mm) was found to have one additional positive lymph node on a subsequent superficial femoral lymph node dissection. No patients developed any regional nodal recurrences during a mean follow-up of 31.1 months (range, 3-80 months). This preliminary report suggests that the majority of the time the sentinel lymph node may be the only site of regional microscopic nodal disease and that a subsequent superficial femoral lymph node dissection may not be necessary in patients with early melanoma of the lower extremity after a positive sentinel lymphadenectomy. However, whether the sentinel lymphadenectomy can be used solely as a regional surgical treatment for this subgroup of patients still warrants further evaluation.

Prevalence of additional positive lymph nodes in complete lymphadenectomy specimens after positive sentinel lymphadenectomy findings for early-stage melanoma of the head and neck.

In this study, the prevalence of additional positive lymph nodes in subsequent complete lymphadenectomy specimens for patients with early-stage melanoma of the head and neck, after positive sentinel lymphadenectomy results, was retrospectively analyzed. In the past 5 years at the authors' institution, 23 consecutive patients with clinical stage I or stage II melanoma of the head and neck underwent complete lymphadenectomies after positive sentinel lymph node biopsies and wide local excisions of the primary lesions. Sentinel lymph nodes were identified with intraoperative lymphatic mapping techniques (radiolymphoscintigraphy and vital blue dye injection) and were examined with routine histological methods and immunohistochemical staining for S-100. All lymph nodes harvested in complete lymphadenectomies were examined with routine histological techniques. Twenty-one patients (91.3 percent) demonstrated no additional positive lymph nodes in subsequent complete lymphadenectomy specimens; two patients (8.7 percent) each demonstrated one additional positive lymph node in the complete lymphadenectomy specimens. Both patients had ulcerated primary lesions more than 5 mm in depth. No patient developed a regional nodal recurrence during a mean follow-up period of 23.7 months (range, 2 to 56 months). The low prevalence of additional positive lymph nodes in complete lymphadenectomy specimens suggests that when microscopic metastases exist in the regional nodal basin, most of the time they are confined to the sentinel lymph nodes of patients with early-stage melanoma of the head and neck. Nevertheless, the question of whether subsequent complete lymphadenectomy is still necessary for this subgroup of patients warrants further study.

Effect of lymphatic mapping on diagnosis and treatment of patients with T1a, T1b favorable breast cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the incidence of nodal metastasis in a consecutive series of patients treated at the authors' institution with highly selective criteria, and to determine the impact that lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy have on the detection of nodal metastases in this carefully selected patient population. METHODS: Study patients were selected from the 7,750 breast cancer patients entered into the authors' database from April 1989 to August 2001, based on the following criteria: nonpalpable, T1a and T1b, non-high nuclear grade tumors, without lymphovascular invasion. RESULTS: Of the 7,750 patients in the database 1,327 (17%) were found to have T1a and T1b lesions. Three hundred eighty-nine patients were confirmed to meet all four selection criteria. This represents 5% (389/7,750) of the authors' breast cancer patients and 29.3% (389/1,327) of the authors' T1a/T1b tumors. One hundred sixty patients were diagnosed before routine use of lymphatic mapping, and only one patient had a positive axillary lymph node. Two hundred twenty-nine patients underwent lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy, and 10 had a positive axillary lymph node. The difference in proportions of nodal positivity between the mapped and unmapped patients was significant. CONCLUSIONS: This study clearly demonstrates the ability of lymphatic mapping and a more detailed examination of the sentinel node to increase the accuracy of axillary staging. It has been argued that this highly selected group of breast cancer patients possessing retrospectively identified "favorable" characteristics does not require axillary staging. This select population represents only 5% of breast cancer patients in this series, and the authors do not believe they can be accurately identified preoperatively. Therefore, the authors strongly argue for evaluation of the axillary nodal status by lymphatic mapping.

Completion axillary lymph node dissection minimizes the likelihood of false negatives for patients with invasive breast carcinoma and cytokeratin positive only sentinel lymph nodes.

OBJECTIVE: To document the incidence of metastatic disease in complete axillary lymph node dissections (CALND) of patients with invasive carcinoma after a sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy, positive only by immunohistochemical staining for cytokeratin (CK-IHC). METHODS: Sections of all SLNs, negative by routine histology, were immunostained and examined for cytokeratin positive cells. Sections of lymph nodes from CALND specimens were interpreted using routine hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining. RESULTS: A total of 409 patients (29.6%) had metastatic disease in at least one sentinel lymph node on H&E examination. Of 971 H&E negative patients, 78 (8.0%) were positive only by CK-IHC. Sixty-two of the CK-IHC positive only patients underwent CALND. Nine of these 62 patients (14.5%) had metastases identified in the CALND specimen. CONCLUSIONS: Because 14.5% of patients with invasive breast cancer and SLNs positive only by CK-IHC were found to have H&E positive lymph nodes on CALND, we conclude first, that CK-IHC should be used to evaluate SLNs, and second, that CALND should be considered when SLNs are positive by CK-IHC only. This approach will result in an absolute reduction of the false negative rate (absolute false negative rate reduced by 2.6% in our series).