World Journal of Surgical Oncology (Jul 2023)

Prognosis and local treatment strategies of breast cancer patients with different numbers of micrometastatic lymph nodes

  • Shiping Luo,
  • Wenfen Fu,
  • Jingyi Lin,
  • Jie Zhang,
  • Chuangui Song

DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12957-023-03082-x
Journal volume & issue
Vol. 21, no. 1
pp. 1 – 10

Abstract

Read online

Abstract Background Lymph node micrometastasis is an important prognostic factor in breast cancer, but patients with different numbers of involved lymph nodes are all divided into the same N1mi stage without distinction. We designed this study to compare the prognosis and local treatment recommendations of N1mi breast cancer patients with different numbers of micrometastatic lymph nodes. Patients and methods A total of 27,032 breast cancer patients with T1-2N1miM0 stage from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database (2004–2019) who underwent breast surgery were included in this retrospective study. Patients were divided into three groups for prognosis comparison according to the number of micrometastatic lymph nodes: N1mi with 1 (Nmi = 1), 2 (Nmi = 2), or more (Nmi ≥ 3) involved lymph nodes. We explored the characteristics and survival outcomes of the population receiving different local treatments, including different axillary surgery types and whether receiving radiotherapy or not. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis were used to compare the overall survival (OS) and breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) in different groups. Stratified analyses and interaction analyses were also applied to explore the predictive significance of different involved lymph nodes numbers. Propensity score matching (PSM) method was utilized to balance the differences between groups. Results Univariate and multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that nodal status was an independent prognostic factor. After adjustment for other prognostic factors, there was a significant difference in prognosis between Nmi = 1 group and Nmi = 2 group [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 1.145, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.047–1.251, P = 0.003], and patients with Nmi ≥ 3 group had a significantly poorer prognosis (adjusted HR 1.679, 95% CI 1.589–2.407; P < 0.001). The proportion of N1mi patients only underwent sentinel lymph nodes biopsy (SLNB) gradually increased from 2010 (P trend < 0.001). After adjusting for other factors, N1mi patients who underwent axillary lymph nodes dissection (ALND) was associated with significant survival benefit than SLNB (adjusted HR 0.932, 95%CI 0.874–0.994; P = 0.033), the same goes for receiving radiotherapy (adjusted HR 1.107, 95%CI 1.030–1.190; P = 0.006). Further stratified analysis showed that in the SLNB subgroup, radiotherapy was associated with a significant survival benefit (HR 1.695, 95%CI 1.534–1.874; P < 0.001), whereas in the ALND subgroup, there was no significant prognostic difference with or without radiotherapy (HR 1.029, 95%CI 0.933–1.136; P = 0.564). Conclusion Our study indicates that the increasing number of lymph node micrometastases was associated a worse prognosis of N1mi breast cancer patients. In addition, ALND does provide a significant survival benefit for these patients, while the benefit from local radiotherapy may be of even greater importance.

Keywords