Abstract GS02-02: Are nodal ITCs after neoadjuvant chemotherapy an indication for axillary dissection? The OPBC05/EUBREAST-14R/ICARO study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Background: In patients with micro- and macrometastases in the sentinel lymph node (SLN) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), additional positive nodes are found in >60% of cases and axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) is currently considered standard of care. The likelihood of finding additional positive lymph nodes in patients with residual isolated tumor cells (ITCs) is unknown, and the benefit of ALND is unclear. As a consequence, surgical management of the axilla in these patients is not standardized. We sought to evaluate how often additional positive lymph nodes are found, to determine factors associated with ALND, and to compare oncological outcomes in patients treated with and without ALND after identification of residual ITCs in the SLN. Methods: Data were collected from 42 centers: 20 in the Oncoplastic Breast Consortium (OPBC) and EUBREAST networks, and 22 in North and South America. We included patients with cT1-4 N0-3 breast cancer at diagnosis who underwent NAC followed by axillary staging with either SLN biopsy (SLNB) or targeted axillary dissection (TAD) and were found to have residual ITCs [ypN0(i+)]. Single-tracer mapping was allowed for cN0 patients, while dual mapping or TAD was required for cN+ cases. Axillary treatment included completion ALND and/or nodal radiotherapy (RT). Competing risk analysis was performed to assess the cumulative incidence rates of any axillary recurrence (AR), locoregional recurrence (LRR), and any invasive (locoregional or distant) recurrence. Five-year cumulative incidence rates were compared between patients who underwent ALND and those who did not using the Gray’s test. Type I error rate was set to 0.05 (α). Results: We included 412 patients treated with NAC followed by surgery from 01/2009-05/2022. 146 (35.4%) had completion ALND and 266 (64.6%%) did not. Median patient age was 48 years. The majority (57%) of patients had clinical T2 tumors, and 68% had biopsy-proven N1 disease. Most were HR+/HER2- (41%) or HER2+ (39%). Most patients (80%) received anthracycline and taxane-based chemotherapy regimens. Nodal RT was administered to 83% of patients. The median number of SLNs with ITCs was 1. Patients treated with ALND were more likely to have ITCs detected on frozen section (61% v 6.7%, p< 0.001), to have N2/3 disease at presentation (15.1% v 5.6%, p=0.001) and to have LVI (40% v 26%, p=0.004) (Table 1). There was no significant trend over time in the proportion of patients undergoing completion ALND during the study period (p=0.5). In the ALND group, additional positive nodes were found in 43/146 (29.5%) of cases, and consisted of macrometastases in 11/146 (7.5%), micrometastases in 9/146 (6.2%), and ITCs in 23/146 (15.8%). 5-year rates of any AR, LRR, and any invasive recurrence in the entire cohort were 2.7% (95% CI 1.2-5.4), 2.8% (95% CI 1.2-5.4) and 16% (95% CI 11-21), respectively. There was no statistical difference between patients who underwent ALND and those who did not in any of the 3 endpoints (2.2% v 3.1%, p=0.6), (2.6% v 3.0%, p=0.4) and (14% v 18%, p=0.12), respectively. Conclusion: The likelihood of finding additional positive lymph nodes in patients with ITCs after NAC is lower than in patients with residual micro- and macrometastases, and in the majority of cases, they contain ITCs. Nodal recurrence after omission of ALND is rare in this population. Overall, these results do not support routine ALND in patients with residual ITCs. Table 1. Clinicopathological Features of the Study Cohort, Stratified by Type of Axillary Surgery Frequency (row percent) reported for categorical variables, and median (IQR) reported for continuous variables. SLNB sentinel lymph node biopsy; TAD targeted axillary dissection; SLNs sentinel lymph nodes; LNs lymph nodes; pCR pathologic complete response; ACT anthracycline and taxane; AC anthracycline; H Herceptin, HP, Herceptin and Perjeta; TC taxol (or Taxotere) and carboplatinum; LVI lymphovascular invasion; BCS breast-conserving surgery. ^ Applied to HER2- tumors only (n=252). ^^ Applies to HER2+ tumors only (n=160). # LVI was present on core biopsy or final pathology. * Applies to BCS patients only (n=175). ** Applies to mastectomy patients only (n=237). Citation Format: Giacomo Montagna, Alison Laws, Massimo Ferrucci, Mary Mrdutt, Natália Polidorio, Varadan Sevilimedu, Tracy-Ann Moo, Andrea Barrio, Marissa K. Boyle, Flavia Vidal Cabero, Daniela Cocco, Fabio Corsi, Angelena Crown, Meghan R. Flanagan, Mehmet Ali Gulcelik, Callie Hlavin, Justyna Jelinska, Hasan Karanlik, Susan Kesmodel, Henry Kuerer, Sherko Küemmel, Cornelia Leo, Tehillah Menes, Melissa Pilewskie, Nina Pislar, Nicola Rocco, Jai Min Ryu, Leonardo Soares, Christoph Tausch, M. Umit Ugurlu, CICERO URBAN, Astrid Botty van de Bruele, Denise Vorburger, Fredrik Wärnberg, Anna Weiss, Austin Williams, Stephanie Wong, Steven G. Woodward, Susie X. Sun, Jennifer Q. Zhang, M. Firdos Ziauddin, Guldeniz Karadeniz Cakmak, Nuran Bese, Thorsten Kühn, Judy Boughey, Tari King, Nina Ditsch, Maggie Banys-Paluchowski, Monica Morrow, Walter Weber. Are nodal ITCs after neoadjuvant chemotherapy an indication for axillary dissection? The OPBC05/EUBREAST-14R/ICARO study [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 GS02-02.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".