[Skip to Navigation]
Sign In
Figure.  Study Flowchart
Study Flowchart

ALND indicates axillary lymph node dissection; cN, clinical nodal stage; cT, clinical tumor stage; NAC, neoadjuvant chemotherapy; N+, node positive; pCR, pathologic complete response; SLN, sentinel lymph node; and SLNB, sentinel lymph node biopsy.

Table 1.  Clinicopathologic Characteristics of Study Cohorta
Clinicopathologic Characteristics of Study Cohorta
Table 2.  Treatment Characteristics
Treatment Characteristics
1.
Boughey  JC, Suman  VJ, Mittendorf  EA,  et al; Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology.  Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial.   JAMA. 2013;310(14):1455-1461. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.278932PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Montagna  G, Mamtani  A, Knezevic  A, Brogi  E, Barrio  AV, Morrow  M.  Selecting node-positive patients for axillary downstaging with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(11):4515-4522. doi:10.1245/s10434-020-08650-zPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Boileau  JF, Poirier  B, Basik  M,  et al.  Sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer: the SN FNAC study.   J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(3):258-264. doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.55.7827PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Classe  JM, Loaec  C, Gimbergues  P,  et al.  Sentinel lymph node biopsy without axillary lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is accurate and safe for selected patients: the GANEA 2 study.   Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;173(2):343-352. doi:10.1007/s10549-018-5004-7PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Kuehn  T, Bauerfeind  I, Fehm  T,  et al.  Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective, multicentre cohort study.   Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(7):609-618. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70166-9PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Kahler-Ribeiro-Fontana  S, Pagan  E, Magnoni  F,  et al.  Long-term standard sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant treatment in breast cancer: a single institution ten-year follow-up.   Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021;47(4):804-812. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2020.10.014PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Martelli  G, Barretta  F, Miceli  R,  et al.  Sentinel node biopsy alone or with axillary dissection in breast cancer patients after primary chemotherapy: long-term results of a prospective interventional study.   Ann Surg. 2020. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000004562PubMedGoogle Scholar
8.
Piltin  MA, Hoskin  TL, Day  CN, Davis  J  Jr, Boughey  JC.  Oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(12):4795-4801. doi:10.1245/s10434-020-08900-0PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Tee  SR, Devane  LA, Evoy  D,  et al.  Meta-analysis of sentinel lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with initial biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer.   Br J Surg. 2018;105(12):1541-1552. doi:10.1002/bjs.10986PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Caudle  AS, Yang  WT, Krishnamurthy  S,  et al.  Improved Axillary evaluation following neoadjuvant therapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer using selective evaluation of clipped nodes: implementation of targeted axillary dissection.   J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(10):1072-1078. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.64.0094PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Diego  EJ, McAuliffe  PF, Soran  A,  et al.  Axillary staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a pilot study combining sentinel lymph node biopsy with radioactive seed localization of pre-treatment positive axillary lymph nodes.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(5):1549-1553. doi:10.1245/s10434-015-5052-8PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Hartmann  S, Reimer  T, Gerber  B, Stubert  J, Stengel  B, Stachs  A.  Wire localization of clip-marked axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients treated with primary systemic therapy.   Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(9):1307-1311. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.035PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Nguyen  TT, Hieken  TJ, Glazebrook  KN, Boughey  JC.  Localizing the clipped node in patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: early learning experience and challenges.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(10):3011-3016. doi:10.1245/s10434-017-6023-zPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Laws  A, Hughes  ME, Hu  J,  et al.  Impact of residual nodal disease burden on technical outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy for node-positive (cN1) breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(12):3846-3855. doi:10.1245/s10434-019-07515-4PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Giuliano  AE, Ballman  K, McCall  L,  et al.  Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: long-term follow-up from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (Alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 Randomized Trial.   Ann Surg. 2016;264(3):413-420. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001863PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2 Comments for this article
EXPAND ALL
Letter to the Editor: Nodal Recurrence in Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer Treated With Sentinel Node Biopsy Alone After Neoadjuvan
Yanhong Wang | the Second Affiliated Hospital of Fujian Medical University, Department of Radiotherapy, Quanzhou, Fujian 362000, China
Dear Editor
We write regarding the recent paper by Barrio et al.[1] which found that breast cancer patients with cN1 disease, who achieve nodal pathologic complete response (pCR) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), can be treated with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone with 3 or more negative SLNs retrieved, and suffered low rate of nodal recurrence (0.4%). We would like to congratulate the authors for their efforts in performing this study.
As radiation therapist, we have a great interest in the role of regional nodal radiotherapy (RNI) for those breast cancer patients with cN1 and ypN0 disease after standardized SLNB
technique. Two multi-institutional studies (KROG 16-16 and KROG 12-05) failed to identify any benefit from RNI in ypN0 patients after NAC and breast-conserving surgery (BCS)[2, 3]. However, more than 80% patients in these two studies received axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) but not SLNB. Another retrospective study conducted by Cao Lu et al. also demonstrated that RNI did not improve survival for breast cancer patients with cN1 and ypN0 disease (n=89), with 88.9% patients received Mastectomy and 97.5% patients received ALND [4]. But whether the RNI can be omitted for those patients with cN1 and ypN0 disease when staging by SLNB? Standardized SLNB approach showed low false-negative rates (FNRs, <10%) for patients with cN1 and ypN0 breast cancer and is reasonable alternative to stage the axilla after NAC. We believe further investigation is needed. We suggest that Barrio and colleagues analyze the difference of survival and recurrence patterns between patients received nodal radiotherapy (n=164) or not (n=70). Of course, unplanned analyses can be used only to generate hypotheses. To be clinically applicable, results need to be validated. If negative results were showed in further analysis and multicenter randomized controlled trials (RCTs), RNI can be avoided for selected patients, and notable relative reduction of lymphedema risk (from 23.3% to 57.5%) can be expected [5]. We are looking forward the reply from authors and more relative RCTs in future.


