Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics

User menu

  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Anticancer Research
  • Other Publications
    • Anticancer Research
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
  • Register
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Anticancer Research

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Current Issue
  • Archive
  • Info for
    • Authors
    • Subscribers
    • Advertisers
    • Editorial Board
  • Other Publications
    • In Vivo
    • Cancer Genomics & Proteomics
    • Cancer Diagnosis & Prognosis
  • More
    • IIAR
    • Conferences
    • 2008 Nobel Laureates
  • About Us
    • General Policy
    • Contact
  • Visit us on Facebook
  • Follow us on Linkedin
Research ArticleClinical Studies

One-step Nucleic Acid Amplification Can Identify Sentinel Node-negative Breast Cancer Patients With Excellent Prognosis

KENZO SHIMAZU, TOMOHIRO MIYAKE, JUN OKUNO, YASUTO NAOI, TOMONORI TANEI, MASAFUMI SHIMODA, NAOFUMI KAGARA, SEUNG JIN KIM and SHINZABURO NOGUCHI
Anticancer Research March 2019, 39 (3) 1447-1454; DOI: https://doi.org/10.21873/anticanres.13261
KENZO SHIMAZU
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • For correspondence: kshimazu@onsurg.med.osaka-u.ac.jp
TOMOHIRO MIYAKE
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
JUN OKUNO
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
YASUTO NAOI
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
TOMONORI TANEI
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
MASAFUMI SHIMODA
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
NAOFUMI KAGARA
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SEUNG JIN KIM
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
SHINZABURO NOGUCHI
Department of Breast and Endocrine Surgery, Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Osaka, Japan
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Abstract

Background/Aim: One-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) is a newly developed procedure for detection of node metastasis by targeting CK19 mRNA. This study aimed to compare the prognosis of ER-positive/HER2-negative (ER+/HER2−) breast cancer patients with negative sentinel lymph node (SLN), as determined by OSNA with that determined by pathology. Patients and Methods: A total of 508 patients who underwent breast surgery and SLN biopsy were enrolled. Of 263 patients with negative SLN by OSNA (osN0), 239 were treated with endocrine therapy alone (osN0-ET), and of 107 with negative SLN by pathology (pN0), 103 were treated with endocrine therapy alone (pN0-ET). Results: Distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) of osN0-ET group (99.5% at 6 years) was significantly better (p=0.044) than that of pN0-ET group. Multivariate analysis revealed that osN0 was significantly associated (p=0.019) with favorable DRFS. Conclusion: ER+/HER2− breast cancer patients with negative SLN by OSNA show an excellent prognosis with endocrine therapy alone.

  • Breast cancer
  • sentinel lymph node
  • prognosis
  • one-step nucleic acid amplification

Axillary nodal status is the most significant independent prognostic factor for breast cancer. Currently, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has become the standard procedure for staging axillary nodal status of patients with early invasive breast cancer (1-5). The advantages of SLNB in breast cancer patients include enhanced pathological examination of a small number of sentinel lymph nodes (SLN), which permits more frequent detection of micrometastasis and isolated tumor cells (ITC) by means of pathological examination with serial sectioning and/or immunohistochemistry (IHC). In fact, some studies have reported that initially node-negative patients with conventional pathological examination turned out to be node-positive with more extensive pathological assessment (6). However, such an exhaustive examination of each SLN is unfeasible in daily clinical practice.

In the meantime, the one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA) has been developed as a rapid procedure for detecting lymph node (LN) metastasis by targeting cytokeratin 19 (CK19) mRNA (7). OSNA can be completed within 30-40 min, making it suitable as an intra-operative procedure for detecting SLN metastasis (8-12). Since an entire LN can be examined by OSNA, unlike by routine pathological examination which examines only a few representative sections from each LN, micrometastasis is considered less likely to be missed by OSNA than by a routine pathological examination. In fact, comparison of for the detection rates of LN metastasis by OSNA and by pathology (step-section analysis with immunohistochemistry) shows a slightly higher rate of detection by OSNA than by pathology, suggesting that OSNA can detect some micrometastases missed by pathology (13-15).

