ReviewDer Pathologe2009
[Sentinel node biopsy in breast cancer: pathological analysis and interpretation].
Review in Der Pathologe, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This overview examines how the introduction of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has changed the pathological staging of breast cancer. The more intensive analysis of the sentinel lymph nodes (gross slicing, step sections, immunohistological or molecular analysis) has lead to stage shifting in breast cancer. Regarding the rate of up-staging by positive results of SLNB, there are significant differences between institutes, some method-related, some related to the interpretation of results. Methodological differences should be reduced by means of reliable guidelines with the goal of systematically identifying metastases of a particular size (a macrometastasis over 2 mm being the minimum criterion). The next review of the TNM classification should result in a reduction in interobserver variability as a result of better definitions of staging categories for isolated tumor cells and micrometastases. In addition, a staging category is expected for metastases which have been identified by calibrated quantitative molecular tests only and which are larger than isolated tumors. Even in settings where nodal staging by SLNB is based on molecular tests at least a proportion of the lymph node should be investigated histologically.
Indexed as
Identifiers
19224216What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.