对 MF18-02/MF18-03 NEOSENTITURK 研究的综合分析:对新辅助化疗反应良好的乳腺癌患者,只要提供放疗,ypN 阳性疾病就没有必要进行腋窝淋巴结清扫。

IF 6.1 2区 医学 Q1 ONCOLOGY Cancer Pub Date : 2024-10-30 DOI:10.1002/cncr.35610
Mahmut Muslumanoglu, Neslihan Cabioglu, Abdullah Igci, Hasan Karanlık, Havva Belma Kocer, Kazim Senol, Baris Mantoglu, Mustafa Tukenmez, Guldeniz Karadeniz Çakmak, Enver Ozkurt, Mehmet Ali Gulcelik, Selman Emiroglu, Baran Mollavelioglu, Nilufer Yildirim, Suleyman Bademler, Baha Zengel, Didem Can Trabulus, Mustafa Umit Ugurlu, Cihan Uras, Serkan Ilgun, Gokhan Giray Akgul, Alper Akcan, Serdar Yormaz, Yeliz Emine Ersoy, Serdar Ozbas, Ece Dilege, Bulent Citgez, Yasemin Bolukbasi, Ayse Altınok, Ahmet Dag, Gül Basaran, Nihat Zafer Utkan, Beyza Ozcinar, Cumhur Arici, Israa AlJorani, Halil Kara, Banu Yigit, Ebru Sen, Fazilet Erozgen, Aykut Soyder, Burak Celik, Halime Gul Kilic, Leyla Zer, Gürhan Sakman, Levent Yeniay, Kemal Atahan, Ecenur Varol, Vefa Veliyeva, Berk Goktepe, Mehmet Velidedeoglu, Niyazi Karaman, Atilla Soran, Adnan Aydiner, Ravza Yılmaz, Kamuran Ibis, Vahit Ozmen
{"title":"对 MF18-02/MF18-03 NEOSENTITURK 研究的综合分析:对新辅助化疗反应良好的乳腺癌患者,只要提供放疗,ypN 阳性疾病就没有必要进行腋窝淋巴结清扫。","authors":"Mahmut Muslumanoglu, Neslihan Cabioglu, Abdullah Igci, Hasan Karanlık, Havva Belma Kocer, Kazim Senol, Baris Mantoglu, Mustafa Tukenmez, Guldeniz Karadeniz Çakmak, Enver Ozkurt, Mehmet Ali Gulcelik, Selman Emiroglu, Baran Mollavelioglu, Nilufer Yildirim, Suleyman Bademler, Baha Zengel, Didem Can Trabulus, Mustafa Umit Ugurlu, Cihan Uras, Serkan Ilgun, Gokhan Giray Akgul, Alper Akcan, Serdar Yormaz, Yeliz Emine Ersoy, Serdar Ozbas, Ece Dilege, Bulent Citgez, Yasemin Bolukbasi, Ayse Altınok, Ahmet Dag, Gül Basaran, Nihat Zafer Utkan, Beyza Ozcinar, Cumhur Arici, Israa AlJorani, Halil Kara, Banu Yigit, Ebru Sen, Fazilet Erozgen, Aykut Soyder, Burak Celik, Halime Gul Kilic, Leyla Zer, Gürhan Sakman, Levent Yeniay, Kemal Atahan, Ecenur Varol, Vefa Veliyeva, Berk Goktepe, Mehmet Velidedeoglu, Niyazi Karaman, Atilla Soran, Adnan Aydiner, Ravza Yılmaz, Kamuran Ibis, Vahit Ozmen","doi":"10.1002/cncr.35610","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) remains controversial for patients with residual axillary disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), regardless of the residual burden. This study evaluated the oncologic safety and factors associated with outcomes in patients with residual axillary disease. These patients were treated solely with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or targeted axillary dissection (TAD), without ALND, after NAC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A joint analysis of two different multicenter cohorts-the retrospective cohort registry MF18-02 and the prospective observational cohort registry MF18-03 (NCT04250129)-was conducted between January 2004 and August 2022. All patients received regional nodal irradiation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five hundred and one patients with cT1-4, N1-3M0 disease who achieved a complete clinical response to NAC underwent either SLNB alone (n = 353) or TAD alone (n = 148). At a median follow-up of 42 months, axillary and locoregional recurrence rates were 0.4% (n = 2) and 0.8% (n = 4). No significant difference was found in disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates between patients undergoing TAD alone versus SLNB alone, those with breast positive versus negative pathologic complete response, SLN methodology, total metastatic LN of one versus ≥2, or metastasis types as isolated tumor cells with micrometastases versus macrometastases. In the multivariate analysis, patients with nonluminal pathology were more likely to have a worse DFS and DSS, respectively, without an increased axillary recurrence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The omission of ALND can be safely considered for patients who achieve a complete clinical response after NAC, even if residual disease is detected by pathologic examination. Provided that adjuvant radiotherapy is administered, neither the SLNB method nor the number of excised LNs significantly affects oncologic outcomes.</p>","PeriodicalId":138,"journal":{"name":"Cancer","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Combined analysis of the MF18-02/MF18-03 NEOSENTITURK studies: ypN-positive disease does not necessitate axillary lymph node dissection in patients with breast cancer with a good response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as long as radiotherapy is provided.