Axillary surgical staging after neoadjuvant chemotherapy: does technical accuracy matter?
Chelsea Marin,Kimberly Gergelis,Anna Weiss
DOI: https://doi.org/10.21037/gs-24-183
2024-09-03
Gland Surgery
Abstract:Chelsea Marin 1 , Kimberly Gergelis 2,3 , Anna Weiss 1,2 1 Department of Surgery, Division of Surgical Oncology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA; 2 Wilmot Cancer Center, University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA; 3 Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, NY, USA Comment on: Pantiora E, Eriksson S, Wärnberg F, et al . Magnetically guided surgery after primary systemic therapy for breast cancer: implications for enhanced axillary mapping. Br J Surg 2024;111:znae008. Keywords: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB); targeted axillary dissection (TAD); neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) Submitted May 21, 2024. Accepted for publication Jul 17, 2024. Published online Aug 21, 2024. doi: 10.21037/gs-24-183 Optimal surgical staging, and subsequent surgical management of the axilla in patients with breast cancer, have been topics of controversy for the last 20-plus years. The general trend has been towards de-escalating axillary surgery [i.e., replacing axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)] whenever possible due to the significant morbidities associated with ALND. This has been made increasingly possible by the widespread use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT). In patients with initially node-negative (cN0) disease who receive NACT, like upfront surgery patients, SLNB has largely replaced ALND. However, the story is less straight forward for patients initially presenting with node-positive disease (cN+, defined as cN1–3), specifically those who convert to node-negative after NACT (ycN0). NACT can lead to a nodal pathologic complete response (pCR, ypN0) in >40% of cN+ patients, with the highest responses seen in patients with HER2-positive and triple-negative disease; however, among those with residual nodal disease after NACT the accuracy of SLNB is a topic of major debate (1,2). In a prospective institutional cohort study of 113 ycN0 patients (33 of which were initially cN1) undergoing SLNB or targeted axillary dissection (TAD) after NACT, Pantiora et al. investigated the utility of superparamagnetic iron nanoparticles (SPIO) as a tracer for mapping to axillary sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) (3). Patients received radioisotope on the day of surgery, and SPIO injections at a median of 3 (range, 0–248) days before surgery, with 18.6% receiving SPIO before the start of NACT. Authors found that SPIO performed comparably to radioisotope, and that timing of SPIO administration had no significant effect on concordance with radioisotope. This is interesting for a few reasons. First, the ability to administer a tracer prior to the day of surgery is beneficial from an operational logistics standpoint, e.g., fewer procedures to coordinate on or immediately before the day of surgery. Additionally, as a proportion of patients in this study received SPIO prior to NACT, this suggests that SPIO may allow for more accurate axillary staging (i.e., mapping the axilla before chemotherapy-induced fibrosis and remodeling) (4). However, these conclusions must be interpreted cautiously, as they were based on a very small sample size, only 18.6% (n=21) of all patients in this study received SPIO before the start of NACT and only 29% (n=33) were cN1 at presentation. Pantiora et al. also found that SPIO detected more SLNs than radioisotope (median of 3 versus 2 SLNs respectively, P<0.001), and that in ypN+ patients, SPIO identified more metastatic SLNs than radioisotope; however, this too was based on a very small sample size (n=19) (3). Furthermore, in the 33 patients who presented with cN+ disease, converted to ycN0, and underwent TAD, the specifically targeted lymph node (LN) was SPIO-positive in 94% of patients versus radioisotope positive in 67% (P<0.001), again suggesting that SPIO may be more accurate in mapping the axilla before NACT (3). It is important to note that while all these findings are interesting and certainly hypothesis-generating, authors provide very little detail around the patient population, including outcomes by tumor subtype. Also notably lacking are details about the methods of assessing presenting axillary LN status and nodal response to NACT, i.e., whether the patients were considered cN+ based on physical exam alone, or by axillary imaging with or without percutaneous LN biopsy proving nodal metastases. This lack of granularity makes the findings difficult to apply broadly, but still this study highlights an important debate when it comes to the use of SLNB in cN+ patients after NACT: how important is the technical accuracy of axillary surgical staging? Is nodal clipping and localization necessary? Several prospective trials have investigated the accuracy -Abstract Truncated-
surgery