Predicting non-sentinel lymph node status after positive sentinel biopsy in breast cancer: what model performs the best in a Czech population?
Language English Country Switzerland Media print-electronic
Document type Comparative Study, Journal Article, Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
- MeSH
- Algorithms MeSH
- Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy * MeSH
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Lymphatic Metastasis diagnosis pathology MeSH
- Breast Neoplasms ethnology pathology MeSH
- Nomograms * MeSH
- Predictive Value of Tests MeSH
- ROC Curve MeSH
- Aged, 80 and over MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Check Tag
- Adult MeSH
- Middle Aged MeSH
- Humans MeSH
- Aged, 80 and over MeSH
- Aged MeSH
- Female MeSH
- Publication type
- Journal Article MeSH
- Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't MeSH
- Comparative Study MeSH
- Geographicals
- Czech Republic MeSH
Several models have previously been proposed to predict the probability of non-sentinel lymph node (NSLN) metastases after a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in breast cancer. The aim of this study was to assess the accuracy of two previously published nomograms (MSKCC, Stanford) and to develop an alternative model with the best predictive accuracy in a Czech population. In the basic population of 330 SLN-positive patients from the Czech Republic, the accuracy of the MSKCC and the Stanford nomograms was tested by the area under the receiver operating characteristics curve (AUC). A new model (MOU nomogram) was proposed according to the results of multivariate analysis of relevant clinicopathologic variables. The new model was validated in an independent test population from Hungary (383 patients). In the basic population, six of 27 patients with isolated tumor cells (ITC) in the SLN harbored additional NSLN metastases. The AUCs of the MSKCC and Stanford nomograms were 0.68 and 0.66, respectively; for the MOU nomogram it reached 0.76. In the test population, the AUC of the MOU nomogram was similar to that of the basic population (0.74). The presence of only ITC in SLN does not preclude further nodal involvement. Additional variables are beneficial when considering the probability of NSLN metastases. In the basic population, the previously published nomograms (MSKCC and Stanford) showed only limited accuracy. The developed MOU nomogram proved more suitable for the basic population, such as for another independent population from a mid-European country.
See more in PubMed
Eur J Surg Oncol. 2005 Nov;31(9):958-64 PubMed
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2008 Dec;112(3):523-31 PubMed
Am J Surg. 2006 Oct;192(4):484-7 PubMed
Cancer. 2008 Apr 15;112(8):1672-8 PubMed
Eur J Cancer. 2008 Oct;44(15):2185-91 PubMed
Ann Surg Oncol. 2003 Dec;10(10):1140-51 PubMed
J Clin Oncol. 2005 Oct 20;23(30):7703-20 PubMed
Ann Surg Oncol. 2008 Sep;15(9):2562-7 PubMed
Ann Surg Oncol. 2007 Aug;14(8):2195-201 PubMed
Am J Surg. 2005 Oct;190(4):543-50 PubMed
Ann Surg. 2007 Mar;245(3):462-8 PubMed
J Clin Oncol. 2008 Jan 10;26(2):258-63 PubMed
Ann Surg Oncol. 2006 Mar;13(3):310-20 PubMed
J Clin Pathol. 2002 Dec;55(12):926-31 PubMed
Cancer. 2007 Aug 15;110(4):723-30 PubMed
Ann Surg Oncol. 2005 Dec;12(12):1066-72 PubMed
Br J Surg. 2008 Mar;95(3):302-9 PubMed
Am J Surg. 2007 Jun;193(6):686-92 PubMed
World J Surg. 2002 May;26(5):592-7 PubMed
Am Surg. 2004 Nov;70(11):1019-24 PubMed
BMC Cancer. 2008 Mar 04;8:66 PubMed
Radiology. 1982 Apr;143(1):29-36 PubMed
Pathol Oncol Res. 2007;13(1):5-14 PubMed
Am J Surg. 2007 Nov;194(5):699-700 PubMed
J Surg Oncol. 2007 Dec 1;96(7):547-53 PubMed
J Clin Oncol. 2006 Apr 20;24(12):1814-22 PubMed
