Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Sentinel-Lymph-Node-Based Management or Routine Axillary Clearance? One-Year Outcomes of Sentinel Node Biopsy Versus Axillary Clearance (SNAC): A Randomized Controlled Surgical Trial

  • Breast Oncology
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

We sought the extent to which arm morbidity could be reduced by using sentinel-lymph-node-based management in women with clinically node-negative early breast cancer. One thousand eighty-eight women were randomly allocated to sentinel-lymph-node biopsy followed by axillary clearance if the sentinel node was positive or not detected (SNBM) or routine axillary clearance (RAC, sentinel-lymph-node biopsy followed immediately by axillary clearance). Sentinel nodes were located using blue dye, alone or with technetium-labeled antimony sulfide colloid. The primary endpoint was increase in arm volume from baseline to the average of measurements at 6 and 12 months. Secondary endpoints were the proportions of women with at least 15% increase in arm volume or early axillary morbidity, and average scores for arm symptoms, dysfunctions, and disabilities assessed at 6 and 12 months by patients with the SNAC Study-Specific Scales and other quality-of-life instruments. Sensitivity, false-negative rates, and negative predictive values for sentinel-lymph-node biopsy were estimated in the RAC group. The average increase in arm volume was 2.8% in the SNBM group and 4.2% in the RAC group (P = 0.002). Patients in the SNBM group gave lower ratings for arm swelling (P < 0.001), symptoms (P < 0.001), and dysfunctions (P = 0.02), but not disabilities (P = 0.5). Sentinel nodes were found in 95% of the SNBM group (29% positive) and 93% of the RAC group (25% positive). SNB had sensitivity 94.5%, false-negative rate 5.5%, and negative predictive value 98%. SNBM was successfully undertaken in a wide range of surgical centers and caused significantly less morbidity than RAC.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T. The sentinel node in breast cancer—a multicentre validation study. N Engl J Med. 1998;339:941–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Cody B. Sentinel lymph node biopsy as an alternative to routine axillary lymph node dissection in breast cancer patients. J Surg Oncol. 2001;77(3):149–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cox CE, Salud CJ, Harrington MA. The role of selective sentinel lymph node dissection in breast cancer. Surg Clin North Am. 2000;80(6):1759–77.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Kollias J, Gill PG, Coventry BJ, Malycha P, Chatterton B, Farshid G. Clinical and histological factors associated with sentinel node identification in breast cancer. Aust NZ J Surg. 2000;70:485–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Chua B, Ung OA, Taylor R, Bilous M, Salisbury E, Boyages J. Treatment implications of a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy in early breast cancer. Cancer. 2001, 92:1769–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wilkinson D, Wetzig N, Bennett I. Sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer: using local results for estimation of risk to patient. ANZ J Surg. 2003;73:811–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Redman S, King E. Encouraging research into lymphoedema: a report on the summit held on 25 and 26 February 2000. Sydney: National Breast and Ovarian Cancer Centre, 2000. http://www.nbcc.org.au/resources/resource.php?code=LRS. Accessed Mar 2008.

  8. Beller EM, Gebski V, Keech AC. Randomisation in clinical trials. Med J Aust. 2002;177:565–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. ISource National Breast Cancer Centre Early Breast Cancer Working Group. Management of early breast cancer. Canberra: National Health and Medical Research Council; 2001. http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/publications/synopses/_files/cp74.pdf. Accessed April 2008.

  10. Wetzig NR, Gill PG, Ung O, et al. for the RACS SNAC Group. Participation in the RACS Sentinel Node versus Axillary Clearance trial. ANZ J Surg. 2005;75:98–100.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Tewari N, Gill PG, Bochner MA, Kollias J. Comparison of volume displacement versus circumferential arm measurements for lymphoedema—implications for the SNAC trial. ANZ J Surg. 2008;78:889–93.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Nowak AK, Hargreaves C, Gill PG, et al. Health-related quality of life before and 1 month after axillary surgery in a randomized trial of sentinel node biopsy versus axillary clearance: the SNAC trial. In 27th Annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, 8–11 Dec 2004, San Antonio. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2004;88 Suppl 1:Abstract 2026.

  13. Smith MJ, Gill PG, Wetzig N, Sourjina T, Gebski V, Ung O, et al. Comparing patients’ and clinicians; assessment of outcomes in a randomised trial of sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer (the RACS SNAC trial). Breast Cancer Res Treat. (in press).

  14. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G. A randomized comparison of sentinel node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2003;349(6):546–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G. Sentinel lymph node biopsy as a staging procedure in breast cancer: an update of a randomized controlled study. Lancet Oncol. 2006;7(12):983–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, et al. Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8(10):881–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Mansel RE, Fallowfield LJ, Kissin M. Randomised multicentre trial of sentinel node biopsy versus standard axillary treatment in operable breast cancer: the ALMANAC Trial. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2006;98(9):599–609.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Fleissig A, Fallowfield LJ, Langridge CI, et al. Post-operative arm morbidity and quality of life. results of the ALMANAC randomised trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with standard axillary treatment in the management of patients with early breast cancer breast. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2006;95(3):279–93.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Benson JR, Querci della Rovere G, the Axilla Management Consensus Group. Management of the axilla in women with breast cancer. Lancet Oncol. 2007;8:331–48.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Cody HS, Borgen PI. State-of-the-art approaches to sentinel node biopsy for breast cancer: study design, patient selection, technique and quality control at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre. Surg Oncol. 1999;8:85–91.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Adverse Drug Reactions Advisory Committee. Patent blue V and anaphylaxis. Australian Adverse Drug Reactions Bull. 2002;21(3):10. http://www.tga.gov.au/adr/aadrb/aadr0208.htm. Accessed Sep 2008.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The study was funded by grants from the Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC), the National Breast Cancer Foundation, the Australian Department of Health and Ageing, MBF Australia, and the Scottwood Trust, New Zealand. Educational workshops for investigators were funded by AstraZeneca. Rhana Pike, from the NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre, assisted with the manuscript.