Refferences
1. Barrio AV, Montagna G, Mamtani A, Sevilimedu V, Edelweiss M, Capko D et al. Nodal Recurrence in Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer Treated With Sentinel Node Biopsy Alone After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy-A Rare Event. JAMA oncology. 2021. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.4394.
2. Cho WK, Park W, Choi DH, Kim YB, Kim JH, Kim SS et al. Role of Elective Nodal Irradiation in Patients With ypN0 After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Followed by Breast-Conserving Surgery (KROG 16-16). Clinical breast cancer. 2019;19(1):78-86. doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2018.08.009.
3. Noh JM, Park W, Suh CO, Keum KC, Kim YB, Shin KH et al. Is elective nodal irradiation beneficial in patients with pathologically negative lymph nodes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy and breast-conserving surgery for clinical stage II-III breast cancer? A multicentre retrospective study (KROG 12-05). British journal of cancer. 2014;110(6):1420-6. doi:10.1038/bjc.2014.26.
4. Cao L, Xu C, Kirova YM, Cai G, Cai R, Wang SB et al. The Role of the Neo-Bioscore Staging System in Guiding the Optimal Strategies for Regional Nodal Irradiation Following Neoadjuvant Treatment in Breast Cancer Patients with cN1 and ypN0-1. Annals of surgical oncology. 2019;26(2):343-55. doi:10.1245/s10434-018-07095-9.
5. Gross JP, Whelan TJ, Parulekar WR, Chen BE, Rademaker AW, Helenowski IB et al. Development and Validation of a Nomogram to Predict Lymphedema After Axillary Surgery and Radiation Therapy in Women With Breast Cancer Fro
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
READ MORE
De-escalating axillary treatment
Mangesh Thorat, MBBS, MS, DNB, FEBS, PhD | Centre for Cancer Prevention, Wolfson Institute of Preventive Medicine Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom
One of the key goals of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) is to downstage axilla and performing sentinel node biopsy (SLNB) after NAC then allows de-escalation of surgical treatment of axilla 1. Barrio and colleagues 2 report valuable prospective data that confirm the oncological safety of this approach. However, certain questions remain unanswered. As authors do not provide clinicopathological characteristics of the entire cohort of 610 patients, the denominator value of hormone-receptor-positive-ERBB2-negative (HR+/ERBB2-Neg) patients is not available; 47 of these converted to N0 status and thereby avoided axillary dissection (ALND). Since response to NAC is poorer in these patients as compared with ERBB2-positive or triple negative patients, could upfront surgery and the application of ACOSOG-Z0011 criteria 3 have resulted in more patients avoiding ALND, with perhaps lower lymphoedema risk? Less than 3 SLNs were retrieved in 43 patients, who underwent ALND as per institutional protocol. Many of these would have had their nodes clipped at the initial biopsy and based on the final status of clipped node, it would be useful to know how many of them could have avoided an ALND under a combined targeted axillary dissection (TAD) with SLNB approach 4 instead of SLNB-only approach here? Furthermore, although not a primary question of this work, a large institutional series like this could also provide data on accuracy of clipped node in predicting axillary status; such data from high-volume world-class center would meaningfully contribute to the existing literature on TAD. Lastly, although the results of the AMAROS trial 5 show much lower morbidity with axillary radiotherapy as compared with surgery, 70% of patients avoiding ALND were treated with axillary radiotherapy. Thus true de-escalation of axillary treatment occurred in only 70 of 610 (11.5%) patients and the focus should now be on true de-escalation without compromising oncological safety.

