早期乳腺癌腋窝处理“降阶梯”策略:现状与进展

邵新宇 ,  彭帅 ,  廖立秋

中国普通外科杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (11) : 1890 -1896.

PDF (581KB)
中国普通外科杂志 ›› 2024, Vol. 33 ›› Issue (11) : 1890 -1896. DOI: 10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2024.11.016
文献综述

早期乳腺癌腋窝处理“降阶梯”策略:现状与进展

作者信息 +

"De-escalation" strategy in axillary management of early breast cancer: current status and progress

Author information +
文章历史 +
PDF (594K)

摘要

早期乳腺癌腋窝淋巴结转移的评估对于疾病分期、辅助治疗决策、区域控制及预后判断至关重要,但腋窝处理的策略呈“降阶梯”趋势。临床腋窝淋巴结阴性(cN0)的早期乳腺癌,前哨淋巴结活检(SLNB)替代腋窝淋巴结清扫(ALND)成为腋窝淋巴结分期的标准术式,前哨淋巴结如为阴性,患者可免除ALND,在有效的全身治疗和区域放疗的加持下,前哨淋巴结低负荷转移可以免除ALND。部分cN0的早期乳腺癌患者可能可以豁免腋窝手术,但患者的选择需更精准。初始临床腋窝淋巴结阳性(cN1)的早期乳腺癌患者可以通过新辅助治疗转化为cN0后行SLNB豁免ALND,假阴性及安全性已有初步数据,但新辅助治疗后SLNB尚有诸多问题尚未解决,需要等待临床研究的结果。未来随着功能影像学、预测模型的兴起与应用,对早期乳腺癌的肿瘤学特征、转移负荷以及治疗反应等的评估将更为精准,早期乳腺癌腋窝处理将更为精准,“降阶梯”将更安全。

Abstract

The assessment of axillary lymph node metastasis in early-stage breast cancer is crucial for disease staging, adjuvant treatment decision-making, regional control, and prognosis estimation. However, the approach to axillary management has shown a "de-escalation" trend. For clinically node-negative (cN0) early-stage breast cancer, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has replaced axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) as the standard procedure for axillary staging. If sentinel lymph nodes are negative, patients can forgo ALND. Even in cases of low-burden sentinel lymph node metastasis, ALND may be omitted with effective systemic therapy and regional radiotherapy. Some cN0 early-stage breast cancer patients may qualify to avoid axillary surgery altogether, but patient selection requires greater precision. For patients with clinically node-positive (cN1) early-stage breast cancer, neoadjuvant therapy can downstage them to cN0, allowing SLNB to replace ALND. Preliminary data on false negatives and safety are available, but many issues with SLNB post-neoadjuvant therapy remain unresolved, requiring further clinical research. In the future, with the advancement and application of functional imaging and predictive models, assessments of oncologic characteristics, metastatic burden, and treatment response in early-stage breast cancer will become more accurate. Axillary management for early-stage breast cancer will become more precise, and de-escalation will be safer.

关键词

乳腺肿瘤 / 前哨淋巴结活组织检查 / 淋巴结清扫术 / 综述

Key words

Breast Neoplasms / Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy / Lymph Node Dissection / Review

引用本文

引用格式 ▾
邵新宇,彭帅,廖立秋. 早期乳腺癌腋窝处理“降阶梯”策略:现状与进展[J]. 中国普通外科杂志, 2024, 33(11): 1890-1896 DOI:10.7659/j.issn.1005-6947.2024.11.016

登录浏览全文

4963

注册一个新账户 忘记密码

前哨淋巴结活检(sentinel lymph node biopsy,SLNB)是乳腺癌外科手术里程碑式的进展,NSABP-B32[1]、ALMANAC[2]和米兰临床研究[3]证实了临床淋巴结阴性(clinical lymph node negative,cN0)的早期乳腺癌患者可以安全豁免腋窝淋巴结清扫(axillary lymph node dissection,ALND),相比ALND,SLNB发生上肢淋巴水肿、上肢感觉异常等严重并发症的概率显著减少,但临床淋巴结阳性(clinical lymph node positive,cN+)的早期乳腺癌需直接ALND。在过去近30年间,随着早期乳腺癌全身治疗的进步,放疗地位的提升,新辅助治疗模式的出现,腋窝处理的局部区域控制作用在弱化,腋窝处理的“降阶梯”策略是目前早期乳腺癌的研究热点[4]。腋窝处理的“降阶梯”策略主要是指在乳腺癌治疗中,根据患者的具体情况,逐步减少腋窝淋巴结清扫的范围和强度,以减少并发症和提高生活质量[5]。笔者根据现有的循证医学证据,就早期乳腺癌腋窝处理“降阶梯”策略的热点问题略做讨论。

