The sensitivity and specificity of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas: a retrospective review of 488 cases.
Identifieur interne : 002245 ( PubMed/Checkpoint ); précédent : 002244; suivant : 002246The sensitivity and specificity of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas: a retrospective review of 488 cases.
Auteurs : S Michelle Shiller [États-Unis] ; Robert Weir ; John Pippen ; Metin Punar ; Daniel SavinoSource :
- Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center) [ 1525-3252 ] ; 2011.
Abstract
Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has become the standard of care for breast carcinoma management, as it precludes the negative morbid effects-including decreased shoulder range of motion, lymphedema, and paresthesias-of unnecessary axillary lymph node dissection. However, the method of pathologic evaluation of the lymph node has been scrutinized to obtain the greatest sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value, ultimately for the benefit of the patient. This retrospective study analyzed 488 biopsies completed by two surgeons and read by multiple pathologists affiliated with Pathologists Biomedical Laboratories. When metastatic disease was not grossly obvious, analysis of the SLN began with touch imprint cytology and, if necessary, a frozen section analysis. On the subsequent day, three levels of the SLN were analyzed with hematoxylin and eosin stain and immunohistochemistry with cytokeratin AE1-3 and the appropriate control. Touch imprint cytology and/or frozen section analysis (where applicable) correctly identified 78 of 89 macrometastases, with a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 100%, and negative predictive value of 97%. Sensitivity was 72% for micrometastases and 60% for isolated tumor cells, each with 100% specificity. In conclusion, the sensitivity and specificity of SLN biopsy at our institution compares with the higher end of percentages reported in the literature.
PubMed: 21566748
Affiliations:
Links toward previous steps (curation, corpus...)
Links to Exploration step
pubmed:21566748Le document en format XML
<record><TEI><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title xml:lang="en">The sensitivity and specificity of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas: a retrospective review of 488 cases.</title><author><name sortKey="Shiller, S Michelle" sort="Shiller, S Michelle" uniqKey="Shiller S" first="S Michelle" last="Shiller">S Michelle Shiller</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Pathology (Shiller, Weir, Punar, Savino) and Oncology (Pippen), Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas and Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center at Dallas. Dr. Shiller is now at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Minnesota</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>Department of Pathology (Shiller, Weir, Punar, Savino) and Oncology (Pippen), Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas and Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center at Dallas. Dr. Shiller is now at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester</wicri:cityArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Weir, Robert" sort="Weir, Robert" uniqKey="Weir R" first="Robert" last="Weir">Robert Weir</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pippen, John" sort="Pippen, John" uniqKey="Pippen J" first="John" last="Pippen">John Pippen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Punar, Metin" sort="Punar, Metin" uniqKey="Punar M" first="Metin" last="Punar">Metin Punar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Savino, Daniel" sort="Savino, Daniel" uniqKey="Savino D" first="Daniel" last="Savino">Daniel Savino</name></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">PubMed</idno><date when="2011">2011</date><idno type="RBID">pubmed:21566748</idno><idno type="pmid">21566748</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Corpus">002631</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="PubMed">002631</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Curation">002631</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="PubMed" wicri:step="Curation">002631</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/PubMed/Checkpoint">002631</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Checkpoint" wicri:step="PubMed">002631</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title xml:lang="en">The sensitivity and specificity of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas: a retrospective review of 488 cases.</title><author><name sortKey="Shiller, S Michelle" sort="Shiller, S Michelle" uniqKey="Shiller S" first="S Michelle" last="Shiller">S Michelle Shiller</name><affiliation wicri:level="2"><nlm:affiliation>Department of Pathology (Shiller, Weir, Punar, Savino) and Oncology (Pippen), Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas and Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center at Dallas. Dr. Shiller is now at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.