Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Journal of Nuclear Medicine
  • SNMMI
    • JNM
    • JNMT
    • SNMMI Journals
    • SNMMI
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Journal of Nuclear Medicine

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current
    • Ahead of print
    • Past Issues
    • JNM Supplement
    • SNMMI Annual Meeting Abstracts
    • Continuing Education
    • JNM Podcasts
  • Subscriptions
    • Subscribers
    • Institutional and Non-member
    • Rates
    • Journal Claims
    • Corporate & Special Sales
  • Authors
    • Submit to JNM
    • Information for Authors
    • Assignment of Copyright
    • AQARA requirements
  • Info
    • Reviewers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
  • About
    • About Us
    • Editorial Board
    • Contact Information
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
    • Help
    • SNMMI Journals
  • View or Listen to JNM Podcast
  • Visit JNM on Facebook
  • Join JNM on LinkedIn
  • Follow JNM on Twitter
  • Subscribe to our RSS feeds
OtherBASIC SCIENCE INVESTIGATIONS

Let Every Node Count!

Roger F. Uren
Journal of Nuclear Medicine March 2001, 42 (3) 452-453;
Roger F. Uren
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Sentinel lymph node biopsy has excited the medical community and has been described by some as the most significant advance in surgical oncology in the decade of the 1990s. The technique allows accurate lymph node staging with minimum morbidity and has been successfully applied to melanoma (1,2), breast cancer (3,4), and an expanding list of other solid cancers that show significant metastatic spread to regional lymph nodes. The best results for melanoma and breast cancer are achieved when three approaches are combined to locate and remove the sentinel node. These are preoperative lymphoscintigraphy, blue dye injection at the time of surgery, and the intraoperative use of a γ-detecting probe to aid in the surgical location of the sentinel node. Success thus relies on the development of a close working relationship between the nuclear medicine physician and the surgeon. Although this requires a considerable commitment on the part of the nuclear medicine physician, it should not be seen as a chore but, rather, embraced as an opportunity to be involved in an evolving technique, the results of which impact directly on patient management. A similar level of cooperative involvement is also required from the histopathologist to ensure that the sentinel node is subjected to appropriate scrutiny using serial sections and special staining technique (5).

The aim of preoperative lymphoscintigraphy is to accurately map the pattern of lymphatic drainage from theprimary tumor site to its draining lymph nodes. Any lymph node that receives direct lymphatic drainage from the primary tumor site is a sentinel node and should be biopsied as part of a sentinel node biopsy procedure (6). There must be detectable counts in the node at the time of surgery so that a γ-detecting probe can be used, and thus the radiocolloid used for lymphoscintigraphy must adequately radiolabel the sentinel node.

Therefore, successful preoperative lymphoscintigraphy requires the use of a tracer that readily enters the initial lymphatic capillary at the site of the primary tumor, moves freely through the lymphatic collecting vessels, and is retained in the sentinel node long enough for that node to be detected using a γ probe at surgery. The ideal tracer for this purpose would have close to 100% of the injected dose migrate from the primary site to the draining sentinel node and have 100% retention in that node. None of the radiopharmaceuticals in current clinical use come close to this ideal. Radiocolloids are the most common tracers used for preoperative lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel node biopsy at this time, and considerable disagreement about the particle size that is the most desirable in different clinical situations remains. Some argue that small particles more easily enter the initial lymphatic capillary and thus better radiolabel the sentinel node, whereas others argue that large particles are better because fewer second-tier nodes are radiolabeled. What does seem clear is that the search for a better tracer for sentinel node biopsy should be encouraged.

The article by Phillips et al. (7) in this issue of The Journal of Nuclear Medicine is an interesting approach to the dual problems of ensuring greater migration of tracer from the injection site while at the same time increasing retention in the sentinel node. Using their biotin-liposome/avidin technique increased retention of liposomes in the draining lymph node by a factor of 8.5 compared with that of control liposomes. This is a significant advance; nevertheless, only one in five labeled liposomes that reached the sentinel node was retained in it, which offers hope for improvement in their results. This finding is itself interesting because most radiocolloid particles that reach a sentinel node are retained by the node regardless of particle size. Perhaps the process of phagocytosis that traps radiocolloids in the subcapsular sinus of sentinel nodes is not the same process that causes the retention of liposomes.