1 cN0早期乳腺癌腋窝“降阶梯”处理

从NSABP-B32临床研究等数据[1-3]可以看到,cN0、前哨淋巴结阳性的患者,40%~70%的患者没有非前哨淋巴结转移,提示对于这部分患者,常规行ALND存在过度治疗的可能;另外,cN0的患者,前哨淋巴结阳性的比例<30%,提示约70%的cN0患者可能无须腋窝手术。

cN0、前哨淋巴结阳性的早期乳腺癌患者中哪些可以豁免ALND?Z0011研究[6]、AMAROS研究[7]、OTOASOR研究[8]、SINODAR-ONE研究[9]等对这一问题已经进行了探讨,这些研究纳入了cN0,1~2枚前哨淋巴结微转移及宏转移的T1~T2患者,绝大部分为保乳患者,一组行ALND,一组行腋窝放疗或观察。从研究的结果来看,尽管非前哨淋巴结阳性的比例高达30%~40%,但无论局部控制、还是远期生存两组之间无显著差别,提示前哨淋巴结微转移或宏转移的患者可以通过保乳手术或腋窝放疗安全地豁免ALND。但上述研究存在设计和实施缺陷,比如试验设计的非劣效性边界过宽、样本量较少导致统计学效力不足等,尤其是入组接受乳房切除术的患者较少,前哨淋巴结微转移占比高等因素,一定程度上限制了其在临床实践中的应用[10-12]。

在2023年圣安东尼奥乳腺癌研讨会(San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium,SABCS),会议上报告并在《新英格兰医学杂志》发表的SENOMAC研究[13],探讨了cN0、前哨淋巴结低负荷转移患者豁免ALND的可行性。SENOMAC研究入组了cN0、T1~T3、前哨淋巴结1~2枚宏转移的患者,术前常规进行腋窝超声检查,如果超声发现可疑阳性淋巴结,则进行细针穿刺,穿刺阳性仍可以入组,术中随机获取的非前哨淋巴结阳性、额外的前哨淋巴结存在微转移、孤立细胞簇(isolated tumor cell,ITC)仍可以入组。从SENOMAC研究入组基线看,患者平均年龄为61岁,年龄≥65岁的患者占比约40%;T3的患者约6%;接受乳房切除手术约36%;前哨淋巴结包膜外侵犯的比例约1/3,激素受体(hormone receptor,HR)阳性/HER-2阴性的比例达85%以上,几乎所有患者均接受了全身性辅助治疗,近90%的患者接受了淋巴引流区放疗。中位随访46.8个月,SLNB组和ALND组患者的5年无复发生存率无显著差别,分别为89.7%和88.7%,5年总生存率分别为92.9%和92.0%,5年乳腺癌特异性生存率分别为97.1%和96.6%。SENOMAC研究证实了在有效全身性治疗和区域放疗加持下,扩大适应证的cN0、前哨淋巴结1~2枚宏转移的患者可以安全地豁免ALND,为更多cN0患者带来了疗效和生活质量方面的净获益。