Conflict of Interest

None of the contributors has any conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Consortia

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Grantley Gill.

Additional information

A full list of contributors is provided in the Appendix.

Appendix

Appendix

Volume of a Truncated Cone

Consider a segment of length h with a base circumference C b and an apex circumference C a. The area of the base and apex circles is given by A b = C 2b /4Π and A a = C 2a /4Π.

The volume of this segment is

$$ V = h \times {{\left\{ {A_{\text{a}} + A_{\text{b}} + \surd [A_{\text{a}} \times A_{\text{b}} ]} \right\}} \mathord{\left/ {\vphantom {{\left\{ {A_{\text{a}} + A_{\text{b}} + \surd [A_{\text{a}} \times A_{\text{b}} ]} \right\}} 3}} \right. \kern-\nulldelimiterspace} 3}; \quad h = 100 $$

The volume of each arm is then estimated as the sum of the six truncated cones.

Contributors to the SNAC Trial

Writing Committee

P. Grantley Gill (chair), Neil Wetzig, Val Gebski, Martin Stockler, Owen Ung, Ian Campbell, John Simes

Management Committee

P. Grantley Gill (study chair), N. Wetzig (deputy study chair), M. Bilous, I. Campbell, J. Collins, X. Coskinas, G. Farshid, V. Gebski, D. Gillett, W. Hague, R. Harman, J. Kollias, A. Macphee, R.J. Simes, M. Stockler, O. Ung, R. Uren, B. Vachan, L. Young

Safety and Data Monitoring Committee

B. Chatterton, M. Jones, W. Raymond, J. Simpson

Pathology Audit Committee

M. Bilous, G Farshid, X. Coskinas

NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre (Coordinating Centre)

X. Coskinas, A. Ray, K. Scott, B. Vachan (trial coordinators); C. Greig, A. Lucas, R. Tangunan, S. Wonders (data managers); C. Brown, V. Gebski, C. Hargreaves, C. Pardy, T. Sourjina (statisticians); C. Munro, A.-T. Nguyen (database administrators); R. Pike (writer-editor); R.J. Simes (director), M.R. Stockler (oncology co-director)

Sites Contributing Patients to the SNAC Trial and the Principal Investigators

Westmead Hospital, Sydney: Owen Ung, Dominic Moon, James French

Concord Hospital, Sydney: David Gillett, Gail Molland

Coffs Harbour Base Hospital, Coffs Harbour: Bill Ross

Lismore Base Public Hospital, Lismore: Rob Simon

Nepean Hospital, Sydney: Patrick Cregan, Deborah Cheung

Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney: Andrew Spillane

St Vincent’s Mater Health, Sydney: Margaret Pooley

Strathfield Breast Centre, Sydney: David Gillett, Gail Molland

St. Vincent’s Private Hospital, Lismore: Rob Simon

Baringa Private Hospital, Coffs Harbour: Bill Ross

Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne: John Collins, Bruce Mann, Craig Murphy, Julie Miller

St Vincent’s Hospital, Melbourne: Michael Henderson, Suzanne Moore, Paul Kitchen

Geelong Hospital, Geelong: Gregory Mitchell

Royal Women’s Hospital, Melbourne: Bruce Mann

Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane: Neil Wetzig, David Wilkinson, Ian Bennet

Mater Private Hospital, Brisbane: Neil Wetzig, David Wilkinson, Chris Pyke

Nambour General Hospital, Nambour: Justin D’Arcy, Michael Donovan, Lisa Creighton

Gold Coast Hospital, Southport: Daniel DeVianna

Wesley Medical Centre, Brisbane: Neil Wetzig

Mater Adult Hospital, Brisbane: Chris Pyke

Royal Adelaide Hospital, Adelaide: Grantley Gill, James Kollias, Melissa Bochner, Robert Kennedy

St Andrew’s Hospital, Adelaide: Grantley Gill, James Kollias, Melissa Bochner

Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Adelaide: Vladamir Humeniuk, David Walsh

Western Breast Clinic, Adelaide: Vladamir Humeniuk, David Walsh

Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth: David Oliver, Diana Hastrich

St John of God Murdoch, Perth: David Oliver

Auckland Hospital, Auckland: Alex Ng

Middlemore Hospital, Auckland: Garth Poole

North Shore Hospital, Auckland: Richard Harman, Sharon Cacala, Eva Juhasz

Palmerston North Hospital, Palmerston North: Colin Wilson, Pravin Kumar, Bruce Rhind

Waikato Hospital, Waikato: Ian Campbell

Principal Site Coordinators

V. Arriola, A. Bell, A. Brown, D. Dash, A. Davis, K. Devantier, A. Dowd, J. Goad, S. Govenlock, J. Hargan, C. Kennedy, K. Latimer, C. MacDonald, C. McBride, L. Neave, M. Osinski, C. Paine, A. Power, C. Preston, J. Scarlet, J. Silbereisen, M. Stanley, P. Whitfield, R. Wicks, R. Winter

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gill, G., The SNAC Trial Group of the Royal Australasian College of Surgeons (RACS) and NHMRC Clinical Trials Centre. Sentinel-Lymph-Node-Based Management or Routine Axillary Clearance? One-Year Outcomes of Sentinel Node Biopsy Versus Axillary Clearance (SNAC): A Randomized Controlled Surgical Trial. Ann Surg Oncol 16, 266–275 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0229-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-008-0229-z

Keywords

Navigation