7
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      Breast cancer treatment‐related arm lymphoedema and morbidity: A 6‐year experience in an Australian tertiary breast centre

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          <p class="first" id="d3566047e91">Recent surgical de-escalation of the axilla in breast cancer management has led to reduced number of immediate and delayed axillary lymph node dissections (ALND) after sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNBs). We aim to assess the postoperative impact of SLNB versus immediate and delayed ALND on arm lymphoedema and morbidity. </p>

          Related collections

          Most cited references31

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          A randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer.

          Although numerous studies have shown that the status of the sentinel node is an accurate predictor of the status of the axillary nodes in breast cancer, the efficacy and safety of sentinel-node biopsy require validation. From March 1998 to December 1999, we randomly assigned 516 patients with primary breast cancer in whom the tumor was less than or equal to 2 cm in diameter either to sentinel-node biopsy and total axillary dissection (the axillary-dissection group) or to sentinel-node biopsy followed by axillary dissection only if the sentinel node contained metastases (the sentinel-node group). The number of sentinel nodes found was the same in the two groups. A sentinel node was positive in 83 of the 257 patients in the axillary-dissection group (32.3 percent), and in 92 of the 259 patients in the sentinel-node group (35.5 percent). In the axillary-dissection group, the overall accuracy of the sentinel-node status was 96.9 percent, the sensitivity 91.2 percent, and the specificity 100 percent. There was less pain and better arm mobility in the patients who underwent sentinel-node biopsy only than in those who also underwent axillary dissection. There were 15 events associated with breast cancer in the axillary-dissection group and 10 such events in the sentinel-node group. Among the 167 patients who did not undergo axillary dissection, there were no cases of overt axillary metastasis during follow-up. Sentinel-node biopsy is a safe and accurate method of screening the axillary nodes for metastasis in women with a small breast cancer. Copyright 2003 Massachusetts Medical Society
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial.

            Sentinel lymph node biopsy in women with operable breast cancer is routinely used in some countries for staging the axilla despite limited data from randomized trials on morbidity and mortality outcomes. We conducted a multicenter randomized trial to compare quality-of-life outcomes between patients with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer who received sentinel lymph node biopsy and patients who received standard axillary treatment. The primary outcome measures were arm and shoulder morbidity and quality of life. From November 1999 to October 2003, 1031 patients were randomly assigned to undergo sentinel lymph node biopsy (n = 515) or standard axillary surgery (n = 516). Patients with sentinel lymph node metastases proceeded to delayed axillary clearance or received axillary radiotherapy (depending on the protocol at the treating institution). Intention-to-treat analyses of data at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months after surgery are presented. All statistical tests were two-sided. The relative risks of any lymphedema and sensory loss for the sentinel lymph node biopsy group compared with the standard axillary treatment group at 12 months were 0.37 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.23 to 0.60; absolute rates: 5% versus 13%) and 0.37 (95% CI = 0.27 to 0.50; absolute rates: 11% versus 31%), respectively. Drain usage, length of hospital stay, and time to resumption of normal day-to-day activities after surgery were statistically significantly lower in the sentinel lymph node biopsy group (all P .05). Sentinel lymph node biopsy is associated with reduced arm morbidity and better quality of life than standard axillary treatment and should be the treatment of choice for patients who have early-stage breast cancer with clinically negative nodes.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial.

              Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) accurately identifies nodal metastasis of early breast cancer, but it is not clear whether further nodal dissection affects survival. To determine the effects of complete axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) on survival of patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastasis of breast cancer. The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 trial, a phase 3 noninferiority trial conducted at 115 sites and enrolling patients from May 1999 to December 2004. Patients were women with clinical T1-T2 invasive breast cancer, no palpable adenopathy, and 1 to 2 SLNs containing metastases identified by frozen section, touch preparation, or hematoxylin-eosin staining on permanent section. Targeted enrollment was 1900 women with final analysis after 500 deaths, but the trial closed early because mortality rate was lower than expected. All patients underwent lumpectomy and tangential whole-breast irradiation. Those with SLN metastases identified by SLND were randomized to undergo ALND or no further axillary treatment. Those randomized to ALND underwent dissection of 10 or more nodes. Systemic therapy was at the discretion of the treating physician. Overall survival was the primary end point, with a noninferiority margin of a 1-sided hazard ratio of less than 1.3 indicating that SLND alone is noninferior to ALND. Disease-free survival was a secondary end point. Clinical and tumor characteristics were similar between 445 patients randomized to ALND and 446 randomized to SLND alone. However, the median number of nodes removed was 17 with ALND and 2 with SLND alone. At a median follow-up of 6.3 years (last follow-up, March 4, 2010), 5-year overall survival was 91.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.1%-94.5%) with ALND and 92.5% (95% CI, 90.0%-95.1%) with SLND alone; 5-year disease-free survival was 82.2% (95% CI, 78.3%-86.3%) with ALND and 83.9% (95% CI, 80.2%-87.9%) with SLND alone. The hazard ratio for treatment-related overall survival was 0.79 (90% CI, 0.56-1.11) without adjustment and 0.87 (90% CI, 0.62-1.23) after adjusting for age and adjuvant therapy. Among patients with limited SLN metastatic breast cancer treated with breast conservation and systemic therapy, the use of SLND alone compared with ALND did not result in inferior survival. clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003855.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                (View ORCID Profile)
                Journal
                Asia-Pacific Journal of Clinical Oncology
                Asia-Pac J Clncl Oncology
                Wiley
                1743-7555
                1743-7563
                February 2022
                February 25 2021
                February 2022
                : 18
                : 1
                : 109-117
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Department of Breast Surgery Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital Perth Western Australia Australia
                Article
                10.1111/ajco.13523
                33629541
                6bc3f35a-6db1-4d40-914c-603a1072e00d
                © 2022

                http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor

                http://doi.wiley.com/10.1002/tdm_license_1.1

                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article