在临床实践中,对于1~3枚腋窝淋巴结转移的早期乳腺癌,是否都需要术后放疗有一定的争议[14-15]。在不需要或不能确定是否需要术后放疗时,ALND可能是最安全的策略[16]。Morrow教授[17]在第17届上海国际乳腺癌论坛上介绍了纪念斯隆-凯特琳癌症中心(Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center,MSKCC)关于cN0、1~2枚前哨淋巴结阳性、全乳切除时腋窝处理的策略。MSKCC根据既往的资料开发了一种算法,基于患者术前的临床病理资料,多学科评估患者术后放疗的必要性;如果经评估不需要行术后放疗的患者,则行前哨淋巴结术中快速病理检查,根据快速病理结果决定是否行ALND;如果经评估需要行术后放疗的患者,则不行前哨淋巴结术中快速病理检查及ALND,而是结束手术,等待术后慢石蜡病理结果,如果慢石蜡病理结果证实只有1~2枚前哨淋巴结转移,则行包括腋窝在内的术后放疗,如果慢石蜡病理结果证实为3个及以上前哨淋巴结转移,则重返手术室行ALND;通过这种腋窝处理策略,MSKCC可以免除67%左右的术中前哨淋巴结快速病理检查,免除53%的ALND,而需要重返手术室行ALND的比例小于5%。

SENOMAC研究[13]纳入了1.4%的cN0、细针穿刺证实为淋巴结转移的患者,因入组病例数较少,这部分患者的预后在全文中并未单独分析。对于cN0、影像学提示1~2枚异常腋窝淋巴结的患者是否可以在SLNB后豁免ALND的讨论由来已久,通过回顾性分析cN0、影像学提示腋窝淋巴结异常患者SLNB后行ALND的结果显示,70%的患者淋巴结转移数目≤2枚,即使是经细针穿刺证实为阳性淋巴结,47%的患者淋巴结转移数目≤2枚,提示仍有超过50%的患者可以通过SLNB豁免ALND[18];同时,一系列cN0、SLNB的大型临床研究[1-3,6-9]对临床cN0的要求仅需满足临床查体无异常即可,均未要求术前行腋窝影像学评估,其意向性治疗(intention-to-treat,ITT)人群SLNB替代ALND后腋窝复发风险极低。因此,包括美国临床肿瘤学会(American Society of Clinical Oncology,ASCO)指南、美国国立综合癌症网络(National Comprehensive Cancer Network,NCCN)指南都将cN0、影像学提示1~2枚异常腋窝淋巴结的患者纳入可以行SLNB的适应人群[19-20],但在国内,多数专家对该类患者免除ALND仍持有相对谨慎的态度,国内指南中仅做一般推荐,更多的专家认为此类患者可通过新辅助治疗降期保腋窝[21-23]。

cN0早期乳腺癌患者能否豁免SLNB?研究[19, 24-25]表明,年龄≥70岁、T1、拟接受术后辅助内分泌治疗、HR阳性/HER-2阴性的老年患者豁免SLNB,虽然局部复发风险增加,但总生存率和乳腺癌特异死亡风险无差异,因此,此类患者可以考虑豁免SLNB。随着影像学的进步,能够筛选出cN0患者中更低危的患者,比如,在cT1N0、luminal型的患者中,超声检查正常与临床体查阴性的患者发生腋窝淋巴结宏转移的概率只有8.6%~14%[26-27],使豁免SLNB成为可能。SOUND研究[28]纳入年龄>18岁、临床体查和超声检查显示无腋窝淋巴结受累、计划接受保乳手术和放疗的T1患者。>50岁的入组患者超过80%,HR阳性/HER-2阴性的患者超过90%。研究结果表明,SLNB组和无腋窝手术组的5年无远处复发转移率分别为97.7%和98.0%,达到了非劣效终点,两组的腋窝复发率都小于1%,两组的腋窝复发率和无病生存均没有显著差异。尽管SOUND研究[28]存在部分病理学信息缺失,但未影响术后治疗计划,且5年整体预后良好,可考虑在多学科协作决策不影响辅助治疗的情况下个体化实施。

新辅助治疗可以达到手术降期的目的;cN1的患者经过新辅助治疗后,一定比例的患者腋窝淋巴结达到病理完全缓解(pathological complete response,pCR),HER-2阳性/三阴性乳腺癌(triple negative breast cancer,TNBC)患者的腋窝pCR可超过35%~50%,尤其是初始肿瘤负荷较低的cT1-2N0的HER-2阳性/TNBC患者,乳房原发灶达到pCR1时,其腋窝淋巴结非pCR风险不足2%[29-31],此类患者是否可以免除腋窝手术或用放疗代替值得进一步研究,两项前瞻性单臂研究ASICS和EUBREAST-01研究正在进行当中[32]。

