4.5 Article

Effect of axillary lymphadenectomy on breast carcinoma survival

期刊

BREAST CANCER RESEARCH AND TREATMENT
卷 91, 期 1, 页码 11-18

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10549-004-6276-7

关键词

age; breast cancer; lymphadenetomy; race; surival

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose. To determine the effect of axillary lymphadenectomy on breast carcinoma survival, and to determine racial and age differences in the extent of axillary lymphadenectomy. Methods. Cases were 257,157 women diagnosed with breast carcinoma in the Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results program from 1988 through 2000. Variables included number of lymph nodes removed, number of positive lymph nodes, ratio of positive nodes to number of nodes removed, use of radiation therapy, surgery (breast conserving surgery versus mastectomy), stage, age, race, and hormone receptor status. Correlation statistics were used to determine associations between survival and lymph node variables for all cases and when stratified by stage. Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were used to compare survival by lymph node categories overall and stratified by stage. Cox regression analyses were used to determine factors associated with survival. Results. Older women were significantly less likely to have lymph nodes examined and lymph node involvement compared to younger women, and black women were significantly less likely to have lymph nodes examined, but were significantly more likely to have lymph node involvement compared to white women. Risk of death was significantly reduced for cases who had lymphadenectomy compared to those who did not. For cases diagnosed at stage IIA or higher, risk of death increased significantly with increased number of positive nodes and increased ratio of positive to total nodes removed. Conclusions. Improved survival in node negative cases of breast carcinoma may be due to removal of undetected micrometastases. Women diagnosed at more advanced stages as well as black women may also benefit from more extensive lymphadenectomy.

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

4.5
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