Axillary Surgery in Breast Cancer - Primary Results of the INSEMA Trial.

IF 96.2 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL New England Journal of Medicine Pub Date : 2025-03-13 Epub Date: 2024-12-12 DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa2412063
Toralf Reimer, Angrit Stachs, Kristina Veselinovic, Thorsten Kühn, Jörg Heil, Silke Polata, Frederik Marmé, Thomas Müller, Guido Hildebrandt, David Krug, Beyhan Ataseven, Roland Reitsamer, Sylvia Ruth, Carsten Denkert, Inga Bekes, Dirk-Michael Zahm, Marc Thill, Michael Golatta, Johannes Holtschmidt, Michael Knauer, Valentina Nekljudova, Sibylle Loibl, Bernd Gerber
{"title":"Axillary Surgery in Breast Cancer - Primary Results of the INSEMA Trial.","authors":"Toralf Reimer, Angrit Stachs, Kristina Veselinovic, Thorsten Kühn, Jörg Heil, Silke Polata, Frederik Marmé, Thomas Müller, Guido Hildebrandt, David Krug, Beyhan Ataseven, Roland Reitsamer, Sylvia Ruth, Carsten Denkert, Inga Bekes, Dirk-Michael Zahm, Marc Thill, Michael Golatta, Johannes Holtschmidt, Michael Knauer, Valentina Nekljudova, Sibylle Loibl, Bernd Gerber","doi":"10.1056/NEJMoa2412063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Whether surgical axillary staging as part of breast-conserving therapy can be omitted without compromising survival has remained unclear.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial, we investigated the omission of axillary surgery as compared with sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer staged as T1 or T2 (tumor size, ≤5 cm) who were scheduled to undergo breast-conserving surgery. We report here the per-protocol analysis of invasive disease-free survival (the primary efficacy outcome). To show the noninferiority of the omission of axillary surgery, the 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate had to be at least 85%, and the upper limit of the confidence interval for the hazard ratio for invasive disease or death had to be below 1.271.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5502 eligible patients (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer) underwent randomization in a 1:4 ratio. The per-protocol population included 4858 patients; 962 were assigned to undergo treatment without axillary surgery (the surgery-omission group), and 3896 to undergo sentinel-lymph-node biopsy (the surgery group). The median follow-up was 73.6 months. The estimated 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 91.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.9 to 93.5) among patients in the surgery-omission group and 91.7% (95% CI, 90.8 to 92.6) among patients in the surgery group, with a hazard ratio of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14), which was below the prespecified noninferiority margin. The analysis of the first primary-outcome events (occurrence or recurrence of invasive disease or death from any cause), which occurred in a total of 525 patients (10.8%), showed apparent differences between the surgery-omission group and the surgery group in the incidence of axillary recurrence (1.0% vs. 0.3%) and death (1.4% vs. 2.4%). The safety analysis indicates that patients in the surgery-omission group had a lower incidence of lymphedema, greater arm mobility, and less pain with movement of the arm or shoulder than patients who underwent sentinel-lymph-node biopsy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this trial involving patients with clinically node-negative, T1 or T2 invasive breast cancer (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer), omission of surgical axillary staging was noninferior to sentinel-lymph-node biopsy after a median follow-up of 6 years. (Funded by the German Cancer Aid; INSEMA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02466737.).</p>","PeriodicalId":54725,"journal":{"name":"New England Journal of Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1051-1064"},"PeriodicalIF":96.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"New England Journal of Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa2412063","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/12/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Whether surgical axillary staging as part of breast-conserving therapy can be omitted without compromising survival has remained unclear.

Methods: In this prospective, randomized, noninferiority trial, we investigated the omission of axillary surgery as compared with sentinel-lymph-node biopsy in patients with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer staged as T1 or T2 (tumor size, ≤5 cm) who were scheduled to undergo breast-conserving surgery. We report here the per-protocol analysis of invasive disease-free survival (the primary efficacy outcome). To show the noninferiority of the omission of axillary surgery, the 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate had to be at least 85%, and the upper limit of the confidence interval for the hazard ratio for invasive disease or death had to be below 1.271.

