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 STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Annals of Surgical Oncology
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 10/2015

01-10-2015 | Breast Oncology

The Importance of Applying ACOSOG Z0011 Criteria in the Axillary Management of Invasive Lobular Carcinoma: A Multi-institutional Cohort Study

Authors: Amanda Roberts, MD, MPH, Sharon Nofech-Mozes, MD, Bruce Youngson, MSc, MD, David R. McCready, MSc, MD, Manar Al-Assi, BSc, Stephanie Ramkumar, MD, MSc, Tulin Cil, MD, MEd

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 10/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group (ACOSOG) Z0011 trial led to a significant change in the management of patients with early stage breast cancer and limited sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastases. However, only 27 patients with invasive lobular carcinoma (ILC) were randomized to the completion axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) arm. To assess the generalizability of the Z0011 trial, the primary aim of this study was to determine the risk of residual nodal burden (RNB) for ILC.

Methods

A multi-institutional cohort study was completed. RNB was determined for women of any age with an ILC and at least one positive SLN who underwent a primary breast procedure (lumpectomy or mastectomy) and both a SLN biopsy followed by a completion ALND between July 1, 1999, and June 30, 2009, at two large academic centers.

Results

A total of 59 patients (60 ILCs) met the inclusion criteria. Although the overall RNB was 40 %, it was significantly greater in the T3+ group compared to T1/T2 (87 vs. 24 %, respectively, p < 0.0001). When comparing only ILCs that met all of the inclusion criteria for ACOSOG Z0011 (T1 or T2, 1 or 2 SLNs positive, no SLN extranodal extension, and breast conservation) to those ILCs that did not, the RNB was significantly greater in the latter (56 vs. 17 %; p < 0.003).

Conclusions

Overall, the clinical practice changes that have occurred after publication of the ACOSOG Z0011 trial appear to be generalizable to ILCs within the inclusion criteria of the study.
Literature
1.
Pesce C, Morrow M. The need for lymph node dissection in nonmetastatic breast cancer. Annu Rev Med. 2013;64:119–29.CrossRefPubMed
2.
Ram R, Singh J, McCaig E. Sentinel node biopsy alone versus completion axillary node dissection in node positive breast cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Int J Breast Cancer. 2014;2014:513780.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
3.
Rao R, Euhus D, Mayo HG, Balch C. Axillary node interventions in breast cancer: a systematic review. JAMA. 2013;310:1385–94.CrossRefPubMed
4.
Giuliano AE, Hunt KK, Ballman KV, et al. Axillary dissection vs no axillary dissection in women with invasive breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA. 2011;305:569–75.CrossRefPubMed
5.
Korkola JE, DeVries S, Fridlyand J, et al. Differentiation of lobular versus ductal breast carcinomas by expression microarray analysis. Cancer Res. 2003;63:7167–75.PubMed
6.
Borst MJ, Ingold JA. Metastatic patterns of invasive lobular versus invasive ductal carcinoma of the breast. Surgery. 1993;114:637–41.PubMed
7.
Fernandez B, Paish EC, Green AR, et al. Lymph-node metastases in invasive lobular carcinoma are different from those in ductal carcinoma of the breast. J Clin Pathol. 2011;64:995–1000.CrossRefPubMed
8.
Topps A, Clay V, Absar M, et al. The sensitivity of pre-operative axillary staging in breast cancer: comparison of invasive lobular and ductal carcinoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2014;40:813–17.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Gainer SM, Hunt KK, Beitsch P, et al. Changing behavior in clinical practice in response to the ACOSOG Z0011 trial: a survey of the American Society of Breast Surgeons. Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19:3152–58.CrossRefPubMed
10.
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;15:1303–10.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
11.
Chung A, Gangi A, Mirocha J, Giuliano A. Applicability of the ACOSOG Z0011 criteria in women with high-risk node-positive breast cancer undergoing breast conserving surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22;1128–32.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Wang J, Mittendorf EA, Sahin AA, et al. Outcomes of sentinel lymph node dissection alone vs. axillary lymph node dissection in early stage invasive lobular carcinoma: a retrospective study of the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. PLoS One. 2014;9:e89778.PubMedCentralCrossRefPubMed
13.
Chae AW, Vandewalker KM, Li YJ, et al. Quantitation of sentinel node metastatic burden and Her-2/neu over-expression accurately predicts residual axillary nodal involvement and extranodal disease in breast cancer. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2013;39:627–33.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Boler DE, Uras C, Ince U, Cabioglu N. Factors predicting the non–sentinel lymph node involvement in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node metastases. Breast. 2012;21:518–23.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Eldweney H, Alkhaldy K, Alsaleh N, et al. Predictors of non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients with positive sentinel lymph node (Pilot study). J Egypt Natl Canc Inst. 2012;24:23–30.CrossRef
16.
Durak MG, Akansu B, Akin MM, et al. Factors predicting non–sentinel lymph node involvement in sentinel node positive breast carcinoma. Turk Patoloji Deg. 2011;27:189–95.
Metadata
Title
The Importance of Applying ACOSOG Z0011 Criteria in the Axillary Management of Invasive Lobular Carcinoma: A Multi-institutional Cohort Study
Authors
Amanda Roberts, MD, MPH
Sharon Nofech-Mozes, MD
Bruce Youngson, MSc, MD
David R. McCready, MSc, MD
Manar Al-Assi, BSc
Stephanie Ramkumar, MD, MSc
Tulin Cil, MD, MEd
Publication date
01-10-2015
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 10/2015
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-015-4756-0

Other articles of this Issue 10/2015

Annals of Surgical Oncology 10/2015 Go to the issue

Breast Oncology

Contemporary Challenges in Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer: A Collaboration Opportunity for Genetic Counselors and Breast Surgeons

Breast Oncology

Intraoperative Assessment of Final Margins with a Handheld Optical Imaging Probe During Breast-Conserving Surgery May Reduce the Reoperation Rate: Results of a Multicenter Study

Breast Oncology

What is a Breast Surgeon Worth? A Salary Survey of the American Society of Breast Surgeons

Breast Oncology

Breast Cancer Risk and Follow-up Recommendations for Young Women Diagnosed with Atypical Hyperplasia and Lobular Carcinoma In Situ (LCIS)

Breast Oncology

Multigene Panel Testing Detects Equal Rates of Pathogenic BRCA1/2 Mutations and has a Higher Diagnostic Yield Compared to Limited BRCA1/2 Analysis Alone in Patients at Risk for Hereditary Breast Cancer

Breast Oncology

The Ethics of Breast Surgery