The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer.
Abstract
PURPOSE: We previously demonstrated increased detection of axillary metastases using sentinel lymphadenectomy (SLND) and immunohistochemistry. These methods have evolved and we now report our current use of these techniques and our most recent results of axillary staging with SLND. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred seven consecutive women (previously unreported) with breast cancer underwent SLND followed by completion axillary lymphadenectomy (ALND). All sentinel nodes were examined intraoperatively with frozen section and postoperatively with hematoxylin and eosin staining (H&E) plus immunohistochemical staining (IHC) using antibody to cytokeratin. The nonsentinel axillary nodes were examined with H&E, but not IHC. RESULTS: The median age was 56.6 years (range, 28 to 90). Most patients (58.9%) were postmenopausal, most primary tumors (62.6%) were palpable, and most operations (86.9%) were breast-conserving. The mean tumor size was 2.11 +/- 1.38 cm. Sentinel nodes were identified in 100 patients: 42 patients had metastases in sentinel nodes; of these, 28 (66.7%) had no other involved axillary nodes. On average, 1.8 +/- 1.1 sentinel nodes were examined and 20.3 +/- 7.8 nonsentinel nodes were removed. Of seven patients with no identified sentinel nodes, six had a tumor-negative axilla. SLND was 100% predictive of axillary status in these 100 women. CONCLUSION: In this population of breast cancer patients, SLND with frozen section and IHC was a minimally invasive, highly accurate intraoperative method of axillary staging. We are evaluating the elimination of routine ALND for sentinel-node negative women to minimize the morbidity associated with standard dissections. The ability to identify node-negative patients without ALND would be a welcome addition to the management of women with breast cancer.
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
Cited by
Giuliano, A. E., Ballman, K. V., McCall, L., Beitsch, P. D., Brennan, M. B., Kelemen, P. R., Ollila, D. W., Hansen, N. M., Whitworth, P. W., Blumencranz, P. W., et al. (2017) · JAMA · doi:10.1001/jama.2017.11470 · Cited by 1,912
Self-citationLyman, G. H., Giuliano, A. E., Somerfield, M. R., Benson, A. B., Bodurka, D. C., Burstein, H. J., Cochran, A. J., Cody, H. S., Edge, S. B., Galper, S., et al. (2005) · Journal of Clinical Oncology · doi:10.1200/jco.2005.08.001 · Cited by 1,887
Self-citationVan Zee, K. J., Manasseh, D.-M. E., Bevilacqua, J. L. B., Boolbol, S. K., Fey, J. V., Tan, L. K., Borgen, P. I., Cody, H. S., & Kattan, M. W. (2003) · Annals of Surgical Oncology · doi:10.1245/aso.2003.03.015 · Cited by 818
Langer, I., Guller, U., Berclaz, G., Koechli, O. R., Schaer, G., Fehr, M. K., Hess, T., Oertli, D., Bronz, L., Schnarwyler, B., et al. (2007) · Annals of Surgery · doi:10.1097/01.sla.0000245472.47748.ec · Cited by 353
Standard for Breast Conservation Therapy in the Management of Invasive Breast Carcinoma
Morrow, M., Strom, E. A., Bassett, L. W., Dershaw, D. D., Fowble, B., Giuliano, A., Harris, J. R., O'Malley, F., Schnitt, S. J., Singletary, S. E., et al. (2002) · CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians · doi:10.3322/canjclin.52.5.277 · Cited by 324
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- Giuliano, A. E., Jones, R. C., Brennan, M., & Statman, R.
- Venue
- Journal of Clinical Oncology
- Published
- 1997-06
- Volume
- 15
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 2345-2350
- ISSN
- 0732-183X (ISSN-L)
- 1527-7755
- OpenAlex
- W1955110002
- Cited by
- 1,096
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 32.21
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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: Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1200/jco.1997.15.6.2345
- The paper
- Giuliano, A. E., Jones, R. C., Brennan, M., & Statman, R. (1997). Sentinel lymphadenectomy in breast cancer. Journal of Clinical Oncology. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.1997.15.6.2345
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.