Although some aspects remain controversial, a large body of evidence seems to indicate that micrometastasis of LN, but not of ITCs, is of significant prognostic importance (6, 16-18). We, therefore, hypothesized that patients with negative SLN examined by OSNA (osN0) would have a better prognosis than those with negative SLN assessed by pathology (pN0). The aim of this study was, thus, to compare the prognosis of osN0 and pN0 patients.

Patients and Methods

Patient population. This retrospective study included 508 consecutive patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER2)-negative, and SLN-negative invasive breast cancers (T1-2N0) who underwent breast surgery (breast conserving surgery or mastectomy) with SLNB between July 2008 and May 2015. For examination of SLN metastasis, OSNA or pathology was used at the physician's discretion with one of the methods described below. ALNs of every patient were preoperatively examined by ultrasonography (US). When ALN metastasis was suspected, fine needle aspiration cytology (FNAC) was performed and the patients with cytology-proven ALN metastasis were excluded from the study. This study was approved by the Ethical Review Board of Osaka University Hospital (approval number:12423-4).

Sentinel lymph node biopsy. All patients underwent SLN biopsy with a combination of patent blue and indocyanine green and/or radiocolloid (technetium 99m tin-colloid). The methodology of SLN biopsy has been described in detail in our previous studies (3-5). SLN (blue) was defined as a lymph node partially or completely stained by blue dye or directly connected to a blue-stained afferent lymphatic tract. SLN (radiocolloid) was defined as a lymph node with ex vivo radioactivity (counts per second) measuring 400% or more than that of the axillary background.

OSNA. The method for OSNA has been described previously in more detail (10, 12). Briefly, after removal of a very thin slice (1 mm) from the middle of each SLN for pathological examination, the remaining LN slice was homogenized in 4 ml of Lynorhag lysis buffer (Sysmex, Kobe, Japan), pH 3.5, and centrifuged briefly at room temperature, followed by assessment of two microliters of the supernatant in an RD-100i system using reverse transcription loop-mediated isothermal amplification (RT-LAMP). The results were reported according to the manufacturer's instructions as negative (<2.5×102 copies/μl), + positive (≥2.5×102 and <5.0×103 copies/μl =micrometastasis), ++ positive (≥5.0×103 copies/μl= macrometastasis), or + i (inhibited in the regular sample and ≥2.5×102 copies/μl in the diluted sample) (7). Patients classified as + i were also considered positive. The quantity of LN available for one OSNA reaction weighed between 50 mg and 600 mg. If the removed SLN weighed more than 600 mg, the node was divided into two sections for separate assays by OSNA.

Pathological examination. A 2-mm thick slice was cut from the middle of each SLN for intraoperative frozen section examination. The remainders of the SLN as well as the slice subjected to frozen section examination were fixed in 10% buffered formalin. The remainder of the SLN was sectioned into 2-mm slices, and embedded in paraffin. The remaining slices subjected to frozen section were also embedded in paraffin. The paraffin sections (4 μm) of these SLNs were subjected to Hematoxylin Eosin (HE) staining and immunohistochemistry with an anti-cytokeratin antibody (AE1/3) (Nichirei, Tokyo, Japan) as described previously (3-5). For the present study, micro- and macro-metastases, but not isolated tumor cells (ITCs), were classified as metastases. The thin slice (1 mm) cut from the SLN before analysis by OSNA was also examined by HE staining.

Determination of ER, progesterone receptor (PR), Ki67 and HER2. ER, PR, and Ki67 expression in tumor tissues was immunohisto-chemically examined with a previously described method (19). ER and PR were defined as positive when 10% or more of the tumor cells stained immunohistochemically positive. Ki67 was defined as positive when 20% or more of tumor cells stained positive. HER2 was determined immunohistochemically and/or by means of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). When a tumor showed +3 immunostaining or the FISH ratio was ≥2.0, it was considered HER2 positive.

Adjuvant therapy. Every patient was treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy (tamoxifen or tamoxifen plus LH-RH agonist for premenopausal women, and tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor for postmenopausal women), and the decision as to adjuvant chemotherapy was made by the physician concerned, taking into consideration age, tumor size, histological grade and Ki67 (≥20%). Every patient treated with breast conserving surgery received radiation therapy (50 Gy) to the whole breast and none of the patients treated with mastectomy was given radiation therapy.

