MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Abstract PS01-02: Long-term outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for initially node-positive breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

2024· review· en· W4396590903 on OpenAlexaffabout
Anna Weiss, Alison Laws, Carol Mita, Tari A. King

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineBreast cancerMeta-analysisSentinel lymph nodeOncologyChemotherapySentinel nodeInternal medicineLymph nodeBiopsyNode (physics)Term (time)SurgeryCancer

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) alone is now frequently offered to women with initially node-positive breast cancer who convert to pathologically node negative (nodal pCR) following neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), despite limited long-term data regarding the oncologic safety of this approach. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the long-term oncologic outcomes associated with SLNB alone following NAC for initially node-positive breast cancer. Methods: A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Medline (Ovid), Embase, and Cochrane Central Registry were systematically searched for studies comparing women undergoing SLNB or ALND following NAC for initially clinically node-positive breast cancer. Included studies reported one of the following outcomes: axillary recurrence (AR), locoregional recurrence (LRR), disease-free survival (DFS) or overall survival. A random effects meta-analysis was used to calculate weighted pooled effect estimates (risk ratios, RR) for all outcomes. Variability across studies due to heterogeneity was estimated using I2 statistics. Subgroup analysis was performed by length of follow-up for each study. Risk of bias within studies was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS). Results: Data for participants undergoing treatment between 2004 and 2022 was captured across studies. The median age of women treated with NAC for initially node-positive breast cancer ranged from 46 to 60 years. The median follow-up time ranged from 19.5 to 108 months across included studies. Nine observational studies were eligible for meta-analysis. No studies were excluded from the analysis on the basis of quality: Newcastle-Ottawa Scale scores ranged from 6 to 9 (maximum possible score of 9). Rates of axillary recurrence (AR) were low across all included studies (range 0.0% to 5.6%). For AR, data for 2,882 patients from 7 studies was quantitatively synthesized (SLNB=1,964; ALND=917). For LRR, data for 2,629 patients from 7 studies was quantitatively synthesized (SLNB=1,857; ALND=771). No significant differences were observed in AR between patients undergoing SLNB alone versus ALND following NAC for initially node-positive breast cancer: pooled RR 1.02 (95% CI: 0.46-2.29, I2=0.0%). Similarly, no significant differences were observed in LRR (RR 0.70, 95% CI: 0.45-1.10, I2=0.0%), DFS (RR 0.77, 95% CI: 0.55-1.08, I2=0.0%), nor overall mortality (RR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.33-1.33, I2=0.0%) between the SLNB and ALND groups. Conclusions: Among patients who convert to node-negative following NAC, this meta-analysis suggests that SLNB alone does not result in significantly different oncologic outcomes compared to ALND, and that de-escalation of axillary surgery to SLNB alone in this context may be safely considered in this patient population. Citation Format: Mariam Rana, Anna Weiss, Alison Laws, Carol Mita, Tari King. Long-term outcomes of sentinel lymph node biopsy following neoadjuvant chemotherapy for initially node-positive breast cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PS01-02.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0190.051
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.121
GPT teacher head0.462
Teacher spread0.341 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies→French-language works237,207→