REFERENCES:
1. Thorat MA. Sentinel lymph node assessment in breast cancer patients receiving neo-adjuvant chemotherapy: To biopsy before or after? Int J Cancer. 2016;138(2). doi:10.1002/ijc.29692
2. Barrio A V., Montagna G, Mamtani A, et al. Nodal Recurrence in Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer Treated With Sentinel Node Biopsy Alone After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy—A Rare Event. JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(12):1851-1855. doi:10.1001/JAMAONCOL.2021.4394
3. Giuliano AE, Ballman K V., McCall L, et al. Effect of Axillary Dissection vs No Axillary Dissection on 10-Year Overall Survival Among Women With Invasive Breast Cancer and Sentinel Node Metastasis: The ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. 2017;318(10):918-926. doi:10.1001/JAMA.2017.11470
4. Caudle AS, Yang WT, Krishnamurthy S, et al. Improved axillary evaluation following neoadjuvant therapy for patientswith node-positive breast cancer using selective evaluation of clipped nodes: Implementation of targeted axillary dissection. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(10):1072-1078. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.64.0094
5. Donker M, van Tienhoven G, Straver ME, et al. Radiotherapy or surgery of the axilla after a positive sentinel node in breast cancer (EORTC 10981-22023 AMAROS): a randomised, multicentre, open-label, phase 3 non-inferiority trial. Lancet Oncol. 2014;15(12):1303-1310. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70460-7
CONFLICT OF INTEREST: None Reported
READ MORE
Brief Report
October 7, 2021

Nodal Recurrence in Patients With Node-Positive Breast Cancer Treated With Sentinel Node Biopsy Alone After Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy—A Rare Event

Author Affiliations
  • 1Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
  • 2Biostatistical Service, Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
  • 3Department of Pathology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York
JAMA Oncol. 2021;7(12):1851-1855. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.4394
Key Points

Question  What is the nodal recurrence rate in patients with clinically node-positive (cN1) breast cancer treated with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC)?

Findings  In this cohort study of 610 patients with cN1 breast cancer, among 234 consecutive patients whose cancer was rendered cN0 with NAC treated with SLNB alone with 3 or more negative SLNs retrieved, rates of axillary failure at a median follow-up of 40 months were low (0.4%), without routine nodal clipping.

