Axillary Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Breast-Conserving Surgery at German Breast Cancer Centers Within the Last 14 Years – Comparison of a University Center and a Community Hospital

Amelie de Gregorio; Peter Widschwendter; Susanne Albrecht; Nikolaus de Gregorio; Thomas W. P. Friedl; Jens Huober; Wolfgang Janni; Florian K. Ebner

doi:10.1055/a-0750-1880

Geburtshilfe und Frauenheilkunde, Table of Contents

CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 · Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 2018; 78(11): 1138-1145
DOI: 10.1055/a-0750-1880

GebFra Science

Original Article

Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York

Axillary Surgery in Breast Cancer Patients Treated with Breast-Conserving Surgery at German Breast Cancer Centers Within the Last 14 Years – Comparison of a University Center and a Community Hospital

Operatives Axillastaging bei brusterhaltender Therapie über die letzten 14 Jahre an zertifizierten Brustzentren – Vergleich zwischen einem Universitätszentrum und einem städtischen Haus

Authors

Amelie de Gregorio

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Peter Widschwendter

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Susanne Albrecht

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Nikolaus de Gregorio

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Thomas W. P. Friedl

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Jens Huober

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Wolfgang Janni

¹Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University Hospital Ulm, Ulm, Germany
Florian K. Ebner

²Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Helios Hospital Amper, Dachau, Germany

Abstract

Background Guideline recommendations for axillary surgical approach in breast cancer (BC) treatment changed over the last decade.

Methods Data from all invasive BC patients (n = 5344) treated with breast conserving surgery (BCS) at the breast cancer centers of the University Hospital Ulm (U-BCC) and the community hospital Dachau (D-BCC) were included into a retrospective analysis for assessing information on axillary surgery between 2003 and 2016 based on the documented cancer registry data.

Results The average annual rate of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) was 85.5% and 87.2% in Ulm and Dachau, respectively. SNB was performed more precisely at the U-BCC with a median of 2.4 resected lymph nodes (LN) compared to a median of 3.2 resected LN in Dachau. Median number of resected LN for axillary lymph node dissection (ALNE) showed a statistically significant reduction over time in Ulm (r_s = − 0.82; p < 0.001) and Dachau (r_s = − 0.76; p = 0.002). The rate of secondary ALNE (after SNB; 2° ALNE) decreased significantly in U-BCC (r_s = − 0.76; p = 0.002) while it remained stable in D-BCC. The influential publication of the Z0011 study in 2010 resulted in a significant reduction of secondary ALNE (24.1% preZ0011 and 14.4% postZ0011; p < 0.001) in Ulm.

Conclusion Changes in axillary surgery over time can be seen in the annual statistics of the reviewed BCCs. With BCS, mostly SNB was performed and numbers of removed LN in ALNE have decreased. In the U-BCC, the rate of 2° ALNE dropped after the publication of the Z0011 data. The fact that no such decrease for 2° ALNE was found in D-BCC suggests that university hospitals implement new data and research results into clinical routine earlier than peripheral community hospitals.

Zusammenfassung

Hintergrund In den letzten 10 Jahren haben sich die Empfehlungen zum operativen Vorgehen in der Axilla bei Mammakarzinompatientinnen gewandelt.

Methoden Die Daten von insgesamt 5344 Patientinnen mit invasivem Brustkrebs, die sich entweder im Brustzentrum des Universitätsklinikums Ulm (U-BCC) oder im Helios Amper-Klinikum Dachau (D-BCC) einer brusterhaltenden Therapie (BET) unterzogen, wurden basierend auf den dokumentierten anonymisierten Tumorregisterdaten retrospektiv zwischen 2003 und 2016 analysiert, um neue Trends im chirurgischen Vorgehen bei Axillainterventionen zu identifizieren.