2 cN1早期乳腺癌腋窝“降阶梯”处理

cN+早期乳腺癌腋窝降阶梯的研究主要集中在初始cN1且新辅助治疗后转化为cN0的患者,初始cN2~3且新辅助治疗后仍为cN+的患者,直接行ALND,不推荐SLNB[19-22]。

cN1且新辅助治疗后转化为cN0的患者行SLNB的前提条件是:新辅助治疗后的SLNB必须具有可行性,成功率高,假阴性低,安全性高,不影响生存[33-34]。ACOSOG Z1071研究[35]、SN FNAC研究[36]以及SENTINA研究[37]中,纳入了cT2~3N1~2的患者,在新辅助治疗后达到cN0的患者中行SLNB,示踪剂绝大多数都是在核素的基础上,联合蓝染料,研究结果显示前哨淋巴结的检出率80%~92%,采用双示踪技术的检出率高于单个示踪剂,而假阴性率均超过10%,但当采用双示踪、前哨淋巴结的检出数目超过3枚时,假阴性率可以降至10%以下。如果新辅助治疗前在阳性淋巴结中植入标记铗或放射性碘粒子,新辅治疗后达到cN0的患者中再行SLNB,或开展靶向腋窝淋巴结切除(targeted axillary dissection,TAD)手术,能将假阴性率降至2%以下[38-39]。Fan等[40]2024年发表在《国际外科杂志》的研究结果表明,cN1患者,新辅助治疗前植入放射性碘粒子,新辅助治疗后术中开展SLNB+TAD,假阴性率约3%~5%。目前新辅助治疗后开展SLNB的临床研究只是公布了技术层面的结果,并没有公布长期的生存数据,但可以从一些真实世界研究的数据来看新辅助治疗降期后行SLNB的安全性[41]。大多数回顾性研究[30, 39]的数据表明,在新辅后cN0患者中使用SLNB是安全的,腋窝复发率<1%,且并不影响患者远期生存,但以上研究入组病例有限,且多为单中心研究,缺乏多中心大样本前瞻性临床研究长期生存结果的支持,安全性与可行性尚存在争议。目前国内外的指南推荐在初始cN1早期乳腺癌患者新辅助治疗降期为cN0后,采用双示踪、检出前哨淋巴结数目≥3枚(保证数量),联合或不联合标记铗技术(保证质量),可以使用SLNB[19-22]。

cN1的患者,新辅助治疗后前哨淋巴结低负荷转移,后续如何处理?首先,新辅助治疗后前哨淋巴结存在低负荷转移,非前哨淋巴结阳性的较高,即使是ITC,非前哨淋巴结阳性的概率超过37%,微转移及宏转移时,非前哨淋巴结阳性的概率达到60%以上,出现3枚以上其他非前哨淋巴结转移的概率分别达到10%、30%[42-44];其次,美国丹娜-法伯/布莱根和妇女医院癌症中心(Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women's Cancer Center,DFBWCC)及美国国家癌症数据库(National Cancer Database,NCDB)的回顾性分析[45-47]表明,与新辅助治疗后出现腋窝淋巴结pCR患者相比,ITC和微转移的患者5年无病生存、总生存明显更差,增加复发死亡的风险,在TNBC和HER-2阳性患者中最为明显,提示新辅助化疗(NAC)后的低负荷转移是预后不良的指标,后续进行ALND的必要性;一项系统分析纳入9项研究[4]共4 000余例患者,多因素分析结果显示,新辅助治疗后腋窝淋巴结转移(特别是转移数目>3枚),局部区域复发风险增加,如合并其他不良预后因素,10年局部复发风险至少增加20%。