Meaning  These data support potential omission of axillary lymph node dissection in patients with cN1 breast cancer who achieve nodal pathologic complete response with NAC and are treated with SLNB alone.

Abstract

Importance  Prospective trials have demonstrated sentinel lymph node (SLN) false-negative rates of less than 10% when 3 or more SLNs are retrieved in patients with clinically node-positive breast cancer rendered clinically node-negative with neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). However, rates of nodal recurrence in such patients treated with SLN biopsy (SLNB) alone are unknown because axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) was performed in all patients, limiting adoption of this approach.

Objective  To evaluate nodal recurrence rates in a consecutive cohort of patients with clinically node-positive (cN1) breast cancer receiving NAC, followed by a negative SLNB using a standardized technique, and no further axillary surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants  From November 2013 to February 2019, a cohort of consecutively identified patients with cT1 to cT3 biopsy-proven N1 breast cancer rendered cN0 by NAC underwent SLNB with dual tracer mapping and omission of ALND if 3 or more SLNs were identified and all were pathologically negative. Metastatic nodes were not routinely clipped, and localization of clipped nodes was not performed. The study was performed in a single tertiary cancer center.

Intervention  Omission of ALND in patients with cN1 breast cancer after NAC if 3 or more SLNs were pathologically negative.

Main Outcome and Measures  The primary outcome was the rate of nodal recurrence among patients with cN1 breast cancer treated with SLNB alone after NAC.

Results  Of 610 patients with cN1 breast cancer treated with NAC, 555 (91%) converted to cN0 and underwent SLNB; 234 (42%) had 3 or more negative SLNs and had SLNB alone. The median (IQR) age of these 234 patients was 49 (40-58) years; median tumor size was 3 cm; 144 (62%) were ERBB2 (formerly HER2)-positive, and 43 (18%) were triple negative. Most (212 [91%]) received doxorubicin-based NAC; 205 (88%) received adjuvant radiotherapy (RT), and 164 (70%) also received nodal RT. At a median follow-up of 40 months, there was 1 axillary nodal recurrence synchronous with local recurrence in a patient who refused RT. Among patients who received RT (n = 205), there were no nodal recurrences.

Conclusions and Relevance  This cohort study found that in patients with cN1 disease rendered cN0 with NAC, with 3 or more negative SLNs with SLNB alone, nodal recurrence rates were low, without routine nodal clipping. These findings potentially support omitting ALND in such patients.

Introduction

In patients with clinically node-positive (cN1) breast cancer, neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC) can eradicate disease in axillary lymph nodes, with nodal pathologic complete response (pCR) rates exceeding 40%,1 reducing the need for axillary lymph node dissection (ALND).2 Four prospective multi-institutional trials demonstrated that patients with cN1 breast cancer whose disease converted to clinically node-negative (cN0) after treatment with NAC can be reliably staged with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), with false-negative rates (FNRs) of less than 10% when 3 or more SLNs are retrieved.1,3-5 Because the patients enrolled in these trials underwent ALND to establish the FNR of SLNB, they do not provide data on rates of axillary recurrence in this population, which remain uncertain.

The aim of this study was to evaluate nodal recurrence rates in a consecutive cohort of patients with cN1 breast cancer treated with NAC, followed by a negative SLNB result using a standardized SLN technique.

Methods

Beginning in November 2013 it became standard practice at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) to offer NAC to patients with biopsy-proven cN1 breast cancer to downstage the axilla and avoid ALND. Consecutive patients with clinical T1 to T3 biopsy-proven N1 breast cancer who received NAC and converted to cN0 by physical examination were eligible for SLNB; ALND was omitted in all instances when 3 or more SLNs were identified and all were pathologically negative. This retrospective study was approved by the MSKCC institutional review board, with a waiver for informed consent. Our prospectively maintained HIPAA-compliant database was queried to identify patients treated from November 2013 to February 2019.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy was performed after NAC using dual tracer mapping with technetium-99m sulfur colloid and isosulfan blue dye. Radioactive, blue, or palpably abnormal nodes were considered SLNs. In patients presenting with clips, localization of the clipped node was not performed and surgeons were unaware if the clipped node was retrieved during the SLNB.

