Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34513601›Full record

ArticleWorld journal of clinical oncology2021

Macrometastasis at selective lymph node biopsy: A practical going-for-the-one clinical scoring system to personalize decision making.

Mercedes Herrero, Raquel Ciérvide, Maria Elisa Calle-Purón, Javier Valero, Paula Buelga, Isabel Rodriguez-Bertos, Leticia Benassi, Angel Montero

Open access · diamondAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in World journal of clinical oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.1field-weighted citation impact, top 62% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Mercedes HerreroDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, HM Hospitales, Madrid 28050, Spain.
Raquel CiérvideDepartment of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid 28050, Spain. raquel.ciervide@gmail.com.
Maria Elisa Calle-PurónDepartment of Preventive Medicine and Public Health, Complutense University of Madrid, Madrid 28050, Spain.
Javier ValeroDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, HM Hospitales, Madrid 28050, Spain.
Paula BuelgaDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, HM Hospitales, Madrid 28050, Spain.
Isabel Rodriguez-BertosDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, HM Hospitales, Madrid 28050, Spain.
Leticia BenassiDepartment of Gynecology and Obstetrics, HM Hospitales, Madrid 28050, Spain.
Angel MonteroDepartment of Radiation Oncology, HM Hospitales, Madrid 28050, Spain.
HM Hospitales · ESUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAxillary sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is standard treatment for patients with clinically and pathological negative lymph nodes. However, the role of completion axillary lymph node dissection (cALND) following positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is debated.

aimTo identify a subgroup of women with high axillary tumor burden undergoing SLNB in whom cALND can be safely omitted in order to reduce the risk of long-term complications and create a Preoperative Clinical Risk Index (PCRI) that helps us in our clinical practice to optimize the selection of these patients.

methodsPatients with positive SLNB who underwent a cALND were included in this study. Univariate and multivariate analysis of prognostic and predictive factors were used to create a PCRI for safely omitting cALND.

resultsFrom May 2007 to April 2014, we performed 1140 SLN biopsies, of which 125 were positive for tumor and justified to practice a posterior cALND. Pathologic findings at SLNB were micrometastases (mic) in 29 cases (23.4%) and macrometastasis (MAC) in 95 cases (76.6%). On univariate analysis of the 95 patients with MAC, statistically significant factors included: age, grade, phenotype, histology, lymphovascular invasion, lymph-node tumor size, and number of positive SLN. On multivariate analysis, only lymph-node tumor size (≤ 20 mm) and number of positive SLN (> 1) retained significance. A numerical tool was created giving each of the parameters a value to predict preoperatively which patients would not benefit from cALND. Patients with a PCRI ≤ 15 has low probability (< 10%) of having additional lymph node involvement, a PRCI between 15-17.6 has a probability of 43%, and the probability increases to 69% in patients with a PCRI > 17.6.

conclusionThe PCRI seems to be a useful tool to prospectively estimate the risk of nodal involvement after positive SLN and to identify those patients who could omit cALND. Further prospective studies are necessary to validate PCRI clinical generalization.

Indexed as

Complete axillary lymph node dissectionMacrometastasisPreoperative clinical risk indexSentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID34513601
PMCPMC8394159
OpenAlexW3194219830

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.