Statistical analysis. JMP_ 14.0 (SAS Institute Inc., Cary, NC, USA) software was used for the statistical analyses in this study. Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test were used for comparing the clinicopathological factors of two groups. Distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) was defined as the time from surgery to distant recurrence of breast cancer. Disease-free survival (DFS) events included ipsilateral breast cancer recurrence, local/regional recurrence, distant recurrence, or death from any cause. Overall survival (OS) was defined as the time from surgery to death from any cause. DRFS, DFS, and OS rates were estimated using the Kaplan–Meier survival curve and compared for the two groups with a log-rank test. Multivariate analysis of various parameters associated with DRFS was conducted using Cox's proportional hazard regression models. A p-value of <0.05 was considered significant.

Results

Patients analyzed. SLNs of 508 patients with ER+/HER2− and clinically node-negative invasive breast cancers (T1-2N0M0) were subjected to OSNA (376 patients) or pathological examination (132 patients) at the physician's discretion. SLN metastasis was found in 113 patients (30.1%) by OSNA and 25 patients (18.9%) by pathological examination (Figure 1). Detection of positivity for SLN metastasis by OSNA was significantly higher than that by pathology (p=0.014). Of the 113 OSNA-positive patients, 71 were assessed as + positive (=micrometastasis), 37 were assessed as ++ positive (=macrometastasis) and 5 were assessed as + i. Of the 25 pathology-positive patients, 16 were diagnosed as macrometastasis and 9 were diagnosed as micrometastasis.

Of the 263 patients with negative SLN detected by OSNA (osN0), 239 were treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone (osN0-ET group), and of the 107 patients with negative SLN identified by pathology (pN0), 103 were treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone (pN0-ET group) (Figure 1). The osN0-ET group included only one patient with micrometastasis detected histologically in a 1-mm slice cut from the center of an SLN. The clinicopathological characteristics of the osN0-ET group and pN0-ET group are shown in Table I. There was no significant difference in any clinicopathological characteristics between the two groups. There were also no differences in the number of removed and examined SLNs between the two groups. The median follow-up was 60 months (range=12-120 months).

Prognosis of osN0 or pN0 patients. DRFS, DFS, and OS of the patients in the osN0-ET group and pN0-ET group are shown in Figure 2. DRFS was significantly better (p=0.044) in the osN0-ET group than the pN0-ET group (Figure 2A), and the osN0-ET group tended to show a better DFS than the pN0-ET group although the difference was not statistically significant (Figure 2B). OS of the two groups was similar (Figure 2C). Multivariate analysis revealed that osN0 and positive progesterone receptor were significantly associated with favorable DRFS (p=0.019 and p=0.042, respectively) (Table II).

Figure 1.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 1.

Flowchart of patient selection. ER: Estrogen receptor; HER2: human epidermal growth factor receptor 2; OSNA: one-step nucleic acid amplification; ET: endocrine therapy; CT: chemotherapy.

Discussion

Several studies have compared SLN positivity detected by OSNA and pathology (13-15, 20). In the studies reported by the other investigators listed in Table III, an entire SLN was examined for detection of SLN metastasis by OSNA or by pathology using step sections with immunohistochemistry for cytokeratins. All five studies including ours, found that the ratio of SLN positivity detected by OSNA was higher than that detected by pathology, and two studies showed a statistically significant difference. In addition, when all the studies were combined, a statistically significant difference in SLN positivity was observed between OSNA and pathology (p=0.0050). Interestingly, Santaballa et al. reported a significant difference (p=0.0007) in positivity for micrometastasis between OSNA (11.0%) and pathology (3.6%), but not in macrometastasis (16.5% and 20.1%, respectively) (14). Taken together, these results seem to suggest that OSNA is less likely to miss micrometastasis than pathology, which has an inherent risk of missing micrometastasis between the cut surfaces of an SLN used for pathological examination.