在2023年SABCS会议报告的OPBC05研究[30],回顾性分析了新辅助治疗后残留ITC的患者,分别进一步接受ALND,或豁免ALND的疗效差异。结果表明,接受ALND治疗的患者与未接受ALND治疗的患者在腋窝复发、局部复发以及任意侵袭性复发的发生率上差异无统计学意义。虽然OPBC05研究是阳性结果,提示对于新辅助治疗后残留ITC的患者,豁免ALND具有一定可行性,但是OPBC05研究是一项回顾性研究,两组的基线并不均衡,豁免ALND组肿瘤分期更早,术中冷冻快速病理中发现ITC患者中大多执行ALND,而慢石蜡病理中发现ITC患者中大多是执行观察。

AMAROS和OTOASOR两项研究[7-8]的结果显示,初始手术的cN0早期乳腺癌存在前哨淋巴结低负荷转移时,腋窝放疗和ALND能达到同等效果,然而,目前新辅助治疗后前哨淋巴结低负荷转移能否采用放疗替代ALND缺乏前瞻性的循证医学证据,OPBC-03/TAXIS研究和A011202研究正在开展当中,探索腋窝放疗在新辅助治疗后腋窝淋巴结非pCR患者中的作用[4, 48]。土耳其一项多中心性回顾性研究[49]纳入了303例细胞病理学证实的cN+、cT1~4N1~3患者,新辅助治疗后腋窝只单独接受了SLNB,所有患者均行区域淋巴结照射;该研究中提到,在cN1疾病患者中,通过NAC实现cN0,且SLNB单独使用,腋窝复发率较低,这可能支持在这些患者中省略ALND。因此,新辅助治疗后前哨淋巴结阳性提示预后不良,复发风险高,免除ALND会影响辅助强化治疗的决策,ALND仍是此类患者的标准治疗。随着放疗技术的进步和精准度的提高,能否协同强化治疗达到理想的局部控制,值得期待和进一步研究。

3 结语与展望

随着乳腺癌治疗模式的演进、新型药物的应用、全身治疗疗效的不断提高,合理的乳腺癌局部区域控制可以转化为生存、生活质量的获益,乳腺癌腋窝处理近年来趋向于降阶梯。对于cN0的早期乳腺癌,SLNB是目前标准的腋窝处理术式,前哨淋巴结微转移和宏转移的处置方案将更为个体化,同时筛选出豁免SLNB的患者是将来研究的方向;对于新辅助治疗后cN1转化为cN0的患者,SLNB可行性和安全性已有一定的数据,但其对远期生存影响、前哨淋巴结阳性患者的后续腋窝处理、放疗的意义等诸多问题仍需要解决,将是研究的热点。需要指出的是,在早期乳腺癌腋窝“降阶梯”的探索道路上,需要权衡诸多因素,如手术并发症、区域复发风险、淋巴结状态对辅助治疗决策必要性,以及远期生存等等。随着人工智能、功能影像学、预测模型的兴起与应用,对早期乳腺癌的肿瘤学特征、转移负荷以及治疗反应等的判断更为精准,早期乳腺癌腋窝处理将更为精准,“降阶梯”策略将更安全。

参考文献

[1]

Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2010, 11(10):927-933. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70207-2 .

[2]

Mansel RE, Fallowfield L, Kissin M, et al. Randomized multicenter trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial[J]. J Natl Cancer Inst, 2006, 98(9):599-609. doi:10.1093/jnci/djj158 .

[3]

Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. A randomized comparison of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer[J]. N Engl J Med, 2003, 349(6):546-553. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa012782 .

[4]

刘岩松, 张丽莎, 马菲, 等. 浅谈乳腺癌手术中腋窝淋巴结的处理[J]. 中华外科杂志, 2024, 62(8):731-736. doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20231117-00226 .

[5]

Liu YS, Zhang LS, Ma F, et al. The surgical management of axillary lymph node disease in breast cancer patients[J]. Chinese Journal of Surgery, 2024, 62(8):731-736. doi:10.3760/cma.j.cn112139-20231117-00226 .

[6]

毕钊, 王永胜. 1~2枚前哨淋巴结阳性早期乳腺癌患者治疗策略降阶梯新理念[J]. 中国癌症杂志, 2023, 33(6):560-565. doi:10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2023.06.002 .

[7]

Bi Z, Wang YS. New concept of de-escalation management strategy in breast cancer patients with 1-2 positive sentinel lymph nodes[J]. China Oncology, 2023, 33(6):560-565. doi:10.19401/j.cnki.1007-3639.2023.06.002 .

