MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409318033 · doi:10.1200/jco-25-00099

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Early-Stage Breast Cancer: ASCO Guideline Update

2025· review· en· W4409318033 on OpenAlexaff
Ko Un Park, Mark R. Somerfield, Nirupama Anne, Muriel Brackstone, Alison Conlin, Henrique Lima Couto, Lynn T. Dengel, Andrea Eisen, Brittany Harvey, Jeffrey Hawley, Janice N. Kim, Nwamaka Lasebikan, Elizabeth S. McDonald, Deepti Pradhan, Samantha Shams, Raymond B. Mailhot Vega, Alastair M. Thompson, Mylin A. Torres

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicBreast Cancer Treatment Studies
Canadian institutionsHealth Sciences CentreSunnybrook Health Science CentreWestern University
FundersNational Cancer Institute
KeywordsMedicineGuidelineSystematic reviewSentinel lymph nodeBreast cancerMEDLINEPsychological interventionFamily medicineClinical trialMedical physicsGynecologyCancerPathologyInternal medicineNursing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ASCO Guidelines provide recommendations with comprehensive review and analyses of the relevant literature for each recommendation, following the guideline development process as outlined in the ASCO Guidelines Methodology Manual . ASCO Guidelines follow the ASCO Conflict of Interest Policy for Clinical Practice Guidelines . Clinical Practice Guidelines and other guidance (“Guidance”) provided by ASCO is not a comprehensive or definitive guide to treatment options. It is intended for voluntary use by clinicians and should be used in conjunction with independent professional judgment. Guidance may not be applicable to all patients, interventions, diseases or stages of diseases. Guidance is based on review and analysis of relevant literature, and is not intended as a statement of the standard of care. ASCO does not endorse third-party drugs, devices, services, or therapies and assumes no responsibility for any harm arising from or related to the use of this information. See complete disclaimer in Appendix 1 and 2 (online only) for more. PURPOSE To update the ASCO evidence-based recommendations on the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with initial surgery. METHODS ASCO convened an Expert Panel to develop updated recommendations based on a systematic literature review (January 2016-May 2024). RESULTS Eleven randomized clinical trials (14 publications), eight meta-analyses and/or systematic reviews, and one prospective cohort study met the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. Expert Panel members used available evidence and informal consensus to develop practice recommendations. RECOMMENDATIONS Clinicians should not recommend routine SLNB in select patients who are postmenopausal and ≥50 years of age and with negative findings on preoperative axillary ultrasound for grade 1-2, small (≤2 cm), hormone receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative breast cancer and who undergo breast-conserving therapy. Clinicians may offer postmastectomy radiation (RT) with regional nodal irradiation (RNI) and omit axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in patients with clinically node-negative invasive breast cancer ≤5 cm who receive mastectomy and have one to two positive sentinel nodes. Clinicians may offer SLNB in patients who have cT3-T4c or multicentric tumors (clinically node-negative) or ductal carcinoma in situ treated with mastectomy, and in patients who are obese, male, or pregnant, or who have had prior breast or axillary surgery. Clinicians should not recommend ALND for patients with early-stage breast cancer who do not have nodal metastases, and clinicians should not recommend ALND for patients with early-stage breast cancer who have one or two sentinel lymph node metastases and will receive breast-conserving surgery and whole-breast RT with or without RNI. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/breast-cancer-guidelines . This guideline has been endorsed by the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.961
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0040.002
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.070
GPT teacher head0.475
Teacher spread0.405 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations106
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicBreast Cancer Treatment StudiesFrench-language works237,207