Until now, two studies have reported on the relationship between OSNA and prognosis. Peg et al. found that the total tumor load (TTL; defined as the total number of CK19 mRNA copies in all positive SLNs) significantly correlated with DFS and OS and a low-risk group could be differentiated from a high-risk group by using a TTL cut-off value of 2.5×104 (21). Osako et al. reported that osN0 patients showed an excellent prognosis (5-year DRFS=98.0%) which is consistent with our results (22). However, no reported studies have compared prognosis for osN0 and pN0 patients. In the study presented here, osN0-ET patients showed a significantly better DRFS than did pN0-ET patients. It is speculated that a significant proportion of SLN micrometastases could not be identified (i.e., occult metastases) by routine pathological examination, but could by OSNA. Thus, the reason for the better DRFS of the osN0-ET group than the pN0-ET group is thought to be attributable to inclusion of a higher proportion of patients with SLN occult metastasis in the latter group. Weaver et al. reported that meticulous multistep section analysis revealed occult metastases (isolated tumor cells (11.1%), micrometastases (4.4%), and macrometastases (0.4%)) in SLNs initially classified as negative by a routine histological examination, and these previously occult metastases had a small but significant impact on OS, DFS, and distant disease-free interval (16). It has been reported that 9-32% of patients with negative LNs, identified by various pathological methods, were found to have occult metastasis following meticulous examination (6). This indicates that a significant proportion of patients with SLN metastasis may be underdiagnosed as being without SLN metastasis by routine histological examination. On the other hand, it can be expected that osN0 patients are less likely to harbor occult metastasis since the entire SLN is examined by OSNA.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table I.

Clinicopathological characteristics of patients entered in this study.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table II.

Multivariate analysis of prognostic parameters for DRFS.

Another interesting finding of this study is the attainment of an excellent prognosis for the osN0-ET group, which is equivalent to that for patients at low-risk identified by Oncotype DX in the Trial Assigning IndividuaLized Options for Treatment (Rx), the TAILORx study (23). Only 9.1% of patients with ER+/HER2− and osN0 breast cancer in our study were treated with adjuvant chemotherapy, the indication for which was determined essentially according to the histological grade and Ki67. Thus, the patients treated with adjuvant chemotherapy showed a higher proportion of grade III tumors and Ki67-high tumors (Table IV). Chemotherapy could be avoided for as many as 90.9 % of the patients with ER-positive/HER2-negative/osN0 breast cancer, who attained an excellent prognosis. According to meta-analysis on Oncotype DX in actual practice (24), this genomic test could avoid chemotherapy for 55.1-78.7 % (pooled mean, 72.0%) of ER+/HER2− and pN0 patients. More recently, the TAILORx study reported that 86% of the patients with ER+/HER2− and pN0 breast cancer can be spared adjuvant chemotherapy (25). Even when taking into consideration the fact that SLN positivity is higher (Table III) when detected by OSNA than by pathology, the final proportion of ER+/HER2− and clinically node-negative patients for whom adjuvant chemotherapy can safely be avoided is thought to be similar for OSNA and Oncotype DX. These results seem to suggest the possibility that an accurate determination of SLN status using OSNA may be clinically useful for the selection of patients with an excellent prognosis who can be safely treated with adjuvant endocrine therapy alone, and the capability of this diagnostic assay to select such patients may be no worse than that of Oncotype DX.

Figure 2.
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint
Figure 2.

Kaplan–Meier analyses of relapse-free, disease-free and overall survival. A) Results of Kaplan–Meier analyses of distant relapse-free survival across the two groups. B) Results of Kaplan–Meier analyses of disease-free survival across the two groups. C) Results of Kaplan–Meier analyses of overall survival across the two groups. osN0, the patients with negative SLN examined by one-step nucleic acid amplification (OSNA); pN0: patients with negative SLN examined by pathology.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table III.

Summary of studies comparing sentinel lymph node metastasis detected by OSNA and pathology.

In conclusion, patients with ER+/HER2− and osN0 breast cancer treated with endocrine therapy alone showed better DRFS than those with ER+/HER2− and pN0 breast cancer. SLN micrometastasis missed by a routine pathological examination, but not by OSNA is speculated to have a negative impact on this finding. However, since our results are based on the findings of a retrospective study, they need to be validated by a prospective study including a larger number of patients.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table IV.

Clinicopathological characteristics of osN0 patients according to treatment.

Footnotes

  • Authors' Contributions

    Conception and design: Shimazu K, Noguchi S; Collection and assembly of data: All authors; Data analysis and interpretation: Shimazu K, Noguchi S, Miyake T; Final approval of manuscript: All authors.