[8]

Giuliano AE, Ballman KV, 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[J]. JAMA, 2017, 318(10):918-926. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11470 .

[9]

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[J]. Lancet Oncol, 2014, 15(12):1303-1310. doi:10.1016/S1470-2045(14)70460-7 .

[10]

Sávolt Á, Péley G, Polgár C, et al. Eight-year follow up result of the OTOASOR trial: the Optimal Treatment Of the Axilla - Surgery Or Radiotherapy after positive sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer: a randomized, single centre, phase Ⅲ, non-inferiority trial[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2017, 43(4):672-679. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2016.12.011 .

[11]

Tinterri C, Canavese G, Gatzemeier W, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy versus axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy with one to two metastatic sentinel lymph nodes: sub-analysis of the SINODAR-ONE multicentre randomized clinical trial and reopening of enrolment[J]. Br J Surg, 2023, 110(9):1143-1152. doi:10.1093/bjs/znad215 .

[12]

Cipolla C, Gebbia V, D'Agati E, et al. Comprehensive axillary management of clinically node-positive (cN+) breast cancer patients: a narrative review on neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Cancers, 2024, 16(19):3354. doi:10.3390/cancers16193354 .

[13]

Weber WP, Gentilini OD, Morrow M, et al. Uncertainties and controversies in axillary management of patients with breast cancer[J]. Cancer Treat Rev, 2023, 117:102556. doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2023.102556 .

[14]

Senkus E, Cardoso MJ, Kaidar-Person O, et al. De-escalation of axillary irradiation for early breast cancer - Has the time come?[J]. Cancer Treat Rev, 2021, 101:102297. doi:10.1016/j.ctrv.2021.102297 .

[15]

de Boniface J, Tvedskov TF, Rydén L, et al. Omitting axillary dissection in breast cancer with sentinel-node metastases[J]. N Engl J Med, 2024, 390(13):1163-1175. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa2313487 .

[16]

Curigliano G, Burstein HJ, Gnant M, et al. Understanding breast cancer complexity to improve patient outcomes: the St Gallen International Consensus Conference for the Primary Therapy of Individuals with Early Breast Cancer 2023[J]. Ann Oncol, 2023, 34(11):970-986. doi:10.1016/j.annonc.2023.08.017 .

[17]

So A, Hunt KK. ASO author reflections: de-escalating axillary surgery in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer after neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2024. doi:10.1245/s10434-024-16461-9 .[Online ahead of print]

[18]

Magnoni F, Galimberti V, Corso G, et al. Axillary surgery in breast cancer: an updated historical perspective[J]. Semin Oncol, 2020, 47(6):341-352. doi:10.1053/j.seminoncol.2020.09.001 .

[19]

Morrow M. De-escalating Breast Cancer Surgery: What's Next?[A]//The 17th Shanghai International Breast Cancer Symposium. Available at: DOI: 10.1016/s0960-9776(17)30057-7

[20]

Pilewskie M, Jochelson M, Gooch JC, et al. Is preoperative axillary imaging beneficial in identifying clinically node-negative patients requiring axillary lymph node dissection?[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2016, 222(2):138-145. doi:10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.11.013 .

[21]

Brackstone M, Baldassarre FG, Perera FE, et al. Management of the axilla in early-stage breast cancer: Ontario health (cancer care Ontario) and ASCO guideline[J]. J Clin Oncol, 2021, 39(27):3056-3082. doi:10.1200/jco.21.00934 .

[22]

Gradishar WJ, Moran MS, Abraham J, et al. Breast cancer, version 3.2022, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology[J]. J Natl Compr Cancer Netw, 2022, 20(6):691-722. doi:10.6004/jnccn.2022.0030 .

[23]

叶京明, 徐玲, 刘荫华. 中国早期乳腺癌前哨淋巴结活检手术临床实践指南(2022版)解读[J]. 中国医学前沿杂志:电子版, 2023, 15(9):30-32. doi:10.12037/YXQY/2023.09-03 .