Ergebnisse Im Durchschnitt wurden pro Jahr bei 85,5% der in Ulm und 87,2% der in Dachau mittels BET behandelten Patientinnen Wächterlymphknoten-Biopsien (SNB) durchgeführt. Dabei betrug die mittlere Anzahl an entfernten Lymphknoten (LN) pro SNB in Ulm 2,4 verglichen zu 3,2 LN in Dachau. Die mediane Anzahl an entfernten LN pro Axilladissektion reduzierte sich im Verlauf des Beobachtungszeitraums sowohl in Ulm (r_s = − 0,82; p < 0,001) als auch in Dachau (r_s = − 0,76; p = 0,002). Im Laufe der Jahre nahm zudem die Rate an sekundären Axilladissektionen (nach SNB, 2° ALNE) im U-BCC signifikant ab (r_s = − 0,76; p = 0,002), wohingegen sie in D-BCC stabil blieb. Mit Veröffentlichung der Ergebnisse der Z0011-Studie im Jahr 2010 kam es in Ulm zu einem statistisch signifikanten Rückgang an sekundären ALNE (24,1% vor Z0011 und 14,4% nach Z0011; p < 0,001).

Schlussfolgerung Die jährlichen Statistiken der untersuchten Brustzentren zeigen deutliche Trends im operativen Axillastaging bei Mammakarzinompatientinnen mit BET über die letzten Jahre. Bei der Mehrheit der Patientinnen wurde eine BET mit SNB durchgeführt. Während in beiden Zentren die Zahl der durchschnittlich pro ALNE entnommenen LN über die Jahre signifikant abnahm, ging mit der Publikation der Z0011-Studie auch die Rate an sekundären ALNEs selbst in Ulm zurück. Nachdem ein derartiger Trend für das D-BCC nicht beobachtete werden konnte, kann vermutet werden, dass neue Daten schneller Einzug in die klinische Routine von universitären Brustzentren erhalten.

Key words

breast cancer - national guidelines - treatment changes - sentinel node biopsy - axillary lymph node dissection

Schlüsselwörter

Brustkrebs - nationale Richtlinien - Änderungen in der Behandlung - Wächter-Lymphknotenbiopsie - Axilladissektion