  • Conflicts of Interest

    K.S. has received honoraria from AstraZeneca. Y.N. has received honoraria from Sysmex, and has received research funding from AstraZeneca on the other studies. S.J.K. has received honoraria from AstraZeneca, Takeda, Novartis, Pfizer and Sysmex. S.N. has been an advisor for AstraZeneca, Novartis and Taiho, has received honoraria from Sysmex, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis and Takeda, and has received research funding from Sysmex, AstraZeneca, Chugai, Daiichi-Sankyo, Eisai, Nippon Kayaku, Novartis, Ono, Pfizer, Taiho and Takeda on the other studies. S.N. and Y.N. hold the joint patents with Sysmex on subjects not related to this study. The other Authors do not declare any conflict of interest related to this study. This study was not supported by any funding sources.

  • Received January 18, 2019.
  • Revision received January 30, 2019.
  • Accepted January 31, 2019.
  • Copyright© 2019, International Institute of Anticancer Research (Dr. George J. Delinasios), All rights reserved

References

  1. ↵
    1. Giuliano AE,
    2. Kirgan DM,
    3. Guenther JM,
    4. Morton DL
    : Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for breast cancer. Ann Surg 220(3): 391-398, 1994. PMID: 8092905
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Veronesi U,
    2. Paganelli G,
    3. Viale G,
    4. Luini A,
    5. Zurrida S,
    6. Galimberti V,
    7. Intra M,
    8. Veronesi P,
    9. Maisonneuve P,
    10. Gatti G,
    11. Mazzarol G,
    12. De Cicco C,
    13. Manfredi G,
    14. Fernandez JR
    : Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy as a staging procedure in breast cancer: Update of a randomised controlled study. Lancet Oncol 7(12): 983-990, 2006. PMID:17138219, DOI:10.1016/S1470-2045(06)70947-0
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  2. ↵
    1. Shimazu K,
    2. Tamaki Y,
    3. Taguchi T,
    4. Takamura Y,
    5. Noguchi S
    : Comparison between periareolar and peritumoral injection of radiotracer for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with breast cancer. Surgery 131(3): 277-286, 2002. PMID:11894032
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Shimazu K,
    2. Tamaki Y,
    3. Taguchi T,
    4. Motomura K,
    5. Inaji H,
    6. Koyama H,
    7. Kasugai T,
    8. Wada A,
    9. Noguchi S
    : Lymphoscintigraphic visualization of internal mammary nodes with subtumoral injection of radiocolloid in patients with breast cancer. Ann Surg 237(3): 390-398, 2003. PMID:12616124, DOI:10.1097/01.SLA.0000055226.89022.90
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  3. ↵
    1. Shimazu K,
    2. Tamaki Y,
    3. Taguchi T,
    4. Tsukamoto F,
    5. Kasugai T,
    6. Noguchi S
    : Intraoperative frozen section analysis of sentinel lymph node in breast cancer patients treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Ann Surg Oncol 15(6): 1717-1722, 2008.PMID: 18266040, DOI:10.1245/s10434-008-9831-3
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Park D,
    2. Karesen R,
    3. Naume B,
    4. Synnestvedt M,
    5. Beraki E,
    6. Sauer T
    : The prognostic impact of occult nodal metastasis in early breast carcinoma. Breast Cancer Res Treat 118(1): 57-66, 2009. PMID:19219629, DOI:10.1007/s10549-009-0340-2
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Tsujimoto M,
    2. Nakabayashi K,
    3. Yoshidome K,
    4. Kaneko T,
    5. Iwase T,
    6. Akiyama F,
    7. Kato Y,
    8. Tsuda H,
    9. Ueda S,
    10. Sato K,
    11. Tamaki Y,
    12. Noguchi S,
    13. Kataoka TR,
    14. Nakajima H,
    15. Komoike Y,
    16. Inaji H,
    17. Tsugawa K,
    18. Suzuki K,
    19. Nakamura S,
    20. Daitoh M,
    21. Otomo Y,
    22. Matsuura N
    : One-step nucleic acid amplification for intraoperative detection of lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 13(16): 4807-4816, 2007. PMID:17699859, DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-2512
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  6. ↵
    1. Visser M,
    2. Jiwa M,
    3. Horstman A,
    4. Brink AA,
    5. Pol RP,
    6. van Diest P,
    7. Snijders PJ,
    8. Meijer CJ
    : Intra-operative rapid diagnostic method based on ck19 mrna expression for the detection of lymph node metastases in breast cancer. Int J Cancer 122(11): 2562-2567, 2008. PMID:18324628, DOI:10.1002/ijc.23451
