ArticleBreast cancer (Tokyo, Japan)2022
The involvement of axillary reverse mapping nodes in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer.
Article in Breast cancer (Tokyo, Japan), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- Development and validation of a nomogram for predicting axillary reverse mapping lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Lymph node metastasis in cancer progression: molecular mechanisms, clinical significance and therapeutic interventions.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAxillary reverse mapping (ARM) was developed to preserve the lymphatic drainage from the upper arm during sentinel lymph-node (SLN) biopsy or axillary lymph-node dissection (ALND). However, the oncological safety of ARM has been controversial because of not infrequent involvement of ARM nodes.
methodsPatients with clinically negative nodes (cN0) underwent SLN biopsy and ARM. SLNs were identified using blue dye and radioisotope, and ARM nodes were traced using the fluorescent method. Patients with positive SLN underwent the standard ALND. After surgery, they were followed up for more than 3 years.
resultsA total of 507 patients with cN0 breast cancer were enrolled between May 2009 and November 2017. SLNs were identified in 499 (98%) of 507 patients, and ARM nodes were identified in 159 (31%) patients in the SLN field. The crossover rate of SLN-ARM nodes was 28%. Among 95 patients with positive SLNs, 70 patients underwent conventional ALND. ARM nodes were identified in 65 (93%) of those patients in the ALND field. The mean number of removed ARM nodes was 7.2 (range 0-25) in patients who underwent the standard ALND. Although ARM nodes were involved in 18 of 65 patients, the involved ARM nodes were the same SLNs identified in 14 (78%) patients. Since SLN-ARM nodes should be removed, ARM nodes were involved only in 4 (5.7%) patients after SLN biopsy.
conclusionsExcept for positive SLN-ARM nodes, the involvement of ARM nodes is infrequent in patients with positive SLN.
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.