medigraphic.com

2014, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Cir Cir 2014; 82 (2)

Sentinel lymph node metastasis in patients with ductal breast carcinoma in situ

Ruvalcaba-Limón E, Garduño-Raya MJ, Bautista-Piña V, Trejo-Martínez C, Maffuz-Aziz A, Rodríguez-Cuevas S

Language: Spanish
References: 33
Page: 129-141
PDF size: 411.65 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ still controversial, with positive lymph node in range of 1.4-12.5% due occult invasive breast carcinoma in surgical specimen.
Objective: To know the frequency of sentimel node metastases in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ, identify differences between positive and negative cases.
Methods: Retrospective study of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ treated with sentinel lymph node biopsy because mastectomy indication, palpable tumor, radiological lesion ≥ 5 cm, non-favorable breast-tumor relation and/or patients whom surgery could affect lymphatic flow drainage.
Results: Of 168 in situ carcinomas, 50 cases with ductal carcinoma in situ and sentinel lymph node biopsy were included, with a mean age of 51.6 years, 30 (60%) asymptomatic. The most common symptoms were palpable nodule (18%), nipple discharge (12%), or both (8%). Microcalcifications were common (72%), comedonecrosis pattern (62%), grade-2 histology (44%), and 28% negative hormonal receptors. Four (8%) cases had intra-operatory positive sentinel lymph node and one patient at final histo-pathological study (60% micrometastases, 40% macrometastases), all with invasive carcinoma in surgical specimen. Patients with intra-operatory positive sentinel lymph node where younger (44.5 vs 51 years), with more palpable tumors (50% vs 23.1%), and bigger (3.5 vs 2 cm), more comedonecrosis pattern (75% vs 60.8%), more indifferent tumors (75% vs 39.1%), and less cases with hormonal receptors (50% vs 73.9%), compared with negative sentinel lymph node cases, all these differences without statistic significance.
Conclusions: One of each 12 patients with ductal carcinoma in situ had affection in sentinel lymph node, so we recommend continue doing this procedure to avoid second surgeries due the presence of occult invasive carcinoma.


REFERENCES

  1. Tabár L, Gad A, Holmberg LH, Ljungquist U, Fagerberg CJG, Baldetorp L, et al. Reduction in mortality from breast cancer after mass screening with mammography: Randomised Trial from the Breast Cancer Screening Working Group of the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare. Lancet 1985;325(8433):829-832.

  2. Cortesi L, Chiuri VE, Ruscelli S, Bellelli V, Negri R, Rashid I, et al. Prognosis of screen-detected breast cancers: results of a population based study. BMC Cancer 2006;6:17.

  3. Online American Cancer Society 2013, Breast cancer: What are the key statistics about breast cancer? página 9. (consultado 2013 mayo 12). Disponible en http://www.cancer. org/acs/groups/cid/documents/webcontent/003090-pdf. pdf

  4. Rizo-Rios P, Sierra-Colindres MI, Vázquez-Piñón G, Cano- Guadiana M, Meneses-García A, Mohar A. Registro hospitalario de cáncer: compendio de cáncer 2000-2004. Cancerología 2007;2:203-287.

  5. Rodríguez-Cuevas SA, Guisa Hohenstein F, Labastida- Almendaro S, Espejo-Fonseca R, Capurso-Garcia M, Ruvalcaba-Limón E, et al. Resultados del primer programa de detección oportuna de cáncer de mama en México mediante pesquisa con mastografía. GAMO 2009;8:83-96.

  6. Rodríguez-Cuevas S, Guisa-Hohenstein F, Labastida- Almendaro S. First Breast Cancer Mammography Screening Program in Mexico: Initial Results 2005-2006. Breast J. 2009;15:623-631.

  7. Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 1994;220:391-401.

  8. Lyman GH, Giuliano AE, Somerfield MR, Benson AB 3rd, Bodurka DC, Burstein HJ, et al. American Society of Clinical Oncology Guideline Recommendations for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2005;23:7703-7720.

  9. Schneider C, Trocha S, McKinley B, Shaw J, Bielby S, Blackhurst D, et al. The Use of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ. Am Surg 2010;76:943-946.

  10. Brennan ME, Turner RM, Ciatto S, Marinovich ML, French JR, Macaskill P, et al. Ductal Carcinoma in Situ at Core- Needle Biopsy: Meta-Analysis of Underestimation and Predictors of Invasive Breast Cancer. Radiology 2011;260:119- 128.

  11. Miyake T, Shimazu K, Ohashi H, Taguchi T, Ueda S, Nakayama T, et al. Indication for sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer when core biopsy shows ductal carcinoma in situ. Am J Surg 2011;202:59-65.

  12. Maffuz A, Barroso-Bravo S, Nájera I, Zarco G, Alvarado- Cabrero I, Rodríguez-Cuevas SA. Tumor Size as Predictor of Microinvasion, Invasion, and Axillary Metastasis in Ductal Carcinoma in situ. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 2006;25:223-227.

  13. Segunda revisión del Consenso Nacional sobre Diagnóstico y Tratamiento del Cáncer Mamario. Colima 2006. Gaceta Mexicana de Oncología 2006;5(supl 2):1-21.

  14. Tercera revisión del Consenso Nacional sobre Diagnóstico y Tratamiento del Cáncer Mamario. Colima 2008. Gaceta Mexicana de Oncología 2008;7(supl 6):1-35.