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. Schem C,
    2. Maass N,
    3. Bauerschlag DO,
    4. Carstensen MH,
    5. Loning T,
    6. Roder C,
    7. Batic O,
    8. Jonat W,
    9. Tiemann K
    : One-step nucleic acid amplification-a molecular method for the detection of lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients; results of the german study group. Virchows Arch 454(2): 203-210, 2009. PMID:19101726, DOI:10.1007/s00428-008-0703-9
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Tamaki Y,
    2. Akiyama F,
    3. Iwase T,
    4. Kaneko T,
    5. Tsuda H,
    6. Sato K,
    7. Ueda S,
    8. Mano M,
    9. Masuda N,
    10. Takeda M,
    11. Tsujimoto M,
    12. Yoshidome K,
    13. Inaji H,
    14. Nakajima H,
    15. Komoike Y,
    16. Kataoka TR,
    17. Nakamura S,
    18. Suzuki K,
    19. Tsugawa K,
    20. Wakasa K,
    21. Okino T,
    22. Kato Y,
    23. Noguchi S,
    24. Matsuura N
    : Molecular detection of lymph node metastases in breast cancer patients: Results of a multicenter trial using the one-step nucleic acid amplification assay. Clin Cancer Res 15(8): 2879-2884, 2009. PMID: 19351770, DOI:10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-08-1881
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
    1. Feldman S,
    2. Krishnamurthy S,
    3. Gillanders W,
    4. Gittleman M,
    5. Beitsch PD,
    6. Young PR,
    7. Streck CJ,
    8. Whitworth PW,
    9. Levine EA,
    10. Boolbol S,
    11. Han LK,
    12. Hermann R,
    13. Hoon DS,
    14. Giuliano AE,
    15. Meric-Bernstam F,
    16. Group USOSNAACS
    : A novel automated assay for the rapid identification of metastatic breast carcinoma in sentinel lymph nodes. Cancer 117(12): 2599-2607, 2011. PMID:21226034, DOI:10.1002/cncr.25822
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Teramoto A,
    2. Shimazu K,
    3. Naoi Y,
    4. Shimomura A,
    5. Shimoda M,
    6. Kagara N,
    7. Maruyama N,
    8. Kim SJ,
    9. Yoshidome K,
    10. Tsujimoto M,
    11. Tamaki Y,
    12. Noguchi S
    : One-step nucleic acid amplification assay for intraoperative prediction of non-sentinel lymph node metastasis in breast cancer patients with sentinel lymph node metastasis. Breast 23(5): 579-585, 2014. PMID:24973902, DOI:10.1016/j.breast.2014.05.026
    OpenUrl
  9. ↵
    1. Castellano I,
    2. Macri L,
    3. Deambrogio C,
    4. Balmativola D,
    5. Bussone R,
    6. Ala A,
    7. Coluccia C,
    8. Sapino A
    : Reliability of whole sentinel lymph node analysis by one-step nucleic acid amplification for intraoperative diagnosis of breast cancer metastases. Ann Surg 255(2): 334-342, 2012. PMID:21975319, DOI:10.1097/SLA.0b0 13e31823000ed
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Santaballa A,
    2. De La Cueva H,
    3. Salvador C,
    4. Garcia-Martinez AM,
    5. Guarin MJ,
    6. Lorente D,
    7. Palomar L,
    8. Aznar I,
    9. Dobon F,
    10. Bello P
    : Advantages of one step nucleic acid amplification (osna) whole node assay in sentinel lymph node (sln) analysis in breast cancer. Springerplus 2: 542, 2013. PMID:24255842, DOI:10.1186/2193-1801-2-542
    OpenUrl
  11. ↵
    1. Ruano MA,
    2. Lopez-Bonet E,
    3. Buxo M,
    4. Tuca-Rodriguez F,
    5. Vila-Camps E,
    6. Alvarez E,
    7. Martin-Castillo B,
    8. Menendez JA
    : An improved axillary staging system using the osna assay does not modify the therapeutic management of breast cancer patients. Sci Rep 4: 5743, 2014. PMID:25034150, DOI:10.1038/srep05743
    OpenUrl
  12. ↵
    1. Weaver DL,
    2. Ashikaga T,
    3. Krag DN,
    4. Skelly JM,
    5. Anderson SJ,
    6. Harlow SP,
    7. Julian TB,
    8. Mamounas EP,
    9. Wolmark N
    : Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med 364(5): 412-421, 2011. PMID: 21247310, DOI: 10.1056/NEJMoa1008108
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
    1. de Boer M,
    2. van Deurzen CH,
    3. van Dijck JA,
    4. Borm GF,
    5. van Diest PJ,
    6. Adang EM,
    7. Nortier JW,
    8. Rutgers EJ,
    9. Seynaeve C,
    10. Menke-Pluymers MB,
    11. Bult P,
    12. Tjan-Heijnen VC
    : Micrometastases or isolated tumor cells and the outcome of breast cancer. N Engl J Med 361(7): 653-663, 2009. PMID:19675329, DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa 0904832
