IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0105316.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Feasibility and Accuracy of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Clinically Node-Positive Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Meta-Analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Jian-Fei Fu
  • Hai-Long Chen
  • Jiao Yang
  • Cheng-Hao Yi
  • Shu Zheng

Abstract

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has replaced conventional axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) in axillary node-negative breast cancer patients. However, the use of SLNB remains controversial in patients after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC). The aim of this review is to evaluate the feasibility and accuracy of SLNB after NAC in clinically node-positive patients. Systematic searches were performed in the PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases from 1993 to December 2013 for studies on node-positive breast cancer patients who underwent SLNB after NAC followed by ALND. Of 436 identified studies, 15 were included in this review, with a total of 2,471 patients. The pooled identification rate (IR) of SLNB was 89% [95% confidence interval (CI) 85–93%], and the false negative rate (FNR) of SLNB was 14% (95% CI 10–17%). The heterogeneity of FNR was analyzed by meta-regression, and the results revealed that immunohistochemistry (IHC) staining may represent an independent factor (P = 0.04). FNR was lower in the IHC combined with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) staining subgroup than in the H&E staining alone subgroup, with values of 8.7% versus 16.0%, respectively (P = 0.001). Thus, SLNB was feasible after NAC in node-positive breast cancer patients. In addition, the IR of SLNB was respectable, although the FNR of SLNB was poor and requires further improvement. These findings indicate that IHC may improve the accuracy of SLNB.

Suggested Citation

  • Jian-Fei Fu & Hai-Long Chen & Jiao Yang & Cheng-Hao Yi & Shu Zheng, 2014. "Feasibility and Accuracy of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Clinically Node-Positive Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(9), pages 1-9, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0105316
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0105316
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105316
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0105316&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0105316?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Chong Geng & Xiao Chen & Xiaohua Pan & Jiyu Li, 2016. "The Feasibility and Accuracy of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Initially Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer after Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(9), pages 1-16, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0105316. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.