4.2 Article

Sonographic features of benign and malignant axillary nodes post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy

期刊

BREAST JOURNAL
卷 26, 期 2, 页码 182-187

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tbj.13488

关键词

axilla; breast; cancer; lymph node; metastatic; neoadjuvant chemotherapy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aim was to determine whether sonographic features of metastatic axillary lymph nodes predict pathologic nodal status post-neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NCT) and help to tailor less invasive surgical management of the axilla. Patients with biopsy-proven cN1 primary breast malignancy who received NCT between January 2011 and December 2014 and had performed ultrasound were included in this study. Sonographic features of biopsy-proven clipped metastatic axillary nodes pre- and post-NCT were retrospectively reviewed by two independent readers. Changes in lymph node shape, fatty hilum status, cortical thickness, and cortical echogenicity were compared in patients with and without nodal pathologic complete response (pCR) using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models. Inter-reader variation was analyzed to determine the reproducibility of data. Of the 195 patients included in the study, 75 (45%) showed nodal pCR and 90 (55%) persistent metastatic disease post-NCT. pCR was significantly more likely in lymph nodes with isoechoic or hypoechoic cortical echogenicity post-NCT, (P = .02), conversion to normal cortical thickness (P = .0001), and oval shape (odds ratio = 0.17, P = .004), compared to lymph nodes with anechoic cortical echogenicity, persistent or diffuse cortical thickening, and irregular shape, respectively. The overall accuracy of sonographic nodal features in the prediction of pCR was 65% (95% CI: 58%-72%). The overall accuracy of sonographic features of biopsy-proven metastatic axillary lymph nodes post-NCT is not sufficiently high to predict pCR of axillary nodal status and thereby should not be solely used in guiding less invasive surgical approaches to the axilla.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.2
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据