  15. Cárdenas-Sánchez J, Erazo-Valle A, Maafs-Molina E, Poitevin-Chacón A. Consenso Nacional sobre Diagnóstico y Tratamiento del Cáncer Mamario. Cuarta revisión, Colima, México. Enero 2011. Gaceta Mexicana de Oncología 2011;10(supl 5):1-58.

  16. Cárdenas-Sánchez J, Bargalló-Rocha E, Erazo-Valle A, Maafs- Molina E, Poitevin-Chacón A. En: Consenso Nacional sobre Diagnóstico y Tratamiento del Cáncer Mamario. Quinta revisión, Colima 2013. 1ª edición, México, D.F.: ELSEVIER 2013. p. 41. Disponible en http://consensocancermamario. com/documentos/FOLLETO_CONSENSO_DE_CANCER_DE_ MAMA_5aRev2013.PDF

  17. Yen TWF, Hunt KK, Ross MI, Mirza NQ, Babiera GV, Meric- Bernstam F, et al. Predictors of invasive breast cancer in patients with an initial diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ: A guide to selective use of sentinel lymph node biopsy in management of ductal carcinoma in situ. J Am Coll Surg 2005;200:516-526.

  18. Rubio IT, Roca I, Sabadell D, Xercavins J. Benefit of sentinel node biopsy in patients with breast ductal carcinoma in situ. Cir Esp 2009;85:92-95.

  19. Meijnen P, Oldenburg HSA, Loo CE, Nieweg OE, Peterse JL, Rutgers EJT. Risk of invasion and axillary lymph node metastasis in ductal carcinoma in situ diagnosed by coreneedle biopsy. Br J Surg 2007;94:952-956.

  20. Huo L, Sneige N, Hunt KK, Albarracin CT, Lopez A, Resetkova E. Predictors of invasion in patients with core-needle biopsydiagnosed ductal carcinoma in situ and recommendations for a selective approach to sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ. Cancer 2006;107:1760-1768.

  21. Wilkie C, White L, Dupont E, Cantor A, Cox CE. An update of sentinel lymph node mapping in patients with ductal carcinoma in situ. Am J Surg 2005;190:563-566.

  22. Hoorntje LE, Schipper MEI, Peeters PHM, Bellot F, Storm RK, Borel Rinkes IHM. The Finding of Invasive Cancer After a Preoperative Diagnosis of Ductal Carcinoma-In-Situ: Causes of Ductal Carcinoma-In-Situ Underestimates With Stereotactic 14-Gauge Needle Biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2003;10:748-753.

  23. Goyal A, Douglas-Jones A, Monypenny I, Sweetland H, Stevens G, Mansel RE. Is there a role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in ductal carcinoma in situ? analysis of 587 cases. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006;98:311-314.

  24. King TA, Farr GH Jr, Cederbom GJ, Smetherman DH, Bolton JS, Stolier AJ, et al. A mass on breast imaging predicts coexisting invasive carcinoma in patients with a core biopsy diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Am Surg 2001;67:907-912.

  25. Catteau X, Simon P, Noël JC. Predictors of invasive breast cancer in mammographically detected microcalcification in patients with a core biopsy diagnosis of flat epithelial atypia, atypical ductal hyperplasia or ductal carcinoma in situ and recommendations for a selective approach to sentinel lymph node biopsy. Pathol Res Pract 2012;208:217-220.

  26. Intra M, Rotmensz N, Veronesi P, Colleoni M, Iodice S, Paganelli G, et al. Sentinel node biopsy is not a standard procedure in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the experience of the European institute of oncology on 854 patients in 10 years. Ann Surg 2008;247:315319.

  27. Leonard GD, Swain SM. Ductal Carcinoma In Situ, Complexities and Challenges. JNCI J Natl Cancer Inst 2004;96:906- 920.

  28. Jackman RJ, Burbank F, Parker SH, Evans WP 3rd, Lechner MC, Richardson TR, et al. Stereotactic Breast Biopsy of Nonpalpable Lesions: Determinants of Ductal Carcinoma in Situ Underestimation Rates. Radiology 2001;218:497- 502.

  29. Julian TB, Land SR, Fourchotte V, Haile SR, Fisher ER, Mamounas EP, et al. Is Sentinel Node Biopsy Necessary in Conservatively Treated DCIS? Ann Surg Oncol 2007;14:2202- 2208.

  30. Yamaguchi A, Tsuyuki S, Okamura M, Kawata Y, Kawaguchi K, Kawaguchi N, et al. Indication of sentinel lymph node biopsy with breast-conserving surgery for ductal carcinoma in situ considering lymphatic flow. J Clin Oncol 2012;30(suppl 27):abstr 192.

  31. Meretoja TJ, Heikkilä PS, Salmenkivi K, Leidenius MHK. Outcome of Patients with Ductal Carcinoma In Situ and Sentinel Node Biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2012;19:2345-2351.

  32. Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, Beitsch PD, Whitworth PW, Blumencranz PW, et al. Axillary Dissection vs No Axillary Dissection in Women With Invasive Breast Cancer and Sentinel Node Metastasis. A Randomized Clinical Trial JAMA 2011;305:569-675.

  33. Lester SC, Bose S, Chen YY, Connolly JL, de Baca ME, Fitzgibbons PL, et al. Protocol for the Examination of Specimens From Patients With Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast. Arch Pathol Laborat Med 2009;133:15-25.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com