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  13. ↵
    1. Andersson Y,
    2. Frisell J,
    3. Sylvan M,
    4. de Boniface J,
    5. Bergkvist L
    : Breast cancer survival in relation to the metastatic tumor burden in axillary lymph nodes. J Clin Oncol 28(17): 2868-2873, 2010. PMID:20458033, DOI:10.1200/JCO.2009.24.5001
    OpenUrlAbstract/FREE Full Text
  14. ↵
    1. Morimoto K,
    2. Kim SJ,
    3. Tanei T,
    4. Shimazu K,
    5. Tanji Y,
    6. Taguchi T,
    7. Tamaki Y,
    8. Terada N,
    9. Noguchi S
    : Stem cell marker aldehyde dehydrogenase 1-positive breast cancers are characterized by negative estrogen receptor, positive human epidermal growth factor receptor type 2, and high ki67 expression. Cancer Sci 100(6): 1062-1068, 2009. PMID:19385968, DOI:10.1111/j.1349-7006.2009.01151.x
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  15. ↵
    1. Godey F,
    2. Leveque J,
    3. Tas P,
    4. Gandon G,
    5. Poree P,
    6. Mesbah H,
    7. Lavoue V,
    8. Quillien V,
    9. Athias CB
    : Sentinel lymph node analysis in breast cancer: Contribution of one-step nucleic acid amplification (osna). Breast Cancer Res Treat 131(2): 509-516, 2012. PMID:21993859, DOI:10.1007/s10549-011-1808-4
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  16. ↵
    1. Peg V,
    2. Sansano I,
    3. Vieites B,
    4. Bernet L,
    5. Cano R,
    6. Cordoba A,
    7. Sancho M,
    8. Martin MD,
    9. Vilardell F,
    10. Cazorla A,
    11. Espinosa-Bravo M,
    12. Perez-Garcia JM,
    13. Cortes J,
    14. Rubio IT,
    15. Ramon YCS
    : Role of total tumour load of sentinel lymph node on survival in early breast cancer patients. Breast 33: 8-13, 2017. PMID:28254641, DOI:10.1016/j.breast.2017.02.011
    OpenUrl
  17. ↵
    1. Osako T,
    2. Iwase T,
    3. Ushijima M,
    4. Yonekura R,
    5. Ohno S,
    6. Akiyama F
    : A new molecular-based lymph node staging classification determines the prognosis of breast cancer patients. Br J Cancer 117(10): 1470-1477, 2017. PMID:28910822, DOI:10.1038/bjc.2017.311
    OpenUrl
  18. ↵
    1. Sparano JA,
    2. Gray RJ,
    3. Makower DF,
    4. Pritchard KI,
    5. Albain KS,
    6. Hayes DF,
    7. Geyer CE Jr..,
    8. Dees EC,
    9. Perez EA,
    10. Olson JA Jr..,
    11. Zujewski J,
    12. Lively T,
    13. Badve SS,
    14. Saphner TJ,
    15. Wagner LI,
    16. Whelan TJ,
    17. Ellis MJ,
    18. Paik S,
    19. Wood WC,
    20. Ravdin P,
    21. Keane MM,
    22. Gomez Moreno HL,
    23. Reddy PS,
    24. Goggins TF,
    25. Mayer IA,
    26. Brufsky AM,
    27. Toppmeyer DL,
    28. Kaklamani VG,
    29. Atkins JN,
    30. Berenberg JL,
    31. Sledge GW
    : Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 373(21): 2005-2014, 2015. PMID:26412349, DOI:10.1056/NEJ Moa1510764
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  19. ↵
    1. Carlson JJ,
    2. Roth JA
    : The impact of the oncotype dx breast cancer assay in clinical practice: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Breast Cancer Res Treat 141(1): 13-22, 2013. PMID:23974828, DOI:10.1007/s10549-013-2666-z
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  20. ↵
    1. Sparano JA,
    2. Gray RJ,
    3. Makower DF,
    4. Pritchard KI,
    5. Albain KS,
    6. Hayes DF,
    7. Geyer CE Jr..,
    8. Dees EC,
    9. Goetz MP,
    10. Olson JA Jr..,
    11. Lively T,
    12. Badve SS,
    13. Saphner TJ,
    14. Wagner LI,
    15. Whelan TJ,
    16. Ellis MJ,
    17. Paik S,
    18. Wood WC,
    19. Ravdin PM,
    20. Keane MM,
    21. Gomez Moreno HL,
    22. Reddy PS,
    23. Goggins TF,
    24. Mayer IA,
    25. Brufsky AM,
    26. Toppmeyer DL,
    27. Kaklamani VG,
    28. Berenberg JL,
    29. Abrams J,
    30. Sledge GW Jr..
    : Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer. N Engl J Med 379(2): 111-121, 2018. PMID:29860917, DOI:10.1056/NEJMoa1804710
    OpenUrl
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Anticancer Research: 39 (3)
Anticancer Research
Vol. 39, Issue 3
March 2019
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
  • Back Matter (PDF)
  • Ed Board (PDF)
  • Front Matter (PDF)
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 Anticancer Research.