[24]

Ye JM, Xu L, Liu YH. Interpretation of Chinese clinical practice guidelines for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early-stage breast cancer(2022 edition)[J]. Chinese Journal of the Frontiers of Medical Science:Electronic Version, 2023, 15(9):30-32. doi:10.12037/YXQY/2023.09-03 .

[25]

中国抗癌协会. 乳腺癌前哨淋巴结活检规范化操作指南(2022精要版)[J]. 中国肿瘤临床, 2022, 49(22):1135-1142. doi:10.12354/j.issn.1000-8179.2022.20221052 .

[26]

Chinese Anti-Cancer Associatio. Guidelines for standardized practice of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer(2022 abridged version)[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinical Oncology, 2022, 49(22):1135-1142. doi:10.12354/j.issn.1000-8179.2022.20221052 .

[27]

Hashem M, Rehman S, Salhab M. The role of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-targeted therapies in early-stage breast cancer: current practices, treatment de-escalation, and future prospects[J]. Cureus, 2024, 16(2):e55230. doi:10.7759/cureus.55230 .

[28]

Jatoi I, Kunkler IH. Omission of sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer: historical context and future perspectives on a modern controversy[J]. Cancer, 2021, 127(23):4376-4383. doi:10.1002/cncr.33960 .

[29]

Zahoor S, Haji A, Battoo A, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer: a clinical review and update[J]. J Breast Cancer, 2017, 20(3):217-227. doi:10.4048/jbc.2017.20.3.217 .

[30]

Zhang D, Svensson M, Edén P, et al. Identification of sentinel lymph node macrometastasis in breast cancer by deep learning based on clinicopathological characteristics[J]. Sci Rep, 2024, 14(1):26970. doi:10.1038/s41598-024-78040-y .

[31]

Vanni G, Materazzo M, Paduano F, et al. New insight for axillary de-escalation in breast cancer surgery: "SoFT study" retrospective analysis[J]. Curr Oncol, 2024, 31(8):4141-4157. doi:10.3390/curroncol31080309 .

[32]

Gentilini OD, Botteri E, Sangalli C, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy vs No axillary surgery in patients with small breast cancer and negative results on ultrasonography of axillary lymph nodes: the SOUND randomized clinical trial[J]. JAMA Oncol, 2023, 9(11):1557-1564. doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.3759 .

[33]

Barron AU, Hoskin TL, Day CN, et al. Association of low nodal positivity rate among patients with ERBB2-positive or triple-negative breast cancer and breast pathologic complete response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. JAMA Surg, 2018, 153(12):1120-1126. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2018.2696 .

[34]

Montagna G, Laws A, Ferrucci M, et al. Are Nodal ITCs after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy an Indication for Axillary Dissection? the OPBC05/EUBREAST-14R/ICARO Study[J]. Cancer researchno, 2024, ():GS02-02. DOI: 10.1158/1538-7445.sabcs23-gs02-02

[35]

Wu SY, Li JW, Wang YJ, et al. Clinical feasibility and oncological safety of non-radioactive targeted axillary dissection after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in biopsy-proven node-positive breast cancer: a prospective diagnostic and prognostic study[J]. Int J Surg, 2023, 109(7):1863-1870. doi:10.1097/JS9.0000000000000331 .

[36]

Reimer T. Omission of axillary sentinel lymph node biopsy in early invasive breast cancer[J]. Breast, 2023, 67:124-128. doi:10.1016/j.breast.2023.01.002 .

[37]

Ferrarazzo G, Nieri A, Firpo E, et al. The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer patients who become clinically node-negative following neo-adjuvant chemotherapy: a literature review[J]. Curr Oncol, 2023, 30(10):8703-8719. doi:10.3390/curroncol30100630 .

[38]

Gallagher KK, Iles K, Kuzmiak C, et al. Prospective evaluation of radar-localized reflector-directed targeted axillary dissection in node-positive breast cancer patients after neoadjuvant systemic therapy[J]. J Am Coll Surg, 2022, 234(4):538-545. doi:10.1097/XCS.0000000000000098 .

[39]

Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, et al. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial[J]. JAMA, 2013, 310(14):1455-1461. doi:10.1001/jama.2013.278932 .

