Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2011

01-11-2011 | Breast Oncology

A Multicentered, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Radioguided Seed Localization to Standard Wire Localization for Nonpalpable, Invasive and in situ Breast Carcinomas

Authors: Peter J. Lovrics, MD, Charlie H. Goldsmith, PhD, Nicole Hodgson, MD, MSc, David McCready, MD, Gabriela Gohla, MD, Colm Boylan, MD, Sylvie Cornacchi, MSc, Michael Reedijk, PhD, MD

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 12/2011

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Studies suggest radioguided seed localization (RSL) yields fewer positive margins than wire-guided localization (WL). The goal of this study is to determine whether RSL is superior to WL.

Methods

Women with confirmed invasive or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) undergoing localization and breast conserving surgery were enrolled. Outcomes measured include positive margin and reoperation rates, specimen weight, operative and localization times, and surgeon and radiologist ranking of procedural difficulty.

Results

Randomization was centralized, concealed, and stratified by surgeon with 153 patients in the WL group and 152 in RSL group. Localizations were performed using either ultrasound (70%) or mammographic guidance (30%). Pathology was either DCIS (18%) or invasive carcinoma (82%). Procedures were performed at 3 sites, by 7 surgeons. Only difference found for patient and tumor characteristics was more multifocal disease in RSL group. Using intention-to-treat analysis, there were no differences in positive margins rates for RSL (10.5%) and WL (11.8%), (P = .99) or for positive or close margins (<1 mm) (RSL 19% and WL 22%; P = .61). Mean operative time (minutes) was shorter for RSL (RSL 19.4 vs WL 22.2; P < .001). Specimen volume, weight, reoperation and localization times were similar. Surgeons ranked the seed technique as easier (P = .008), while radiologists ranked them similarly. Patient’s pain rankings during wire localization were higher (P = .038).