Other attempts to improve uptake of tracer in the sentinel lymph nodes have been made. Vera et al. (8) used a nonparticulate receptor-binding radiotracer that combined the advantages of nonparticulate tracers (i.e., rapid entry into the lymphatic capillaries and easy movement through the lymph vessels) with the advantages of radiocolloids (i.e., good retention in the draining sentinel node). Moghimi et al. (9) described the use of copolymers to sterically stabilize nanospheres. This markedly increased the percentage injected dose that reached and was retained in the sentinel lymph node. They reported up to 40% of the injected dose being retained in the sentinel node, which was apparently associated with a marked increase in the rate of opsonization of the labeled nanospheres and a subsequent increase in phagocytosis by the macrophages in the subcapsular sinus of the sentinel nodes. Despite the promise of these approaches, neither appears to have been pursued further in clinical practice.

The current methods of sentinel node biopsy do locate the sentinel nodes in most patients, and the nodes found do accurately stage the node field in >95% of patients. Nevertheless, further research into radiotracers for sentinel node biopsy should be encouraged. However, for any new tracer to be accepted by nuclear medicine physicians and surgeons it should be simple to use in clinical practice and not difficult to prepare in the nuclear medicine department. The method will need to be robust because sentinel node biopsy is now so widely applied throughout the surgical oncology community that any method that works only in a teaching hospital environment will not be adopted.

Footnotes

  • Received Oct. 23, 2000; revision accepted Nov. 3, 2000.

    For correspondence or reprints contact: Roger F. Uren, MD, Department of Medicine, The University of Sydney, Ste. 206, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital Medical Center, 100 Carillon Ave., Newton NSW 2042, Australia.

REFERENCES

  1. ↵
    Morton DL, Wen D-R, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 1992;127:392–399.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    Thompson JF, McCarthy WH, Bosch CMJ, et al. Sentinel lymph node status as an indicator of the presence of metastatic melanoma in regional lymph nodes. Melanoma Res 1995;5:255–260.
    OpenUrlPubMed
  3. ↵
    Krag DN, Weaver DL, Alex JC, Fairbank JT. Surgical resection and radiolocalization of the sentinel lymph node in breast cancer using a gamma probe. Surg Oncol 1993;2:335–340.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    Giuliano AE, Kirgan DM, Guenther JM, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 1994;220:391–401.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    Cochran AJ. The pathologist’s role in sentinel lymph node evaluation. Semin Nucl Med 2000;30:11–17.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    Uren RF, Thompson JF, Howman-Giles R. Lymphatic Drainage of the Skin and Breast: Locating the Sentinel Nodes Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Harwood Academic Publishers; 1999:69.
  7. ↵
    Phillips WT, Klipper R, Goins B. Use of 99mTc-labeled liposomes encapsulating blue dye for identification of the sentinel lymph node. J Nucl Med 2000;42:446–451.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  8. ↵
    Vera DR, Wisner ER, Stadalnik RC. Sentinel node imaging via a nonparticulate receptor-binding radiotracer. J Nucl Med 1997;38:530–535.
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  9. ↵
    Moghimi SM, Hawley AE, Christy NM, Gray T, Illum L, Davis SS. Surface engineered nanospheres with enhanced drainage into lymphatics and uptake by macrophages of the regional lymph nodes. FEBS Lett 1994;344:25–30.
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Journal of Nuclear Medicine
Vol. 42, Issue 3
March 1, 2001
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
Sign In to Email Alerts with your Email Address
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on Journal of Nuclear Medicine.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Let Every Node Count!
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Journal of Nuclear Medicine
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Journal of Nuclear Medicine web site.
Citation Tools
Let Every Node Count!
Roger F. Uren
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Mar 2001, 42 (3) 452-453;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Let Every Node Count!
Roger F. Uren
Journal of Nuclear Medicine Mar 2001, 42 (3) 452-453;
Twitter logo Facebook logo LinkedIn logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One
Bookmark this article

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Footnotes
    • REFERENCES
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • Use of 99mTc-Labeled Liposomes Encapsulating Blue Dye for Identification of the Sentinel Lymph Node
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Tumor-Specific Binding of Radiolabeled PEGylated GIRLRG Peptide: A Novel Agent for Targeting Cancers
  • PET/MRI of Hypoxic Atherosclerosis Using 64Cu-ATSM in a Rabbit Model
  • Tumor Uptake of Anti-CD20 Fabs Depends on Tumor Perfusion
Show more Invited Commentary

Similar Articles

SNMMI

© 2025 SNMMI

Powered by HighWire