Results: A total of 5502 eligible patients (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer) underwent randomization in a 1:4 ratio. The per-protocol population included 4858 patients; 962 were assigned to undergo treatment without axillary surgery (the surgery-omission group), and 3896 to undergo sentinel-lymph-node biopsy (the surgery group). The median follow-up was 73.6 months. The estimated 5-year invasive disease-free survival rate was 91.9% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.9 to 93.5) among patients in the surgery-omission group and 91.7% (95% CI, 90.8 to 92.6) among patients in the surgery group, with a hazard ratio of 0.91 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.14), which was below the prespecified noninferiority margin. The analysis of the first primary-outcome events (occurrence or recurrence of invasive disease or death from any cause), which occurred in a total of 525 patients (10.8%), showed apparent differences between the surgery-omission group and the surgery group in the incidence of axillary recurrence (1.0% vs. 0.3%) and death (1.4% vs. 2.4%). The safety analysis indicates that patients in the surgery-omission group had a lower incidence of lymphedema, greater arm mobility, and less pain with movement of the arm or shoulder than patients who underwent sentinel-lymph-node biopsy.

Conclusions: In this trial involving patients with clinically node-negative, T1 or T2 invasive breast cancer (90% with clinical T1 cancer and 79% with pathological T1 cancer), omission of surgical axillary staging was noninferior to sentinel-lymph-node biopsy after a median follow-up of 6 years. (Funded by the German Cancer Aid; INSEMA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02466737.).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
腋窝手术治疗乳腺癌- INSEMA试验的主要结果。
背景:是否手术腋窝分期作为保乳治疗的一部分可以省略而不影响生存尚不清楚。方法:在这项前瞻性、随机、非劣效性试验中,我们研究了临床淋巴结阴性浸润性乳腺癌分期为T1或T2(肿瘤大小≤5 cm),计划行保乳手术的患者,与前哨淋巴结活检相比,遗漏腋窝手术。我们在此报告侵袭性无病生存(主要疗效结局)的每个方案分析。为了显示遗漏腋窝手术的非劣性,5年无侵袭性生存率必须至少达到85%,侵袭性疾病或死亡风险比的置信区间上限必须低于1.271。结果:共有5502名符合条件的患者(90%为临床T1癌,79%为病理T1癌)按1:4的比例随机分组。按方案人群包括4858例患者;962例不做腋窝手术(手术省略组),3896例行前哨淋巴结活检(手术组)。中位随访时间为73.6个月。估计手术遗漏组患者的5年无侵袭性疾病生存率为91.9%(95%可信区间[CI], 89.9 ~ 93.5),手术组患者的5年无侵袭性疾病生存率为91.7% (95% CI, 90.8 ~ 92.6),风险比为0.91 (95% CI, 0.73 ~ 1.14),低于预先设定的非效性裕度。对525例患者(10.8%)发生的第一主要结局事件(侵袭性疾病的发生或复发或任何原因的死亡)的分析显示,不手术组和手术组在腋窝复发率(1.0%比0.3%)和死亡率(1.4%比2.4%)方面存在明显差异。安全性分析表明,与接受前哨淋巴结活检的患者相比,不手术组患者淋巴水肿发生率更低,手臂活动度更高,手臂或肩部运动时疼痛更少。结论:在这项涉及临床淋巴结阴性、T1或T2浸润性乳腺癌患者(90%为临床T1癌,79%为病理性T1癌)的试验中,在中位随访6年后,遗漏手术腋窝分期并不亚于前哨淋巴结活检。(由德国癌症援助资助;INSEMA ClinicalTrials.gov号码:NCT02466737)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
New England Journal of Medicine
New England Journal of Medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
145.40
自引率
0.60%
发文量
1839
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) stands as the foremost medical journal and website worldwide. With an impressive history spanning over two centuries, NEJM boasts a consistent publication of superb, peer-reviewed research and engaging clinical content. Our primary objective revolves around delivering high-caliber information and findings at the juncture of biomedical science and clinical practice. We strive to present this knowledge in formats that are not only comprehensible but also hold practical value, effectively influencing healthcare practices and ultimately enhancing patient outcomes.
期刊最新文献
A Randomized Trial of Automated Insulin Delivery in Type 2 Diabetes. Antibiotic Treatment for 7 versus 14 Days in Patients with Bloodstream Infections. Liberal or Restrictive Transfusion Strategy in Aneurysmal Subarachnoid Hemorrhage. Axillary Surgery in Breast Cancer - Primary Results of the INSEMA Trial. Sentinel-Lymph-Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer - Is It Obsolete?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1