31
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      The value of completion axillary treatment in sentinel node positive breast cancer patients undergoing a mastectomy: a Dutch randomized controlled multicentre trial (BOOG 2013-07)

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Trials failed to demonstrate additional value of completion axillary lymph node dissection in case of limited sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients undergoing breast conserving therapy. It has been suggested that the low regional recurrence rates in these trials might partially be ascribed to accidental irradiation of part of the axilla by whole breast radiation therapy, which precludes extrapolation of results to mastectomy patients. The aim of the randomized controlled BOOG 2013–07 trial is therefore to investigate whether completion axillary treatment can be safely omitted in sentinel lymph node positive breast cancer patients treated with mastectomy.

          Design

          This study is designed as a non-inferiority randomized controlled multicentre trial. Women aged 18 years or older diagnosed with unilateral invasive clinically T1-2 N0 breast cancer who are treated with mastectomy, and who have a maximum of three axillary sentinel lymph nodes containing micro- and/or macrometastases, will be randomized for completion axillary treatment versus no completion axillary treatment. Completion axillary treatment can consist of completion axillary lymph node dissection or axillary radiation therapy. Primary endpoint is regional recurrence rate at 5 years. Based on a 5-year regional recurrence free survival rate of 98 % among controls and 96 % for study subjects, the sample size amounts 439 per arm (including 10 % lost to follow-up), to be able to reject the null hypothesis that the rate for study and control subjects is inferior by at least 5 % with a probability of 0.8. Results will be reported after 5 and 10 years of follow-up.

          Discussion

          We hypothesize that completion axillary treatment can be safely omitted in sentinel node positive breast cancer patients undergoing mastectomy. If confirmed, this study will significantly decrease the number of breast cancer patients receiving extensive treatment of the axilla, thereby diminishing the risk of morbidity and improving quality of life, while maintaining excellent regional control and without affecting survival.

          Trial registration

          The BOOG 2013–07 study is registered in the register of ClinicalTrials.gov since April 10, 2014, Identifier: NCT02112682.

          Electronic supplementary material

          The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-015-1613-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

          Related collections

          Most cited references24

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases: the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 randomized trial.

          Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) has eliminated the need for axillary dissection (ALND) in patients whose sentinel node (SN) is tumor-free. However, completion ALND for patients with tumor-involved SNs remains the standard to achieve locoregional control. Few studies have examined the outcome of patients who do not undergo ALND for positive SNs. We now report local and regional recurrence information from the American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 trial. American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 was a prospective trial examining survival of patients with SN metastases detected by standard H and E, who were randomized to undergo ALND after SLND versus SLND alone without specific axillary treatment. Locoregional recurrence was evaluated. There were 446 patients randomized to SLND alone and 445 to SLND + ALND. Patients in the 2 groups were similar with respect to age, Bloom-Richardson score, estrogen receptor status, use of adjuvant systemic therapy, tumor type, T stage, and tumor size. Patients randomized to SLND + ALND had a median of 17 axillary nodes removed compared with a median of only 2 SN removed with SLND alone (P < 0.001). ALND also removed more positive lymph nodes (P < 0.001). At a median follow-up time of 6.3 years, there were no statistically significant differences in local recurrence (P = 0.11) or regional recurrence (P = 0.45) between the 2 groups. Despite the potential for residual axillary disease after SLND, SLND without ALND can offer excellent regional control and may be reasonable management for selected patients with early-stage breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy and adjuvant systemic therapy.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Twenty-five-year follow-up of a randomized trial comparing radical mastectomy, total mastectomy, and total mastectomy followed by irradiation.