\",\"authors\":\"Mahmut Muslumanoglu, Neslihan Cabioglu, Abdullah Igci, Hasan Karanlık, Havva Belma Kocer, Kazim Senol, Baris Mantoglu, Mustafa Tukenmez, Guldeniz Karadeniz Çakmak, Enver Ozkurt, Mehmet Ali Gulcelik, Selman Emiroglu, Baran Mollavelioglu, Nilufer Yildirim, Suleyman Bademler, Baha Zengel, Didem Can Trabulus, Mustafa Umit Ugurlu, Cihan Uras, Serkan Ilgun, Gokhan Giray Akgul, Alper Akcan, Serdar Yormaz, Yeliz Emine Ersoy, Serdar Ozbas, Ece Dilege, Bulent Citgez, Yasemin Bolukbasi, Ayse Altınok, Ahmet Dag, Gül Basaran, Nihat Zafer Utkan, Beyza Ozcinar, Cumhur Arici, Israa AlJorani, Halil Kara, Banu Yigit, Ebru Sen, Fazilet Erozgen, Aykut Soyder, Burak Celik, Halime Gul Kilic, Leyla Zer, Gürhan Sakman, Levent Yeniay, Kemal Atahan, Ecenur Varol, Vefa Veliyeva, Berk Goktepe, Mehmet Velidedeoglu, Niyazi Karaman, Atilla Soran, Adnan Aydiner, Ravza Yılmaz, Kamuran Ibis, Vahit Ozmen\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/cncr.35610\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) remains controversial for patients with residual axillary disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), regardless of the residual burden. This study evaluated the oncologic safety and factors associated with outcomes in patients with residual axillary disease. These patients were treated solely with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or targeted axillary dissection (TAD), without ALND, after NAC.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A joint analysis of two different multicenter cohorts-the retrospective cohort registry MF18-02 and the prospective observational cohort registry MF18-03 (NCT04250129)-was conducted between January 2004 and August 2022. All patients received regional nodal irradiation.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five hundred and one patients with cT1-4, N1-3M0 disease who achieved a complete clinical response to NAC underwent either SLNB alone (n = 353) or TAD alone (n = 148). At a median follow-up of 42 months, axillary and locoregional recurrence rates were 0.4% (n = 2) and 0.8% (n = 4). No significant difference was found in disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates between patients undergoing TAD alone versus SLNB alone, those with breast positive versus negative pathologic complete response, SLN methodology, total metastatic LN of one versus ≥2, or metastasis types as isolated tumor cells with micrometastases versus macrometastases. In the multivariate analysis, patients with nonluminal pathology were more likely to have a worse DFS and DSS, respectively, without an increased axillary recurrence.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The omission of ALND can be safely considered for patients who achieve a complete clinical response after NAC, even if residual disease is detected by pathologic examination. Provided that adjuvant radiotherapy is administered, neither the SLNB method nor the number of excised LNs significantly affects oncologic outcomes.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":138,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cancer\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cancer\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35610\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.35610","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:对于新辅助化疗(NAC)后有腋窝残留疾病的患者,无论其残留负担如何,省略腋窝淋巴结清扫(ALND)仍存在争议。本研究评估了残留腋窝疾病患者的肿瘤安全性以及与预后相关的因素。这些患者在NAC治疗后仅接受了前哨淋巴结活检(SLNB)或靶向腋窝清扫术(TAD),未接受ALND治疗:2004年1月至2022年8月期间,对两个不同的多中心队列--回顾性队列登记MF18-02和前瞻性观察性队列登记MF18-03(NCT04250129)--进行了联合分析。所有患者均接受了区域性结节照射:结果:501名患有cT1-4、N1-3M0、对NAC有完全临床反应的患者接受了单纯SLNB(353人)或单纯TAD(148人)治疗。中位随访时间为42个月,腋窝和局部复发率分别为0.4%(2例)和0.8%(4例)。在无病生存率(DFS)和疾病特异性生存率(DSS)方面,单纯TAD与单纯SLNB、乳腺病理完全反应阳性与阴性、SLN方法、转移LN总数为1个与≥2个、转移类型为孤立肿瘤细胞微转移与大转移的患者之间均无明显差异。在多变量分析中,非腔隙病理患者的DFS和DSS分别较差,但腋窝复发率并不增加:结论:对于在NAC治疗后获得完全临床反应的患者,即使病理检查发现了残留疾病,也可以放心地考虑不进行ALND治疗。只要进行了辅助放疗,SLNB 方法和切除 LN 的数量都不会对肿瘤预后产生显著影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Combined analysis of the MF18-02/MF18-03 NEOSENTITURK studies: ypN-positive disease does not necessitate axillary lymph node dissection in patients with breast cancer with a good response to neoadjuvant chemotherapy as long as radiotherapy is provided.