Full Text

References

References
1 Giuliano AE, Haigh PI, Brennan MB. et al. Prospective Observational Study of Sentinel Lymphadenectomy Without Further Axillary Dissection in Patients With Sentinel Node-Negative Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 2553-2559 doi:10.1200/JCO.2000.18.13.2553
2 Bergkvist L, de Boniface J, Jönsson PhyphenE. et al. Axillary recurrence rate after negative sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer: three-year follow-up of the Swedish Multicenter Cohort Study. Ann Surg 2008; 247: 150-156 doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e318153ff40
3 Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G. et al. A Randomized Comparison of Sentinel-Node Biopsy with Routine Axillary Dissection in Breast Cancer. N Engl J Med 2003; 349: 546-553 doi:10.1056/NEJMoa012782
4 Kuehn T, Vogl F, Helms G. et al. Sentinel-node biopsy for axillary staging in breast cancer: results from a large prospective German multi-institutional trial. Eur J Surg Oncol 2004; 30: 252-259 doi:10.1016/j.ejso.2003.11.016
5 Fleissig A, Fallowfield LJ, Langridge CI. et al. Post-operative arm morbidity and quality of life. Results of the ALMANAC randomised trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with standard axillary treatment in the management of patients with early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat 2006; 95: 279-293 doi:10.1007/s10549-005-9025-7
6 Giuliano AE, McCall L, Beitsch P. et al. Locoregional recurrence after sentinel lymph node dissection with or without axillary dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node metastases. Ann Surg 2010; 252: 426-432 discussion 432–433 doi:10.1097/SLA.0b013e3181f08f32
7 Huang TW, Kuo KN, Chen KH. et al. Recommendation for axillary lymph node dissection in women with early breast cancer and sentinel node metastasis: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials using the GRADE system. Int J Surg 2016; 34: 73-80 doi:10.1016/j.ijsu.2016.08.022
8 Soares EWS, Nagai HM, Bredt LC. et al. Morbidity after conventional dissection of axillary lymph nodes in breast cancer patients. World J Surg Oncol 2014; 12: 67 doi:10.1186/1477-7819-12-67
9 Ebner F, Wöckel A, Janni W. et al. Personalized axillary dissection: the number of excised lymph nodes of nodal-positive breast cancer patients has no significant impact on relapse-free and overall survival. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 2017; 143: 1823-1831 doi:10.1007/s00432-017-2425-3
10 Morrow M, Harris JR, Schnitt SJ. Local control following breast-conserving surgery for invasive cancer: results of clinical trials. J Natl Cancer Inst 1995; 87: 1669-1673
11 Houssami N, Macaskill P, Marinovich ML. et al. Meta-analysis of the impact of surgical margins on local recurrence in women with early-stage invasive breast cancer treated with breast-conserving therapy. Eur J Cancer 2010; 46: 3219-3232 doi:10.1016/j.ejca.2010.07.043
12 Moran MS, Schnitt SJ, Giuliano AE. et al. Society of Surgical Oncology–American Society for Radiation Oncology Consensus Guideline on Margins for Breast-Conserving Surgery With Whole-Breast Irradiation in Stages I and II Invasive Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 2014; 32: 1507-1515 doi:10.1200/JCO.2013.53.3935
13 Morrow M, Abrahamse P, Hofer TP. et al. Trends in Reoperation After Initial Lumpectomy for Breast Cancer. JAMA Oncol 2017; 3: 1352 doi:10.1001/jamaoncol.2017.0774
14 Leitlinienprogramm Onkologie (Deutsche Krebsgesellschaft, Deutsche Krebshilfe, AWMF). S3-Leitlinie Früherkennung, Diagnose, Therapie und Nachsorge des Mammakarzinoms, Version 4.1, 2018, AWMF Registernummer: 032-045OL. Online: http://www.leitlinienprogramm-onkologie.de/leitlinien/mammakarzinom/ last access: 07.09.2018
15 Liedtke C, Jackisch C, Thill M. et al. AGO Recommendations for the Diagnosis and Treatment of Patients with Early Breast Cancer: Update 2018. Breast Care 2018; 13: 196-208 doi:10.1159/000489329
16 Untch M, Huober J, Jackisch C. et al. Initial Treatment of Patients with Primary Breast Cancer: Evidence, Controversies, Consensus: Spectrum of Opinion of German Specialists at the 15th International St. Gallen Breast Cancer Conference (Vienna 2017). Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2017; 77: 633-644 doi:10.1055/s-0043-111601
17 Schnoor M, Schäfer T, Welte T. Leitlinien: Aktive Implementierung zeigt Wirkung. Dtsch Arztebl 2010; 107: A-541/B-472/C-646
18 Beckmann MW, Schlieter H, Richter P. et al. Considerations on the Improved Integration of Medical Guidelines into Routine Clinical Practice – a Review and Concept Proposal. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2016; 76: 369-376 doi:10.1055/s-0042-102056
19 Schrodi S, Niedostatek A, Werner C. et al. Is primary surgery of breast cancer patients consistent with German guidelines? Twelve-year trend of population-based clinical cancer registry data. Eur J Cancer Care (Engl) 2015; 24: 242-252 doi:10.1111/ecc.12194
20 Tsao MW, Cornacchi SD, Hodgson N. et al. A Population-Based Study of the Effects of a Regional Guideline for Completion Axillary Lymph Node Dissection on Axillary Surgery in Patients with Breast Cancer. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23: 3354-3364 doi:10.1245/s10434-016-5310-4
21 Mann JM, Wu X, Christos P. et al. The State of Surgical Axillary Management and Adjuvant Radiotherapy for Early-stage Invasive Breast Cancer in the Modern Era. Clin Breast Cancer 2018; 18: e477-e493 doi:10.1016/j.clbc.2017.09.001
22 Reimer T, Stachs A, Nekljudova V. et al. Restricted Axillary Staging in Clinically and Sonographically Node-Negative Early Invasive Breast Cancer (c/iT1-2) in the Context of Breast Conserving Therapy: First Results Following Commencement of the Intergroup-Sentinel-Mamma (INSEMA) Trial. Geburtsh Frauenheilk 2017; 77: 149-157 doi:10.1055/s-0042-122853
23 Olaya W, Wong J, Wong J. et al. When is a Lymph Node Dissection a Lymph Node Dissection? The Number of Lymph Nodes Resected in Sentinel and Axillary Lymph Node Dissections. Ann Surg Oncol 2013; 20: 627-632 doi:10.1245/s10434-012-2642-6
24 Joyce DP, Lowery AJ, McGrath-Soo LB. et al. Management of the axilla: has Z0011 had an impact?. Irish J Med Sci 2016; 185: 145-149 doi:10.1007/s11845-015-1246-0