Nodal recurrence was defined as a recurrence in the ipsilateral axillary, supraclavicular, or internal mammary nodal basins. Local recurrence was defined as an ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence; distant failure included any distant metastases. Time to recurrence was calculated from date of surgery. Patients were censored at time of recurrence or death, or at last known follow-up.

Statistical Analysis

Clinical and treatment characteristics were reported as median and interquartile range for continuous variables and frequency (No., %) for categorical variables. Locoregional recurrence was reported as a crude rate owing to the small number of events. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to estimate cumulative distant recurrence rates and overall survival (OS). Standard errors of survival estimates were estimated using the Greenwood formula to generate 95% CIs. All statistical analyses were conducted using R statistical software (version 3.5.3, R Foundation).

Results

Between November 2013 and February 2019, 769 consecutive patients with stage II to stageIII biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer received NAC followed by axillary surgery. Overall, 610 had cN1 disease and were eligible for SLNB after NAC; reasons for ineligibility are detailed in the Figure. Of patients with cN1 disease, 555 (91%) converted to cN0 by physical examination and received SLNB, and 513 (92%) had 3 or more SLNs retrieved. Overall, ALND was avoided in 234 patients with 3 or more pathologically negative (ypN0) SLNs (Figure).

Clinical and Treatment Characteristics and Follow-up Time

Clinical and treatment characteristics of the 234 patients with ypN0 SLNs are described in Table 1 and Table 2. Median follow-up was 40 months (range, 2.3-76 months), with 772 patient-years of follow-up. Of 234 patients, 224 had at least 1 year of follow-up; 24 patients (10%) were lost to follow-up.

Nodal Recurrence

There was 1 nodal recurrence—an axillary nodal recurrence, synchronous with a local recurrence, occurring 5.4 months after surgery in a patient who refused adjuvant RT. Among patients who received RT (n = 205), there were no nodal recurrences.

Local Recurrence, Distant Recurrence, and OS

One patient experienced an isolated local recurrence 6 years after surgery. Overall, 13 patients developed a distant recurrence, all isolated distant failures. The 5-year distant recurrence-free survival was 92.7% (95% CI, 86.7%-96.1%). Ten patients died during the study period. The 5-year OS was 94.2% (95% CI, 89.0%-97.0%).

Discussion

Among 234 patients with cN1 disease treated with NAC followed by SLNB with dual tracer mapping and retrieval of 3 or more pathologically negative SLNs without nodal clipping, there was 1 nodal recurrence (0.4%), in a patient who declined adjuvant RT. Among patients who received RT (n = 205), there were no nodal failures. These findings add to the existing literature demonstrating the oncologic safety of SLNB alone after NAC in patients with cN1 breast cancer, and confirm rates of axillary recurrence comparable to those observed in other retrospective studies (0%-1.6%).6-8 Unique to our study is the standardized approach to SLNB, with all patients receiving dual tracer mapping and retrieval of 3 or more negative SLNs required for omission of ALND. Kahler-Ribeiro-Fontana et al6 published their 10-year follow-up of 222 patients with cN1/N2 disease treated with NAC, of whom 123 had a negative SLN and were treated with SLNB alone; nodal clipping was not employed, and there were no requirements for number of SLNs retrieved (74% had ≤2 SLNs removed). At a median follow-up of 9.2 years, 2 (1.6%) of 123 ypN0 patients developed an axillary recurrence,6 similar to the rate in our study, taking into account differences in follow-up time. These studies provide preliminary evidence that patients with cN1 disease who achieve nodal pCR with NAC can be treated with SLNB alone, without nodal clipping, with low rates of nodal failure, although longer follow-up is needed in this study to confirm these findings.