Background: The omission of axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) remains controversial for patients with residual axillary disease after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), regardless of the residual burden. This study evaluated the oncologic safety and factors associated with outcomes in patients with residual axillary disease. These patients were treated solely with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) or targeted axillary dissection (TAD), without ALND, after NAC.

Methods: A joint analysis of two different multicenter cohorts-the retrospective cohort registry MF18-02 and the prospective observational cohort registry MF18-03 (NCT04250129)-was conducted between January 2004 and August 2022. All patients received regional nodal irradiation.

Results: Five hundred and one patients with cT1-4, N1-3M0 disease who achieved a complete clinical response to NAC underwent either SLNB alone (n = 353) or TAD alone (n = 148). At a median follow-up of 42 months, axillary and locoregional recurrence rates were 0.4% (n = 2) and 0.8% (n = 4). No significant difference was found in disease-free survival (DFS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) rates between patients undergoing TAD alone versus SLNB alone, those with breast positive versus negative pathologic complete response, SLN methodology, total metastatic LN of one versus ≥2, or metastasis types as isolated tumor cells with micrometastases versus macrometastases. In the multivariate analysis, patients with nonluminal pathology were more likely to have a worse DFS and DSS, respectively, without an increased axillary recurrence.

Conclusions: The omission of ALND can be safely considered for patients who achieve a complete clinical response after NAC, even if residual disease is detected by pathologic examination. Provided that adjuvant radiotherapy is administered, neither the SLNB method nor the number of excised LNs significantly affects oncologic outcomes.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Cancer
Cancer 医学-肿瘤学
CiteScore
13.10
自引率
3.20%
发文量
480
审稿时长
2-3 weeks
期刊介绍: The CANCER site is a full-text, electronic implementation of CANCER, an Interdisciplinary International Journal of the American Cancer Society, and CANCER CYTOPATHOLOGY, a Journal of the American Cancer Society. CANCER publishes interdisciplinary oncologic information according to, but not limited to, the following disease sites and disciplines: blood/bone marrow; breast disease; endocrine disorders; epidemiology; gastrointestinal tract; genitourinary disease; gynecologic oncology; head and neck disease; hepatobiliary tract; integrated medicine; lung disease; medical oncology; neuro-oncology; pathology radiation oncology; translational research
期刊最新文献
A systematic review and meta-analysis of patient-relevant outcomes in comprehensive cancer centers versus noncomprehensive cancer centers. American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline update on palliative care for patients with cancer: Addressing the reality gap. Embrace with caution: The limitations of generative artificial intelligence in responding to patient health care queries. Expression of Concern. Global disparities in cancer care: Bridging the gap in affordability and access to medications between high and low-income countries.
×
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