Yaşar ÜNLÜ, Zeynep BAYRAMOĞLU, Hande KÖKSAL, Mehmet Ali ERYILMAZ, Ethem ÖMEROĞLU

Our sentinel lymph node experience in patients diagnosedwith DCIS and microinvasive breast carcinoma

Aim: Along with the increased availability of radiologic imaging methods, early identification of tumor tissue, and patient surveillance programs; ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and microinvasive DCIS became more commonly identified in the tru-cut biopsy specimens and resected samples of patients. Pathological examinations of the excision materials from these patients reveal invasive tumors, microinvasions or DCIS alone. Recently, it has become debatable whether to perform a sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients diagnosed with DCIS or microinvasive DCIS. In this present study, we evaluated the diagnosis made by examining the excision material, any presence of lymph node metastases, and the relationship of hormone profile to the presence of metastases in the patients diagnosed with DCIS or microinvasive DCIS by the examination of tru-cut biopsy specimens. Based on our study results, we discussed the requirement for SLNB in patients with a tru-cut diagnosis of DCIS or microinvasive DCIS.Materials and Methods: The study included 172 patients, who underwent surgical excision and SLNB after receiving a tru-cut biopsy diagnosis of DCIS and microinvasive DCIS in our hospital from the year 2010 to 2018.Results: Tru-cut biopsy diagnoses were DCIS and microinvasive DCIS in 69.8% (120 patients) and 30.2% (52 patients) respectively. SLNB metastases were identified in 35.8% (n=43) of the DCIS positive patients and 44.2% (n=23) in the microinvasive DCIS positive patients. The diagnosis of invasive ductal carcinoma after mastectomy was made at a rate of 90.0% (n=108) among the DCIS positive patients and 92.3% (n=48) among the microinvasive DCIS positive patients. Conclusion: SLNB metastases were found in 35.8% (n=43) and 44.2% (n=23) of the DCIS positive patients and microinvasive DCIS positive patients, respectively. We conclude that SLNB should be favorably proper to perform in the patients with tru-cut diagnoses of DCIS and microinvasive DCIS because a high rate of SLNB metastases was detected in our DCIS and microinvasive DCIS patients and a high rate of invasive ductal carcinoma diagnosis was made after examining the excision material of these patients.

PDF

___

1. Welch HG, Prorok PC, O’Malley AJ, et al. Breastcancer tumor size, overdiagnosis, and mammography screening effectiveness. N Engl J Med 2016;375;1438- 47.
2. Lyman GH, Somerfield MR, Bosserman LD, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with earlystage breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline update. J Clin Oncol 2016.
3. Burstein HJ, Lacchetti C, Anderson H, et al. Adjuvant endocrine therapy for women with hormone receptorpositive breast cancer: ASCO clinical practice guideline focused update. J Clin Oncol 2019;37:423-38.
4. Lakhani SR, Ellis IO, Schnitt SJ. WHO classification of tumours of the breast. Lyon: IARC 2012.
5. Boler DE, Cabioglu N, Ince U, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in püre DCIS: is it necessary. ISRN Surg 2012;2012:394095.
6. Son BK, Bong JG, Park SH, et al. Ductal carcinoma in situ and sentinel lymph node biopsy. J Breast Cancer 2011;14:301-7.
7. Solin LJ, Kurtz J, Fourquet A, et al. Fifteen-year results of breastconserving surgery and definitive breast irradiation for the treatment of ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. J Clin Oncol 1996;14:754-63.
8. Silverstein MJ, Gierson ED, Colburn WJ, et al. Can intraductal breast carcinoma be excised completely by local excision? Clinical and pathologic predictors. Cancer 1994;73:2985-9.
9. von Rueden DG, Wilson RE. Intraductal carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1984;158:105-11.
10. Winchester DP, Menck HR, Osteen RT, et al. Treatment trends for ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast. Ann Surg Oncol 1995;2:207-13.
11. Zetterlund L, Stemme S, Arnrup H, et al. Incidence of and risk factors for sentinel lymph node metastasis in patients with a postoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg 2014;101:488-94.
12. Intra M, Rotmensz N, Veronesi P, et al. Sentinel node biopsy is not a standard procedure in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: the experience of the European Institute of Oncology on 854 patients in 10 years. Ann Surg 2008;247:315-9.
13. Tummel E, Ochoa D, Korourian S, et al. Does axillary reverse mapping prevent lymphedema after lymphadenectomy?. Annals of Surgery 2017;265:987- 92.
14. Wang L, Guyatt GH, Kennedy SA, et al. Predictors of persistent pain after breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of observational studies. Cmaj 2016;188:352-61.
15. Rafn BS, Hung S, Hoens AM, et al. Prospective surveillance and targeted physiotherapy for arm morbidity after breast cancer surgery: a pilot randomized controlled trial. Clin Rehabil 2018;32:811- 26.
16. Magnoni F, Massari G, Santomauro G, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in microinvasive ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg 2019;106:375-83.
17. Liu CQ, Guo Y, Shi JY, et al. Late morbidity associated with a tumour- negative sentinel lymph node biopsy in primary breast cancer patients: a systematic review. Eur J Cancer 2009;45:1560-8.
18. Zetterlund L, Stemme S, Arnrup H, et al. Incidence of and risk factors for sentinel lymph node metastasis in patients with a postoperative diagnosis of ductal carcinoma in situ. Br J Surg 2014;101:488-94.
19. Ozsan N, Sarsik B, Doganavsargil B, et al. Histopatolojik ve immünhistokimyasal özelliklerin değerlendirilmesi ile karsinomlarda meme sentinel lenf nodu biyopsileri. Ege Medical J 2013;52:80-7.
20. Toss M, Miligy I, Thompson AM, et al. Current trials to reduce surgical intervention in ductal carcinoma in situ of the breast: Critical review. The Breast 2017;35:151-6.
21. Okat Z. Molecular mechanisms affecting estrogen receptor levels in breast cancer. J Surgery and Med 2018;2:137-42.