title: Accuracy of axillary ultrasound in preoperative nodal staging of breast cancer - size of metastases as limiting factor.
abstract: Since the performance of surgical procedures of the axilla in the treatment of early breast cancer is decreasing, the role of axillary ultrasound (AUS) as staging procedere has newly to be addressed. The aim of this study was to determine which patient or histopathological characteristics are related to false-negative AUS. In a retrospective study design data of 470 women with primary breast cancer were collected from patient charts and imaging and pathology records were reviewed. True positive and false negative axillary ultrasound groups were compared in terms of tumor size, histological subtype, grade, estrogen receptor (ER) and HER2 status, proliferation index, number and size of nodal metastases, extracapsular extension (ECE) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI). Of 470 patients, 166 (35%) were node positive, 79 of them with suspicious AUS. Factors associated with false negative AUS by univariate analysis were included in a multivariate model. By multivariate analysis, only size of nodal metastases was an independent factor for false negative AUS. In the sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) subgroup, 45% of patients had nodal metastasis size less than or equal to 5 mm. In conclusion, AUS in preoperative staging of early stage breast cancer is limited by small size of metastases in a substantial number of patients. Prospective studies have to show whether small metastatic deposits leaving in patients in case of no axillary surgery have no negative effect on disease free and overall survival.
authors: Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Rostock, Südring 81, Rostock, 18059 Germany.
authors: Angrit
authors: A
authors: Stachs
authors: Katja
authors: K
authors: Göde
authors: Steffi
authors: S
authors: Hartmann
authors: Bernd
authors: B
authors: Stengel
authors: Ulrike
authors: U
authors: Nierling
authors: Max
authors: M
authors: Dieterich
authors: Toralf
authors: T
authors: Reimer
authors: Bernd
authors: B
authors: Gerber
references: Ann Surg. 2011 Aug;254(2):243-51
references: 21597359
references: Eur J Cancer. 2009 May;45(8):1381-8
references: 19128957
references: J Clin Oncol. 2007 Aug 20;25(24):3670-9
references: 17664461
references: Breast. 2012 Oct;21(5):678-81
references: 22835916
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2006 May;186(5):1342-8
references: 16632729
references: Ann Surg Oncol. 2012 Jun;19(6):1825-30
references: 22227922
references: AJR Am J Roentgenol. 2010 Nov;195(5):1261-7
references: 20966338
references: Breast. 2009 Apr;18(2):119-22
references: 19297159
references: Lancet Oncol. 2013 Apr;14(4):297-305
references: 23491275
references: Breast. 2012 Aug;21(4):578-83
references: 22717665
references: Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Mar;20(3):819-27
references: 22972506
references: Ann Surg. 2005 Jul;242(1):1-6; discussion 7-9
references: 15973094
references: Lancet Oncol. 2010 Oct;11(10):927-33
references: 20863759
references: Ann Surg Oncol. 2009 May;16(5):1136-42
references: 19259742
references: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2010 Aug;123(1):281-90
references: 20140703
references: J Clin Oncol. 2006 Jan 20;24(3):337-44
references: 16344321
references: Cancer. 2005 Feb 1;103(3):492-500
references: 15612028
references: Breast. 2006 Jun;15(3):452-5
references: 16054813
references: Eur J Cancer. 2003 May;39(8):1068-73
references: 12736105
references: JAMA. 2011 Feb 9;305(6):569-75
references: 21304082
references: Lancet Oncol. 2007 Oct;8(10):881-8
references: 17851130
references: N Engl J Med. 2002 Aug 22;347(8):567-75
references: 12192016
references: J Magn Reson Imaging. 2009 Aug;30(2):309-12
references: 19466713
references: N Engl J Med. 2003 Aug 7;349(6):546-53
references: 12904519
references: BMC Cancer. 2008 Jun 09;8:165
references: 18541009
references: Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Aug;128(3):613-24
references: 21523451