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.
One-step Nucleic Acid Amplification Can Identify Sentinel Node-negative Breast Cancer Patients With Excellent Prognosis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from Anticancer Research
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the Anticancer Research web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
2 + 12 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
One-step Nucleic Acid Amplification Can Identify Sentinel Node-negative Breast Cancer Patients With Excellent Prognosis
KENZO SHIMAZU, TOMOHIRO MIYAKE, JUN OKUNO, YASUTO NAOI, TOMONORI TANEI, MASAFUMI SHIMODA, NAOFUMI KAGARA, SEUNG JIN KIM, SHINZABURO NOGUCHI
Anticancer Research Mar 2019, 39 (3) 1447-1454; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13261

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Reprints and Permissions
Share
One-step Nucleic Acid Amplification Can Identify Sentinel Node-negative Breast Cancer Patients With Excellent Prognosis
KENZO SHIMAZU, TOMOHIRO MIYAKE, JUN OKUNO, YASUTO NAOI, TOMONORI TANEI, MASAFUMI SHIMODA, NAOFUMI KAGARA, SEUNG JIN KIM, SHINZABURO NOGUCHI
Anticancer Research Mar 2019, 39 (3) 1447-1454; DOI: 10.21873/anticanres.13261
Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Abstract
    • Patients and Methods
    • Results
    • Discussion
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • Standard ultra-staging compared to one-step nucleic acid amplification for the detection of sentinel lymph node metastasis in endometrial cancer patients: a retrospective cohort comparison
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Efficacy and Safety of Lenvatinib After Progression on First-line Atezolizumab Plus Bevacizumab Treatment in Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma Patients
  • Efficacy and Safety of Platinum-based Chemotherapy With Bevacizumab Followed by Bevacizumab Maintenance for Recurrent Ovarian, Fallopian Tube, and Primary Peritoneal Cancer During PARP Inhibitor Therapy: A Multicenter Retrospective Study
  • Real-world Data of Palliative First-line Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy for Head and Neck Cancer
Show more Clinical Studies

Similar Articles

Keywords

  • Breast cancer
  • Sentinel lymph node
  • prognosis
  • one-step nucleic acid amplification
Anticancer Research

© 2023 Anticancer Research

Powered by HighWire