Trial reportJournal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute2026
Use of indocyanine green fluorescence versus patent blue V dye for sentinel lymph node biopsy in early breast cancer, a randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in Journal of the Egyptian National Cancer Institute, 2026. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is standard for axillary staging in early breast cancer. While the combination of radioisotope and blue dye (e.g., patent blue V, PBV) remains the standard, it has limitations including logistics, variable identification rate (IR), and allergic potential. Indocyanine green (ICG) fluorescence is a promising alternative, but high-quality comparative evidence is needed.
methodsThis was a single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Forty patients with early-stage, node-negative breast cancer were allocated to SLNB using either ICG (n = 20) or PBV (n = 20). All patients subsequently underwent completion level I-II axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) as the pathological reference standard for diagnostic performance assessment. Primary outcome was sentinel lymph node (SLN) IR. Secondary outcomes included detection time, number of SLNs retrieved, false-negative rate (FNR), and safety.
resultsBaseline characteristics were comparable between groups. The SLN IR was significantly higher with ICG (100% [20/20]) than with PBV (75% [15/20], p = 0.047). ICG was associated with a significantly shorter median detection time (14.5 vs. 24.0 min, p < 0.001) and retrieved more SLNs (mean: 3.6 vs. 2.4, p = 0.002). Most critically, ICG demonstrated 100% sensitivity, specificity, negative predictive value (NPV), and overall diagnostic accuracy, with a 0% FNR. In contrast, PBV achieved a sensitivity of 75%, an overall diagnostic accuracy of 90%, and an FNR of 25%. No ICG-related adverse events occurred. PBV caused skin discoloration in 75% of patients and one (5%) allergic reaction.
conclusionICG fluorescence achieved a higher SLN IR, shorter detection time, higher sensitivity, lower FNR, and fewer tracer-related adverse events than PBV as a single tracer for SLNB in patients with early-stage breast cancer. These findings suggest that ICG is a promising standalone tracer when radioisotope mapping is unavailable. Larger multicenter studies are required before widespread adoption can be recommended.
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.