A Nomogram to Predict Factors Associated with Lymph Node Metastasis in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ with Microinvasion

0Citations
Citations of this article
9Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Introduction: Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) with foci of invasion measuring ≤ 1 mm (DCISM), represents < 1% of all invasive breast cancers. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been a standard component of surgery for patients with invasive carcinoma or extensive DCIS. We hypothesize that selective performance of SLNB may be appropriate given the low incidence of sentinel node (SN) metastasis for DCISM. We investigated the clinicopathologic predictors for SN positivity in DCISM, to identify which patients might benefit from SLNB. Methods: A retrospective review of the National Cancer Database was performed for cases from 2012 to 2015. Clinical and tumor characteristics, including SN results, were evaluated, and Pearson’s Chi square tests and logistic regression were performed. Results: Of 7803 patients with DCISM, 306 (4%) had at least one positive SN. Patients with positive SNs were younger, more often of Black race, had higher-grade histology and larger tumor size, and were more likely to have lymphovascular invasion (LVI; all p < 0.001). In an adjusted model, the presence of LVI was associated with the highest odds ratio (OR) for node positivity (OR 8.80, 95% confidence interval 4.56–16.96). Conclusions: Among women with DCISM, only 4% had a positive SN. Node positivity was associated with more extensive and higher-grade DCIS, and the presence of LVI was strongly correlated with node positivity. Our data suggest that LVI is the most important factor in determining which patients with DCISM will benefit from SN biopsy.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Gooch, J. C., Schnabel, F., Chun, J., Pirraglia, E., Troxel, A. B., Guth, A., … Roses, D. (2019). A Nomogram to Predict Factors Associated with Lymph Node Metastasis in Ductal Carcinoma In Situ with Microinvasion. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 26(13), 4302–4309. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-019-07750-9

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free