            In women with breast cancer, the role of radical mastectomy, as compared with less extensive surgery, has been a matter of debate. We report 25-year findings of a randomized trial initiated in 1971 to determine whether less extensive surgery with or without radiation therapy was as effective as the Halsted radical mastectomy. A total of 1079 women with clinically negative axillary nodes underwent radical mastectomy, total mastectomy without axillary dissection but with postoperative irradiation, or total mastectomy plus axillary dissection only if their nodes became positive. A total of 586 women with clinically positive axillary nodes either underwent radical mastectomy or underwent total mastectomy without axillary dissection but with postoperative irradiation. Kaplan-Meier and cumulative-incidence estimates of outcome were obtained. No significant differences were observed among the three groups of women with negative nodes or between the two groups of women with positive nodes with respect to disease-free survival, relapse-free survival, distant-disease-free survival, or overall survival. Among women with negative nodes, the hazard ratio for death among those who were treated with total mastectomy and radiation as compared with those who underwent radical mastectomy was 1.08 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.28; P=0.38), and the hazard ratio for death among those who had total mastectomy without radiation as compared with those who underwent radical mastectomy was 1.03 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.87 to 1.23; P=0.72). Among women with positive nodes, the hazard ratio for death among those who underwent total mastectomy and radiation as compared with those who underwent radical mastectomy was 1.06 (95 percent confidence interval, 0.89 to 1.27; P=0.49). The findings validate earlier results showing no advantage from radical mastectomy. Although differences of a few percentage points cannot be excluded, the findings fail to show a significant survival advantage from removing occult positive nodes at the time of initial surgery or from radiation therapy. Copyright 2002 Massachusetts Medical Society
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Primary breast cancer: ESMO Clinical Practice Guidelines for diagnosis, treatment and follow-up.

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                +31 43 387 7477 , lorivanroozendaal@gmail.com
                Hans.deWilt@radboudumc.nl
                TvDalen@diakhuis.nl
                j.vd.hage@nki.nl
                ljastrobbe@cwz.nl
                liesbeth.boersma@maastro.nl
                s.linn@nki.nl
                marc.lobbes@mumc.nl
                philip.poortmans@radboudumc.nl
                vcg.tjan.heijnen@mumc.nl
                k.vd.vijver@nki.nl
                J.deVries@uvt.nl
                H.Westenberg@arnhemrti.nl
                fons.kessels@mumc.nl
                m.smidt@mumc.nl
                Journal
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BMC Cancer
                BioMed Central (London )
                1471-2407
                3 September 2015
                3 September 2015
                2015
                : 15
                : 610
                Affiliations
                [ ]Division of Surgical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [ ]Division of Surgical Oncology, Radboud university medical centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [ ]Division of Surgical Oncology, Diakonessenhuis Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands
                [ ]Division of Surgical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute - Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [ ]Division of Surgical Oncology, Canisius-Wilhelmina Hospital, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [ ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre (MAASTRO clinic), Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [ ]Division of Medical Oncology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [ ]Department of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [ ]Department of Radiation Oncology, Radboud university medical centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands
                [ ]Division of Medical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [ ]Department of Pathology, Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek Hospital, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
                [ ]Department of Medical and Clinical Psychology, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands
                [ ]Radiation Oncology, Arnhem Institute for Radiation Oncology, Arnhem, The Netherlands
                [ ]Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Medical Technology Assessment, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [ ]GROW - School for Oncology and Developmental Biology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, Maastricht, The Netherlands
                [ ]Department of Surgical Oncology, Maastricht University Medical Centre, P.O. Box 5800 6202 AZ, Maastricht, The Netherlands
                Article
                1613
                10.1186/s12885-015-1613-2
                4559064
                26335105
                355e825b-ed9f-4de8-80f6-8a7963acdf5a
                © van Roozendaal et al. 2015

                Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver ( http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.

                History
                : 16 December 2014
                : 19 August 2015
                Categories
                Study Protocol
                Custom metadata
                © The Author(s) 2015

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                Oncology & Radiotherapy

                Comments

                Comment on this article

                scite_
                81
                0
                67
                0
                Smart Citations
                81
                0
                67
                0
                Citing PublicationsSupportingMentioningContrasting
                View Citations

                See how this article has been cited at scite.ai

                scite shows how a scientific paper has been cited by providing the context of the citation, a classification describing whether it supports, mentions, or contrasts the cited claim, and a label indicating in which section the citation was made.

                Similar content375

                Cited by17

                Most referenced authors603