</nlm:affiliation><country xml:lang="fr">États-Unis</country><placeName><region type="state">Minnesota</region></placeName><wicri:cityArea>Department of Pathology (Shiller, Weir, Punar, Savino) and Oncology (Pippen), Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas and Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center at Dallas. Dr. Shiller is now at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester</wicri:cityArea></affiliation></author><author><name sortKey="Weir, Robert" sort="Weir, Robert" uniqKey="Weir R" first="Robert" last="Weir">Robert Weir</name></author><author><name sortKey="Pippen, John" sort="Pippen, John" uniqKey="Pippen J" first="John" last="Pippen">John Pippen</name></author><author><name sortKey="Punar, Metin" sort="Punar, Metin" uniqKey="Punar M" first="Metin" last="Punar">Metin Punar</name></author><author><name sortKey="Savino, Daniel" sort="Savino, Daniel" uniqKey="Savino D" first="Daniel" last="Savino">Daniel Savino</name></author></analytic><series><title level="j">Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)</title><idno type="eISSN">1525-3252</idno><imprint><date when="2011" type="published">2011</date></imprint></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract" xml:lang="en">Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has become the standard of care for breast carcinoma management, as it precludes the negative morbid effects-including decreased shoulder range of motion, lymphedema, and paresthesias-of unnecessary axillary lymph node dissection. However, the method of pathologic evaluation of the lymph node has been scrutinized to obtain the greatest sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value, ultimately for the benefit of the patient. This retrospective study analyzed 488 biopsies completed by two surgeons and read by multiple pathologists affiliated with Pathologists Biomedical Laboratories. When metastatic disease was not grossly obvious, analysis of the SLN began with touch imprint cytology and, if necessary, a frozen section analysis. On the subsequent day, three levels of the SLN were analyzed with hematoxylin and eosin stain and immunohistochemistry with cytokeratin AE1-3 and the appropriate control. Touch imprint cytology and/or frozen section analysis (where applicable) correctly identified 78 of 89 macrometastases, with a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 100%, and negative predictive value of 97%. Sensitivity was 72% for micrometastases and 60% for isolated tumor cells, each with 100% specificity. In conclusion, the sensitivity and specificity of SLN biopsy at our institution compares with the higher end of percentages reported in the literature.</div></front></TEI><pubmed><MedlineCitation Status="PubMed-not-MEDLINE" Owner="NLM"><PMID Version="1">21566748</PMID><DateCreated><Year>2011</Year><Month>05</Month><Day>13</Day></DateCreated><DateCompleted><Year>2011</Year><Month>07</Month><Day>14</Day></DateCompleted><DateRevised><Year>2017</Year><Month>02</Month><Day>20</Day></DateRevised><Article PubModel="Print"><Journal><ISSN IssnType="Electronic">1525-3252</ISSN><JournalIssue CitedMedium="Internet"><Volume>24</Volume><Issue>2</Issue><PubDate><Year>2011</Year><Month>Apr</Month></PubDate></JournalIssue><Title>Proceedings (Baylor University. Medical Center)</Title><ISOAbbreviation>Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)</ISOAbbreviation></Journal><ArticleTitle>The sensitivity and specificity of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas: a retrospective review of 488 cases.</ArticleTitle><Pagination><MedlinePgn>81-5</MedlinePgn></Pagination><Abstract><AbstractText>Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has become the standard of care for breast carcinoma management, as it precludes the negative morbid effects-including decreased shoulder range of motion, lymphedema, and paresthesias-of unnecessary axillary lymph node dissection. However, the method of pathologic evaluation of the lymph node has been scrutinized to obtain the greatest sensitivity, specificity, and negative predictive value, ultimately for the benefit of the patient. This retrospective study analyzed 488 biopsies completed by two surgeons and read by multiple pathologists affiliated with Pathologists Biomedical Laboratories. When metastatic disease was not grossly obvious, analysis of the SLN began with touch imprint cytology and, if necessary, a frozen section analysis. On the subsequent day, three levels of the SLN were analyzed with hematoxylin and eosin stain and immunohistochemistry with cytokeratin AE1-3 and the appropriate control. Touch imprint cytology and/or frozen section analysis (where applicable) correctly identified 78 of 89 macrometastases, with a sensitivity of 88%, specificity of 100%, and negative predictive value of 97%. Sensitivity was 72% for micrometastases and 60% for isolated tumor cells, each with 100% specificity. In conclusion, the sensitivity and specificity of SLN biopsy at our institution compares with the higher end of percentages reported in the literature.</AbstractText></Abstract><AuthorList CompleteYN="Y"><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Shiller</LastName><ForeName>S Michelle</ForeName><Initials>SM</Initials><AffiliationInfo><Affiliation>Department of Pathology (Shiller, Weir, Punar, Savino) and Oncology (Pippen), Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas and Baylor Charles A. Sammons Cancer Center at Dallas. Dr. Shiller is now at the Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.</Affiliation></AffiliationInfo></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Weir</LastName><ForeName>Robert</ForeName><Initials>R</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Pippen</LastName><ForeName>John</ForeName><Initials>J</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Punar</LastName><ForeName>Metin</ForeName><Initials>M</Initials></Author><Author ValidYN="Y"><LastName>Savino</LastName><ForeName>Daniel</ForeName><Initials>D</Initials></Author></AuthorList><Language>eng</Language><PublicationTypeList><PublicationType UI="D016428">Journal Article</PublicationType></PublicationTypeList></Article><MedlineJournalInfo><Country>United States</Country><MedlineTA>Proc (Bayl Univ Med Cent)</MedlineTA><NlmUniqueID>9302033</NlmUniqueID><ISSNLinking>0899-8280</ISSNLinking></MedlineJournalInfo><CommentsCorrectionsList><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Am J Surg. 2010 May;199(5):625-8</RefSource><PMID Version="1">20466106</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Cancer. 2006 Nov 15;107(10):2328-36</RefSource><PMID Version="1">17039501</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Cell Oncol. 