scholarly journals Clinical practice guidelines for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with early-stage breast cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing-Ming Ye ◽  
Bao-Liang Guo ◽  
Qian Liu ◽  
Fei Ma ◽  
Hong-Jin Liu ◽  
...  
BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e032636
Author(s):  
Frances Rapport ◽  
Andrea L Smith ◽  
Anne E Cust ◽  
Graham J Mann ◽  
Caroline G Watts ◽  
...  

IntroductionSentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a diagnostic procedure developed in the 1990s. It is currently used to stage patients with primary cutaneous melanoma, provide prognostic information and guide management. The Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines state that SLNB should be considered for patients with cutaneous melanoma >1 mm in thickness (or >0.8 mm with high-risk pathology features). Until recently, sentinel lymph node (SLN) status was used to identify patients who might benefit from a completion lymph node dissection, a procedure that is no longer routinely recommended. SLN status is now also being used to identify patients who might benefit from systemic adjuvant therapies such as anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy or BRAF-directed molecular targeted therapy, treatments that have significantly improved relapse-free survival for patients with resected stage III melanoma and improved overall survival of patients with unresectable stage III and stage IV melanoma. Australian and international data indicate that approximately half of eligible patients receive an SLNB.Methods and analysisThis mixed-methods study seeks to understand the structural, contextual and cultural factors affecting implementation of the SLNB guidelines. Data collection will include: (1) cross-sectional questionnaires and semistructured interviews with general practitioners and dermatologists; (2) semistructured interviews with other healthcare professionals involved in the diagnosis and early definitive care of melanoma patients and key stakeholders including researchers, representatives of professional colleges, training organisations and consumer melanoma groups; and (3) documentary analysis of documents from government, health services and non-government organisations. Descriptive analyses and multivariable regression models will be used to examine factors related to SLNB practices and attitudes. Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval has been granted by the University of Sydney. Results will be disseminated through publications and presentations to clinicians, patients, policymakers and researchers and will inform the development of strategies for implementing SLNB guidelines in Australia.


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (28_suppl) ◽  
pp. 48-48
Author(s):  
Christina Ahn Minami ◽  
Ava F. Bryan ◽  
Anna C. Revette ◽  
Rachel A. Freedman ◽  
Tari A. King ◽  
...  

48 Background: Trial data show that omission of surgical axillary staging does not affect overall survival in women >70 with cT1N0 hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancer, and the Society of Surgical Oncology’s Choosing Wisely recommendations advise against routine use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with early-stage HR+ cancers. Despite this, almost 80% of women eligible for omission still undergo SLNB. We sought to explore oncologists’ perspectives of omission of SLNB in this patient population. Methods: We conducted an exploratory qualitative study using semi-structured telephone interviews with surgical, medical, and radiation breast oncologists throughout North America from 3/2020 to 1/2021. Purposive snowball sampling ensured a range of practice types. Interviews were transcribed and a team trained in qualitative analysis undertook thematic analysis guided by grounded theory to identify emergent themes. Results: Participants included sixteen surgical, six medical, and seven radiation oncologists (55% female) (Table). Overall, while oncologists in all fields expressed acceptance regarding SLNB omission in certain women >70 with cT1N0 HR+ disease, many viewed it as a complex choice based on patient comorbidities, chronologic age, patient preferences, and disease factors. Although patients’ physiologic age and life expectancy were also important decisional factors, almost all participants assessed these subjectively despite knowing that validated tools existed. Most surgeons perceived the data backing the Choosing Wisely recommendation as weak, although knowledge of specific supporting studies was low. While all participants agreed that SLNB omission does not affect survival, several radiation oncologists expressed anxiety about resultant increased regional recurrence risk. In the absence of known nodal status, medical and radiation oncologists stated they were more likely to order additional imaging, rely on OncotypeDX scores to make systemic therapy decisions, add high tangents, and be reluctant to offer partial breast irradiation. Conclusions: While surgeons are aware of the Choosing Wisely recommendation, high SLNB rates in patients eligible for omission may be driven by perceptions of the quality of the supporting data and differing ideas regarding appropriate candidacy for omission. There are downstream effects of SLNB omission on medical and radiation oncology treatment decision making and surgeons should engage in multidisciplinary discussion prior to surgery.[Table: see text]


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document