Conclusions

In contrast to other trials positive margin and reoperation rates were similar for RSL and WL. However, for RSL operative times were shorter, and the technique was preferred by surgeons, making it an acceptable method for localization.
Literature
1.
Cady B, Stone MD, Schuler JG, Thakur R, Wanner MA, Lavin PT. The new era in breast cancer: Invasion, size, and nodal involvement dramatically decreasing as a result of mammographic screening. Arch Surg. 1996;131:301–8.PubMed
2.
Skinner KA, Silberman H, Sposto R, Silverstein MJ. Palpable breast cancers are inherently different from nonpalpable breast cancers. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8:705–10.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Lovrics PJ, Cornacchi SD, Farrokhyar F, Garnett A, Chen V, Franic S, et al. The relationship between surgical factors and margin status after breast conservation surgery for early stage breast cancer. Am J Surg. 2008;197:740–6.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Frank HA, Hall FM, Steer ML. Preoperative localization of non-palpable breast lesions demonstrated by mammography. N Engl J Med. 1976;295:259–60.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Acosta JA, Greenlee JA, Gubler KD, Goepfert CJ, Ragland JJ. Surgical margins after needle-localization breast biopsy. Am J Surg. 1995;170:643–5.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Gajdos C, Tartter PI, Bleiweiss IJ, Hermann G, de Csepel J, Estabrook A, et al. Mammographic appearance of nonpalpable breast cancer reflects pathologic characteristics. Ann Surg. 2002;235:246–51.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Papa MZ, Klein E, Davidson B, Karni T, Sperber F, Koller M, et al. The effect of anesthesia type on needle localization. Am J Surg. 1996;171:242–3.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Chadwick DR, Shorthouse AJ. Wire-directed localization biopsy of the breast: an audit of results and analysis of factors influencing therapeutic value in the treatment of breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 1997;23:128–33.PubMedCrossRef
9.
Kepple J, Van Zee KJ, Dowlatshahi K, Henry-Tillman RS, Israel PZ, Klimberg VS. Minimally invasive breast surgery. J Am Coll Surg. 2004;199:961–75.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Staradub VL, Rademaker AW, Morrow M. Factors influencing outcomes for breast conservation therapy for mammographically detected malignancies. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;196:518–24.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Vicini FA, Goldstein NS, Pass H, Kestin LL. Use of pathologic factors to assist in establishing adequacy of excision before radiotherapy in patients treated with breast-conserving surgery. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2004;60:86–94.PubMedCrossRef
12.
Cochrane RA, Valasiadou P, Wilson AR, Al-Ghazal SK, Macmillan RD. Cosmesis and satisfaction after breast-conserving surgery correlates with the percentage of breast volume excised. Br J Surg. 2003;90:1505–9.PubMedCrossRef
13.
Luini A, Zurrida S, Galimberti V, Paganelli G. Radioguided surgery of occult breast lesions. Eur J Cancer. 1998;34:205–6.CrossRef
14.
van der Ploeg IMC, Hobbelink M, van den Bosch MAAJ, Mali WPThM, Borel Rinkes IHM, van Hillegersberg R. Radioguided occult lesions localisation (ROLL) for non-palpable breast lesions: a review of the relevant literature. EJSO 2008;34:1–5.PubMed
15.
Gray RJ, Salud C, Nguyen K, Dauway E, Friedland J, Berman C, et al. Randomized prospective evaluation of a novel technique for biopsy or lumpectomy of nonpalpable breast lesions: radioactive seed versus wire localization. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8:711–5.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Jakub JW, Gray RJ, Degnim AC, Boughey JC, Gardner M, Cox CE. Current status of radioactive seed for localization of non palpable breast lesions. Am J Surg. 2010;199:522–8.PubMedCrossRef
17.
Gray RJ, Giuliano R, Dauway EL, Cox CE, Reintgen DS. Radioguidance for nonpalpable primary lesions and sentinel lymph node(s). Am J Surg. 2001;182:404–6.PubMedCrossRef
18.
Gray RJ, Pockaj BA, Karstaedt PJ, Roarke MC. Radioactive seed localization of nonpalpable breast lesions is better than wire localization. Am J Surg. 2004;188:377–80.PubMedCrossRef
19.
Hughes JH, Mason MC, Gray RJ, McLaughlin SA, Degnim AC, Fulman JT, et al. A multi-site validation trial of radioactive seed localization as an alternative to wire localization. Breast J. 2008;14:153–7.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Rao R, Moldrem A, Saode V, White J, Amen M, Rao M, et al. Experience with seed localization for nonpalpable breast lesions in a public health care system. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:3241–6.PubMedCrossRef
21.
22.
van Riet YEA, Jansen FH, van Beek M, van de Velde CJH, Rutten HJ, Nieuwenhuijzen GA. Localization of non-palpable breast cancer using radiolabelled titanium seed. Br J Surg. 2010;97:1240–5.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
A Multicentered, Randomized, Controlled Trial Comparing Radioguided Seed Localization to Standard Wire Localization for Nonpalpable, Invasive and in situ Breast Carcinomas
Authors
Peter J. Lovrics, MD
Charlie H. Goldsmith, PhD
Nicole Hodgson, MD, MSc
David McCready, MD
Gabriela Gohla, MD
Colm Boylan, MD
Sylvie Cornacchi, MSc
Michael Reedijk, PhD, MD
Publication date
01-11-2011
Publisher
Springer-Verlag
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 12/2011
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-011-1699-y

Other articles of this Issue 12/2011

Annals of Surgical Oncology 12/2011 Go to the issue

Gynecologic Oncology

Prognostic Significance of Stromal Microinvasion in the Intestinal Type of Ovarian Mucinous Adenocarcinoma

Melanomas

Inguinopelvic Lymphadenectomy Following Positive Inguinal Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Melanoma: True Frequency of Synchronous Pelvic Metastases

Erratum

Erratum to: Incidental Papillary Microcarcinoma of the Thyroid—Further Evidence of a Very Low Malignant Potential: A Retrospective Clinicopathological Study With Up to 30 Years of Follow-Up

Head and Neck Oncology

Selective Organ Preservation in Operable Locally Advanced Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinomas Guided by Primary Site Restaging Biopsy: Long-Term Results of Two Sequential Brown University Oncology Group Chemoradiotherapy Studies

Gastrointestinal Oncology

Survival Factors in Patients with Recurrence After Curative Resection of Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinomas

Pancreatic Tumors

Presence of Pancreatic Intraepithelial Neoplasia in the Pancreatic Transection Margin does not Influence Outcome in Patients with R0 Resected Pancreatic Cancer