This SLN protocol at MSKCC was developed based on the results of multi-institutional prospective trials demonstrating a strong relationship between the number of SLNs removed and the FNR in patients with cN1 breast cancer who downstage after treatment with NAC.1,3-5 This finding was confirmed in a meta-analysis in which retrieval of 3 or more SLNs resulted in an FNR of 4% (95% CI, 0%-9%).9 In contrast, the evidence supporting the need for localization and retrieval of clipped nodes is less robust and is based largely on retrospective studies, primarily in patients with suboptimal mapping techniques and retrieval of less than 3 SLNs.10,11Although the FNR of retrieval of the clipped nodes and the SLNs is comparable to that seen with retrieval of 3 or more SLNs, failure to retrieve the clipped node occurs in up to 30% of cases,12,13 resulting in a dilemma of whether ALND is then required. Although we have had success with retrieval of 3 or more SLNs after NAC, critics of this approach note that retrieval of 3 or more SLNs occurred infrequently in other studies (34%-67%),1,5,14 although most were mapped with a single tracer. In institutions where retrieval of 3 or more SLNs occurs infrequently, retrieving the clipped node and the SLNs is a reasonable alternative to stage the axilla after NAC, although long-term nodal recurrence rates with this approach are needed.

Limitations and Strengths

Our study is limited by its performance at a single institution and short median follow-up. However, based on known patterns of axillary failure, with most axillary recurrences occurring within 5 years,15 longer follow-up will unlikely result in a substantial increase in nodal recurrence rates. In addition, although our rate of identifying 3 or more SLNs with the use of dual tracer mapping exceeds 90%, this has not been replicated in other studies, which may limit the generalizability of this approach. Strengths of our study include the standardized approach to SLNB allowing for an assessment of recurrence in a homogeneously treated population.

Conclusions

Given that the prospective studies that established the accuracy of SLNB in this patient population all required ALND, studies like ours provide important data regarding the oncologic safety of surgical deescalation in patients with cN1 disease after treatment with NAC.

Back to top
Article Information

Accepted for Publication: July 19, 2021.

Published Online: October 7, 2021. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2021.4394

Corresponding Author: Monica Morrow, MD, Breast Service, Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, 300 E 66th St, New York, NY 10065 (morrowm@mskcc.org).

Author Contributions: Dr Barrio had full access to all of the data in the study and takes responsibility for the integrity of the data and the accuracy of the data analysis.

Concept and design: Barrio, Montagna, Cody III, Gemignani, Pilewskie, Plitas, Sacchini, Morrow.

Acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data: Barrio, Montagna, Mamtani, Sevilimedu, Edelweiss, Capko, Cody III, El-Tamer, Heerdt, Kirstein, Moo, Plitas, Sacchini, Sclafani, Tadros, Van Zee, Morrow.

Drafting of the manuscript: Barrio, Plitas, Sacchini.

Critical revision of the manuscript for important intellectual content: All authors.

Statistical analysis: Sevilimedu.

Administrative, technical, or material support: Montagna, Cody III, El-Tamer, Sclafani.

Supervision: Barrio, Cody III, Sacchini.

Conflict of Interest Disclosures: Dr Morrow has received speaking honoraria from Roche. Dr Plitas is on the scientific advisory board of Merck, Tizona Pharmaceuticals, and Trishula Therapeutics; he has received research funding from the Takeda Pharmaceutical Company; and he is co-inventor of intellectual property related to anti-CCR8 antibodies for cancer therapy. No other disclosures were reported.

Funding/Support: Supported in part by the National Institutes of Health (NIH)/ National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Center Support Grant P30 CA008748 to Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Role of the Funder/Sponsor: The NIH/NCI had no role in the design and conduct of the study; collection, management, analysis, and interpretation of the data; preparation, review, or approval of the manuscript; and decision to submit the manuscript for publication.

