A PHP Error was encountered

Severity: Warning

Message: file_get_contents(https://...@pubfacts.com&api_key=b8daa3ad693db53b1410957c26c9a51b4908&a=1): Failed to open stream: HTTP request failed! HTTP/1.1 429 Too Many Requests

Filename: helpers/my_audit_helper.php

Line Number: 176

Backtrace:

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 176
Function: file_get_contents

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 250
Function: simplexml_load_file_from_url

File: /var/www/html/application/helpers/my_audit_helper.php
Line: 3122
Function: getPubMedXML

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 575
Function: pubMedSearch_Global

File: /var/www/html/application/controllers/Detail.php
Line: 489
Function: pubMedGetRelatedKeyword

File: /var/www/html/index.php
Line: 316
Function: require_once

Added value of repeat sentinel lymph node biopsy in FDG-PET/CT node-negative patients with ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence. | LitMetric

Purpose: Repeat sentinel lymph node biopsy (rSLNB) has been suggested for axillary staging in clinically node-negative (cN0) patients with ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). Although rSLNB is technically feasible in this group of patients, the clinical value has not been established. We aimed to assess the added value of rSLNB in cN0 patients with IBTR who underwent optimal clinical staging with FDG-PET/CT.

Methods: This retrospective single-center cohort study included 119 patients with IBTR-staged cT1-4N0M0 with FDG-PET/CT who underwent rSLNB between 2006 and 2020. Overall recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) were calculated for subgroups with tumor-positive, tumor negative, and unsuccessful rSLNB.

Results: rSLNB was successful in 79 (66%) of the 119 included patients, of whom 70 (59%) had a tumor negative and 9 (8%) a tumor-positive rSLNB; rSLNB was unsuccessful in the remaining 40 (34%) patients. Patients with a tumor-positive rSLNB had poorer overall 5-year RFS compared to patients with a tumor negative or unsuccessful rSLNB (44% vs. 86% vs. 90%, p = 0.004). Although patients with a tumor-positive rSLNB had worse RFS, the 10-year OS was comparable to a tumor negative or unsuccessful rSLNB (89% vs. 89% vs. 95%, p = 0.701).

Conclusion: The incidence of a tumor-positive rSLNB in patients with a negative FDG-PET/CT is low and does not change survival. Therefore, in cN0 patients with IBTR who underwent optimal clinical staging with FDG-PET/CT, we support a patient- and tumor-tailored treatment strategy in which rSLNB may be omitted.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-022-06654-9DOI Listing

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

tumor negative
16
patients
12
rslnb
12
cn0 patients
12
negative unsuccessful
12
tumor-positive rslnb
12
repeat sentinel
8
sentinel lymph
8
lymph node
8
node biopsy
8

Similar Publications

Want AI Summaries of new PubMed Abstracts delivered to your In-box?

Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!