Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35414152›Full record

SynthesisClinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico2022

The value of sentinel lymph-node biopsy after neoadjuvant therapy: an overview.

Juan C Vázquez, Antonio Piñero, Francisco Javier de Castro, Ana Lluch, Miguel Martín, Agustí Barnadas, Emilio Alba, Álvaro Rodríguez-Lescure, Federico Rojo, Julia Giménez and 5 more

Abstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. De-escalation of axillary interventions in the management of breast cancer patients following neoadjuvant systemic treatment.Translational breast cancer research : a journal focusing on translational research in breast cancer · 2025
    Review
  3. Observational
  4. Article
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

15 authors at 9 institutions in 1 country.

Juan C VázquezIberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), Barcelona, Spain. jvazquezn@santpau.cat.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7780-4387
Antonio PiñeroHospital Clinico Universitario Virgen de la Arrixaca de Murcia, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Murcia, Spain.
Francisco Javier de CastroHospital Nuestra Señora de Sonsoles de Ávila, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Ávila, Spain.
Ana LluchMedical Oncology Unit, Hospital Clínico Universitario de Valencia, Biomedical Research Institute INCLIVA, Universidad de Valencia, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Oncología, CIBERONC-ISCIII, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Valencia, Spain.
Miguel MartínInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria Gregorio Marañón, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Oncología, CIBERONC-ISCIII, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Madrid, Spain.
Agustí BarnadasMedical Oncology Department, Hospital de la Santa Creu I Sant Pau de Barcelona, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Oncología, CIBERONC-ISCIII, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Barcelona, Spain.
Emilio AlbaUGCI Oncología Médica, Hospitales Regional y Virgen de la Victoria, IBIMA. Málaga, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Oncología, CIBERONC-ISCIII, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Málaga, Spain.
Álvaro Rodríguez-LescureHospital General Universitario de Elche, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Alicante, Spain.
Federico RojoHospital Universitario Fundacion Jimenez Diaz de Madrid, Centro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Oncología, CIBERONC-ISCIII, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Madrid, Spain.
Julia GiménezInstituto Valenciano de Oncologia-IVO- GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Valencia, Spain.
Iván SoláIberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain.
María Jesús QuintanaIberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain.
Xavier BonfillIberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Gerard UrrutiaIberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Pedro Sánchez-RoviraMedical Oncology Unit, Complejo Hospitalario de Jaén, GEICAM Spanish Breast Cancer Group, Jaén, Spain.
GEICAM – Spanish Breast Cancer Group · ESIberoamerican Cochrane Centre · ESInstituto de Salud Carlos III · ESUniversitat Autònoma de Barcelona · ESCentro de Investigación Biomédica en Red de Cáncer · ESComplejo Hospitalario de Jaén · ESHospital General Universitario de Elche · ESUniversidad Complutense de Madrid · ESUniversitat de València · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe conducted a systematic review to analyse the performance of the sentinel lymph-node biopsy (SLNB) after the neoadjuvant chemotherapy, compared to axillary lymph-node dissection, in terms of false-negative rate (FNR) and sentinel lymph-node identification rate (SLNIR), sensitivity, negative predictive value (NPV), need for axillary lymph-node dissection (ALND), morbidity, preferences, and costs.

methodsMEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and The Cochrane Library were searched. We assessed the quality of the included systematic reviews using AMSTAR2 tool, and estimated the degree of overlapping of the individual studies on the included reviews.

resultsSix systematic reviews with variable quality were selected. We observed a very high overlapping degree across the included reviews. The FNR and the SLNIR were quite consistent (FNR 13-14%; SLNIR ~ 90% or higher). In women with initially clinically node-negative breast cancer, the FNR was better (6%), with similar SLNIR (96%). The included reviews did not consider the other prespecified outcomes.

conclusionsIt would be reasonable to suggest performing an SLNB in patients treated with NACT, adjusting the procedure to the previous marking of the affected lymph node, using double tracer, and biopsy of at least three sentinel lymph nodes. More well-designed research is needed. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42020114403.

Indexed as

Breast NeoplasmsNeoadjuvant TherapyAxillaFemaleHumansLymph Node ExcisionLymph NodesNeoplasm StagingSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyBreast cancerNeoadjuvant chemotherapyPreoperative chemotherapySentinel lymph node

Identifiers

PMID35414152
OpenAlexW4223484789

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.