The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Axillary Dissection vs No Axillary Dissection in Women With Invasive Breast Cancer and Sentinel Node Metastasis: A Randomized Clinical Trial
Open accessAbstract
CONTEXT: Sentinel lymph node dissection (SLND) accurately identifies nodal metastasis of early breast cancer, but it is not clear whether further nodal dissection affects survival. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effects of complete axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) on survival of patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN) metastasis of breast cancer. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PATIENTS: The American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Z0011 trial, a phase 3 noninferiority trial conducted at 115 sites and enrolling patients from May 1999 to December 2004. Patients were women with clinical T1-T2 invasive breast cancer, no palpable adenopathy, and 1 to 2 SLNs containing metastases identified by frozen section, touch preparation, or hematoxylin-eosin staining on permanent section. Targeted enrollment was 1900 women with final analysis after 500 deaths, but the trial closed early because mortality rate was lower than expected. INTERVENTIONS: All patients underwent lumpectomy and tangential whole-breast irradiation. Those with SLN metastases identified by SLND were randomized to undergo ALND or no further axillary treatment. Those randomized to ALND underwent dissection of 10 or more nodes. Systemic therapy was at the discretion of the treating physician. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Overall survival was the primary end point, with a noninferiority margin of a 1-sided hazard ratio of less than 1.3 indicating that SLND alone is noninferior to ALND. Disease-free survival was a secondary end point. RESULTS: Clinical and tumor characteristics were similar between 445 patients randomized to ALND and 446 randomized to SLND alone. However, the median number of nodes removed was 17 with ALND and 2 with SLND alone. At a median follow-up of 6.3 years (last follow-up, March 4, 2010), 5-year overall survival was 91.8% (95% confidence interval [CI], 89.1%-94.5%) with ALND and 92.5% (95% CI, 90.0%-95.1%) with SLND alone; 5-year disease-free survival was 82.2% (95% CI, 78.3%-86.3%) with ALND and 83.9% (95% CI, 80.2%-87.9%) with SLND alone. The hazard ratio for treatment-related overall survival was 0.79 (90% CI, 0.56-1.11) without adjustment and 0.87 (90% CI, 0.62-1.23) after adjusting for age and adjuvant therapy. CONCLUSION: Among patients with limited SLN metastatic breast cancer treated with breast conservation and systemic therapy, the use of SLND alone compared with ALND did not result in inferior survival. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00003855.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Fisher, B., Anderson, S., Bryant, J., Margolese, R. G., Deutsch, M., Fisher, E. R., Jeong, J.-H., & Wolmark, N. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa022152 · Cited by 6,249
The pathogenesis of cancer metastasis: the ‘seed and soil’ hypothesis revisited
Fidler, I. J. (2003) · Nature Reviews Cancer · doi:10.1038/nrc1098 · Cited by 4,686
Veronesi, U., Cascinelli, N., Mariani, L., Greco, M., Saccozzi, R., Luini, A., Aguilar, M., & Marubini, E. (2002) · New England Journal of Medicine · doi:10.1056/nejmoa020989 · Cited by 4,450
Cited by
Harbeck, N., Penault-Llorca, F., Cortes, J., Gnant, M., Houssami, N., Poortmans, P., Ruddy, K., Tsang, J., & Cardoso, F. (2019) · Nature Reviews Disease Primers · doi:10.1038/s41572-019-0111-2 · Cited by 3,024
Reporting of Noninferiority and Equivalence Randomized Trials: An Extension of the CONSORT Statement
Piaggio, G., Elbourne, D. R., Altman, D. G., Pocock, S. J., Evans, S. J. W., & CONSORT Group, F. T. (2006) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.295.10.1152 · Cited by 1,153
Delivering affordable cancer care in high-income countries
Sullivan, R., Peppercorn, J., Sikora, K., Zalcberg, J., Meropol, N. J., Amir, E., Khayat, D., Boyle, P., Autier, P., Tannock, I. F., et al. (2011) · The Lancet Oncology · doi:10.1016/s1470-2045(11)70141-3 · Cited by 718
Circulating Tumor Cells Predict Survival in Early Average-to-High Risk Breast Cancer Patients
Rack, B., Schindlbeck, C., Jückstock, J., Andergassen, U., Hepp, P., Zwingers, T., Friedl, T. W. P., Lorenz, R., Tesch, H., Fasching, P. A., et al. (2014) · JNCI: Journal of the National Cancer Institute · doi:10.1093/jnci/dju066 · Cited by 615
“Furthermore, because axillary operation will increasingly be confined to sentinel node biopsy, CTCs could be a helpful tool for selection of highrisk patients who might benefit from a more aggressive dose-dense chemotherapy regimen (27,28).”
BackgroundDeep learning radiomics can predict axillary lymph node status in early-stage breast cancer
Zheng, X., Yao, Z., Huang, Y., Yu, Y., Wang, Y., Liu, Y., Mao, R., Li, F., Xiao, Y., Wang, Y., et al. (2020) · Nature Communications · doi:10.1038/s41467-020-15027-z · Cited by 607
Metadata
- Authors
- Giuliano, A. E.
- Venue
- JAMA
- Publisher
- American Medical Association (AMA)
- Published
- 2011-02-09
- Volume
- 305
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 569
- ISSN
- 0002-9955 (ISSN-L)
- 0098-7484
- OpenAlex
- W2096785769
- Cited by
- 2,942
- References
- 4
- FWCI
- 89.89
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Axillary Dissection vs No Axillary Dissection in Women With Invasive Breast Cancer and Sentinel Node Metastasis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1001/jama.2011.90
- The paper
- Giuliano, A. E. (2011). Axillary Dissection vs No Axillary Dissection in Women With Invasive Breast Cancer and Sentinel Node Metastasis: A Randomized Clinical Trial. JAMA. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2011.90
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.