[40]

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]. J Clin Oncol, 2015, 33(3):258-264. doi:10.1200/jco.2014.55.7827 .

[41]

Kolberg HC, Kühn T, Krajewska M, et al. Residual axillary burden after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) in early breast cancer in patients with a priori clinically occult nodal metastases - a transSENTINA analysis[J]. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd, 2020, 80(12):1229-1236. doi:10.1055/a-1298-3453 .

[42]

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]. J Clin Oncol, 2016, 34(10):1072-1078. doi:10.1200/jco.2015.64.0094 .

[43]

Kuemmel S, Heil J, Rueland A, et al. A prospective, multicenter registry study to evaluate the clinical feasibility of targeted axillary dissection (TAD) in node-positive breast cancer patients[J]. Ann Surg, 2022, 276(5):e553-e562. doi:10.1097/SLA.0000000000004572 .

[44]

Fan QD, Bi Z, Gong LG, et al. The feasibility of targeted axillary dissection for breast cancer axillary surgery de-escalation after neoadjuvant therapy: a prospective cohort study[J]. Int J Surg, 2024. doi:10.1097/JS9.0000000000002058 .[Online ahead of print]

[45]

Keelan S, Boland MR, Ryan ÉJ, et al. Long-term survival in patients with node-positive breast cancer who undergo sentinel lymph node biopsy alone after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: meta-analysis[J]. Br J Surg, 2023, 110(3):324-332. doi:10.1093/bjs/znac413 .

[46]

Moo TA, Edelweiss M, Hajiyeva S, et al. Is low-volume disease in the sentinel node after neoadjuvant chemotherapy an indication for axillary dissection?[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2018, 25(6):1488-1494. doi:10.1245/s10434-018-6429-2 .

[47]

Lazar AM, Mutuleanu MD, Spiridon PM, et al. Feasibility of sentinel lymph node biopsy in breast cancer patients with axillary conversion after neoadjuvant chemotherapy-a single-tertiary centre experience and review of the literature[J]. Diagnostics, 2023, 13(18):3000. doi:10.3390/diagnostics13183000 .

[48]

Leonardi MC, Arrobbio C, Gandini S, et al. Predictors of positive axillary non-sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy after neoadjuvant systemic therapy[J]. Radiother Oncol, 2021, 163:128-135. doi:10.1016/j.radonc.2021.08.013 .

[49]

Wong SM, Almana N, Choi J, et al. Prognostic significance of residual axillary nodal micrometastases and isolated tumor cells after neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer[J]. Ann Surg Oncol, 2019, 26(11):3502-3509. doi:10.1245/s10434-019-07517-2 .

[50]

Greenwell K, Hussain L, Lee D, et al. Complete pathologic response rate to neoadjuvant chemotherapy increases with increasing HER2/CEP17 ratio in HER2 overexpressing breast cancer: analysis of the National Cancer Database (NCDB)[J]. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2020, 181(2):249-254. doi:10.1007/s10549-020-05599-1 .

[51]

Schlafstein A, Liu Y, Goyal S, et al. Regional nodal irradiation for clinically node-positive breast cancer patients with pathologic negative nodes after neoadjuvant chemotherapy[J]. Clin Breast Cancer, 2022, 22(2): 127-135. doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2021.06.003

[52]

Foldi J, Rozenblit M, Park TS, et al. Optimal management for residual disease following neoadjuvant systemic therapy[J]. Curr Treat Options Oncol, 2021, 22(9):79. doi:10.1007/s11864-021-00879-4 .

[53]

Cabıoğlu N, Karanlık H, Yıldırım N, et al. Favorable outcome with sentinel lymph node biopsy alone after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in clinically node positive breast cancer at diagnosis: Turkish Multicentric NEOSENTI-TURK MF-18-02-study[J]. Eur J Surg Oncol, 2021, 47(10):2506-2514. doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2021.06.024 .

基金资助

国家自然科学基金资助项目(81974420)

吴阶平医学基金会基金资助项目(320.6750.2023-18-84)

AI Summary AI Mindmap
PDF (581KB)

409

访问

0

被引

详细

导航
相关文章

AI思维导图

/

〈 〉