References
1.
Boughey  JC, Suman  VJ, Mittendorf  EA,  et al; Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology.  Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial.   JAMA. 2013;310(14):1455-1461. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.278932PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Montagna  G, Mamtani  A, Knezevic  A, Brogi  E, Barrio  AV, Morrow  M.  Selecting node-positive patients for axillary downstaging with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(11):4515-4522. doi:10.1245/s10434-020-08650-zPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
3.
Boileau  JF, Poirier  B, Basik  M,  et al.  Sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer: the SN FNAC study.   J Clin Oncol. 2015;33(3):258-264. doi:10.1200/JCO.2014.55.7827PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Classe  JM, Loaec  C, Gimbergues  P,  et al.  Sentinel lymph node biopsy without axillary lymphadenectomy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy is accurate and safe for selected patients: the GANEA 2 study.   Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2019;173(2):343-352. doi:10.1007/s10549-018-5004-7PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Kuehn  T, Bauerfeind  I, Fehm  T,  et al.  Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with breast cancer before and after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (SENTINA): a prospective, multicentre cohort study.   Lancet Oncol. 2013;14(7):609-618. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70166-9PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Kahler-Ribeiro-Fontana  S, Pagan  E, Magnoni  F,  et al.  Long-term standard sentinel node biopsy after neoadjuvant treatment in breast cancer: a single institution ten-year follow-up.   Eur J Surg Oncol. 2021;47(4):804-812. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2020.10.014PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Martelli  G, Barretta  F, Miceli  R,  et al.  Sentinel node biopsy alone or with axillary dissection in breast cancer patients after primary chemotherapy: long-term results of a prospective interventional study.   Ann Surg. 2020. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000004562PubMedGoogle Scholar
8.
Piltin  MA, Hoskin  TL, Day  CN, Davis  J  Jr, Boughey  JC.  Oncologic outcomes of sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for node-positive breast cancer.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2020;27(12):4795-4801. doi:10.1245/s10434-020-08900-0PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Tee  SR, Devane  LA, Evoy  D,  et al.  Meta-analysis of sentinel lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with initial biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer.   Br J Surg. 2018;105(12):1541-1552. doi:10.1002/bjs.10986PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
Caudle  AS, Yang  WT, Krishnamurthy  S,  et al.  Improved Axillary evaluation following neoadjuvant therapy for patients with node-positive breast cancer using selective evaluation of clipped nodes: implementation of targeted axillary dissection.   J Clin Oncol. 2016;34(10):1072-1078. doi:10.1200/JCO.2015.64.0094PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Diego  EJ, McAuliffe  PF, Soran  A,  et al.  Axillary staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer: a pilot study combining sentinel lymph node biopsy with radioactive seed localization of pre-treatment positive axillary lymph nodes.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2016;23(5):1549-1553. doi:10.1245/s10434-015-5052-8PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Hartmann  S, Reimer  T, Gerber  B, Stubert  J, Stengel  B, Stachs  A.  Wire localization of clip-marked axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients treated with primary systemic therapy.   Eur J Surg Oncol. 2018;44(9):1307-1311. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2018.05.035PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
13.
Nguyen  TT, Hieken  TJ, Glazebrook  KN, Boughey  JC.  Localizing the clipped node in patients with node-positive breast cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy: early learning experience and challenges.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24(10):3011-3016. doi:10.1245/s10434-017-6023-zPubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
14.
Laws  A, Hughes  ME, Hu  J,  et al.  Impact of residual nodal disease burden on technical outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy for node-positive (cN1) breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy.   Ann Surg Oncol. 2019;26(12):3846-3855. doi:10.1245/s10434-019-07515-4PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
15.
Giuliano  AE, Ballman  K, McCall  L,  et al.  Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: long-term follow-up from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (Alliance) ACOSOG Z0011 Randomized Trial.   Ann Surg. 2016;264(3):413-420. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000001863PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
×