2007;29(6):497-505</RefSource><PMID Version="1">18032826</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>N Engl J Med. 2009 Aug 13;361(7):653-63</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19675329</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Cancer. 2005 Apr 15;103(8):1581-6</RefSource><PMID Version="1">15747375</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Ann Surg. 2004 Jan;239(1):61-6</RefSource><PMID Version="1">14685101</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Clin Cancer Res. 2007 Aug 15;13(16):4807-16</RefSource><PMID Version="1">17699859</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Ann Oncol. 2009 Aug;20(8):1352-61</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19468032</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Cancer. 1999 Mar 1;85(5):1098-103</RefSource><PMID Version="1">10091794</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Am J Surg. 2008 Dec;196(6):851-5; discussion 855-6</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19095099</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Cytometry B Clin Cytom. 2011 Mar;80(2):112-8</RefSource><PMID Version="1">21337491</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>J Am Coll Surg. 2009 Mar;208(3):333-40</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19317993</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Cancer. 2009 Apr 1;115(7):1555-62</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19195040</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2000 Nov;124(11):1670-3</RefSource><PMID Version="1">11079022</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Am J Surg. 2010 May;199(5):629-35</RefSource><PMID Version="1">20466107</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Br J Surg. 2005 Sep;92(9):1068-80</RefSource><PMID Version="1">16106479</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Am J Surg Pathol. 1999 Mar;23(3):263-7</RefSource><PMID Version="1">10078915</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Jan;35(1):16-20</RefSource><PMID Version="1">18554859</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2003 Jun;127(6):701-5</RefSource><PMID Version="1">12741893</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Am J Surg. 2007 Oct;194(4):426-32</RefSource><PMID Version="1">17826050</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Curr Oncol Rep. 2009 Jan;11(1):15-20</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19080737</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Apr;35(4):387-92</RefSource><PMID Version="1">18639429</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Eur J Surg Oncol. 2009 Mar;35(3):276-80</RefSource><PMID Version="1">18786801</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>World J Surg Oncol. 2009;7:34</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19317888</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Ann Surg Oncol. 2010 Sep;17(9):2384-94</RefSource><PMID Version="1">20221902</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2009 Jun;133(6):869-78</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19492879</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>J Surg Oncol. 2004 Mar;85(3):102-11</RefSource><PMID Version="1">14991881</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>J Clin Pathol. 1999 Dec;52(12):922-4</RefSource><PMID Version="1">10711258</PMID></CommentsCorrections><CommentsCorrections RefType="Cites"><RefSource>World J Surg. 2010 Jan;34(1):55-61</RefSource><PMID Version="1">19953249</PMID></CommentsCorrections></CommentsCorrectionsList><OtherID Source="NLM">PMC3069509</OtherID></MedlineCitation><PubmedData><History><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="entrez"><Year>2011</Year><Month>5</Month><Day>14</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="pubmed"><Year>2011</Year><Month>5</Month><Day>14</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>0</Minute></PubMedPubDate><PubMedPubDate PubStatus="medline"><Year>2011</Year><Month>5</Month><Day>14</Day><Hour>6</Hour><Minute>1</Minute></PubMedPubDate></History><PublicationStatus>ppublish</PublicationStatus><ArticleIdList><ArticleId IdType="pubmed">21566748</ArticleId><ArticleId IdType="pmc">PMC3069509</ArticleId></ArticleIdList></PubmedData></pubmed><affiliations><list><country><li>États-Unis</li></country><region><li>Minnesota</li></region></list><tree><noCountry><name sortKey="Pippen, John" sort="Pippen, John" uniqKey="Pippen J" first="John" last="Pippen">John Pippen</name><name sortKey="Punar, Metin" sort="Punar, Metin" uniqKey="Punar M" first="Metin" last="Punar">Metin Punar</name><name sortKey="Savino, Daniel" sort="Savino, Daniel" uniqKey="Savino D" first="Daniel" last="Savino">Daniel Savino</name><name sortKey="Weir, Robert" sort="Weir, Robert" uniqKey="Weir R" first="Robert" last="Weir">Robert Weir</name></noCountry><country name="États-Unis"><region name="Minnesota"><name sortKey="Shiller, S Michelle" sort="Shiller, S Michelle" uniqKey="Shiller S" first="S Michelle" last="Shiller">S Michelle Shiller</name></region></country></tree></affiliations></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Sante/explor/LymphedemaV1/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 002245 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd -nk 002245 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Sante
|area= LymphedemaV1
|flux= PubMed
|étape= Checkpoint
|type= RBID
|clé= pubmed:21566748
|texte= The sensitivity and specificity of sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer at Baylor University Medical Center at Dallas: a retrospective review of 488 cases.
}}
Pour générer des pages wiki
HfdIndexSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/RBID.i -Sk "pubmed:21566748" \
| HfdSelect -Kh $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/PubMed/Checkpoint/biblio.hfd \
| NlmPubMed2Wicri -a LymphedemaV1
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.31. |  |