ArticlePloS one2019
Could axillary clearance be avoided in clinically node-negative breast cancer patients with positive nodes diagnosed by ultrasound guided biopsy in the post-ACOSOG Z0011 era?
Article in PloS one, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- The role of pre-operative axillary ultrasound in assessment of axillary tumor burden in breast cancer patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Breast cancer research and treatment · 2022Pooled it
- [The evolution of surgical management for early-stage breast cancer at a university breast centre in Hungary].Magyar onkologia · 2026Article
- Article
- Preoperative Axillary Ultrasound in the Era of Z0011: A Model for Predicting High Axillary Disease Burden.Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.) · 2025Article
- Does ultrasound evaluation of the axilla increase the rate of axillary lymph node dissection in early stage clinically node negative breast cancer patients?BMC surgery · 2022Article
- Application of the ACOSOG Z0011 criteria to Chinese patients with breast cancer: a prospective study.World journal of surgical oncology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesThe role of ultrasound (US) guided biopsy in selecting patients for an upfront lymph node dissection (ALND) has been controversial following the publication of the American College of Surgeons (ACOSOG) Z0011 data. The purpose of this study was to investigate if patients with positive axillary lymph nodes (LNs) proven by US guided biopsy should be recommended for ALND and to analyze the utility of preoperative US and US guided biopsy in planning axillary surgery to avoid both unnecessary ALND and unnecessary SLNB.
methodsPatients with a positive preoperative LN biopsy were identified and evaluated to determine their suitability for inclusion according to the criteria proposed in the Z0011 data. The correlation of the number of suspicious nodes found using US with the number of positive nodes on ALND was studied.
resultsA total of 261 breast cancer patients who had a positive preoperative LN needle biopsy were identified, among them, 79 patients with cT1-2N0 breast cancer and ALND were enrolled in the study. Thirty-one patients (39.2%) had ≤2 positive nodes identified in pathology and 10 patients (12.7%) met all of the Z0011 criteria and might have been spared ALND. A significantly greater proportion of women with ≥3 positive nodes during ALND had >1 abnormal LN identified using US compared to women with ≤2 positive LNs found using ALND (66.7% vs. 6.5%, p<0.0001).
conclusionUS with needle biopsy is valuable to patients with multiple suspicious nodes found using US while SLND without US guided needle biopsy is suggested if only one abnormal LN is detected on US in the post-Z0011 era.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.