期刊文献+

乳腺癌前哨淋巴结术中分子诊断的研究 被引量:4

Intra-operative GeneSearchTM BLN assay for detecting breast cancer metastases in sentinel lymph nodes
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的 评估乳腺癌前哨淋巴结(SLN)术中分子诊断--GeneSearchTM BLN Assay (BLNa)的诊断价值.方法 2009年2至6月,全国6家乳腺中心的479例乳腺癌患者入组本研究.SLN均垂直于长轴切割为1.5~3 mm组织块,术中奇数组织块行BLNa检测,术后偶数组织块行逐层切片病理检测(采用间隔150 μm的逐层切片HE染色,每个组织块取6张切片).214例患者的偶数组织块行术中快速冰冻病理(FS)检测,156例患者的所有组织块术中行印片细胞学(TIC)检测.结果 BLNa操作呈现良好的学习曲线,各中心的敏感性和特异性差异均无统计学意义(分别P=0.672;P=0.628),中位操作时间约35 min.以病例数为统计对象分析,BLNa的准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为91.4%、87.5%、92.9%、81.8%、95.3%,其敏感性与FS相似(84.5%,P=0.576),显著优于TIC(75.0%,P=0.049).以淋巴结数为统计对象分析,BLNa的准确性、敏感性、特异性、阳性预测值和阴性预测值分别为93.0%、85.6%、94.6%、76.6%、96.9%,其敏感性与FS相似(84.9%,P=0.885),显著优于TIC(70.0%,P=0.007).对于伴有宏转移的SLN,BLNa的敏感性为93.6%,与FS相似(95.6%,P=0.558),显著优于TIC(80.9%,P=0.011);对于伴有微转移的SLN,BLNa的敏感性为57.5%,有优于FS和TIC的趋势(分别44.4%,P=0.356;30.8%,P=0.094).结论 GeneSearchTM BLN Assay检测快速,易于操作,具有较高的准确性和可重复性,其敏感性优于FS和TIC,可作为SLN术中诊断的首选. Objective To evaluate the clinical value of GeneSearchTM BLN Assay as an intraoperative diagnostic method of sentinel lymph node (SLN) for breast cancer patients. Methods A total of 479 consecutive patients from six centers were involved in this prospective study. The SLNs were identified,dissected and then sectioned along the short axis into multiple blocks. The odd blocks were tested intraoperatively by the above-mentioned assay and the even blocks assessed post-operatively by histopathologic examination. The 4 -6 μm thick stepwise sectioning permanent HE slides were prepared every 150 μm and one block yielded 6 slides. In addition, the even blocks of 136 patients were prepared for frozen section (F S) and all blocks of 156 patients evaluated intra-operatively by touch imprint cytology (TIC). Results In the node basis analysis, its accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, positive predict value (PPV) and negative predict value (NPV) were 93.0%, 85.6%, 94. 6%, 76.6% and 96.9% respectively. Its sensitivity was similar to that of FS ( 84. 9%, P = 0. 885 ) and significantly higher than that of TIC (70. 0%, P = 0. 007 ).When assessing nodes with macro-metastases, its sensitivity was similar to that of FS (93.6% vs 95.6%,P =0. 558) and significantly higher than that of TIC (93.6% vs 80.9%, P = 0. 011 ). When assessing nodes with micro-metastases, it had a higher sensitivity than that of FS (57.5% vs 44.4%, P =0. 356) and TIC (57. 5% vs 30. 8%, P =0. 094). In the patient basis analysis, the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity,PPV and NPV were 91.4%, 87. 5%, 92. 9%, 81.8% and 95. 3% respectively. Its sensitivity was similar to that of FS (84. 5%, P =0. 576) and significantly higher than that of TIC (75.0%, P =0. 049). After adjustment, it had the accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, PPV and NPV of 91.7%, 83. 5%, 95.2%,88. 3% and 93.0% respectively. Its sensitivity was higher than that of FS (72. 1%, P = 0.054) and significantly higher than that of TIC ( 66. 7%, P= 0. 011 ). The two had no significant difference in the sensitivity and specificity. After a learning curve of around 10 cases, it could be performed in a median time of around 35 min. The threshold cycle time values of MG and CK-19 were 36 and 31 respectively. The type of metastases could be estimated approximately according to the cycle time values. The cycle time values of MG under 33 indicated SLN macro-metastases and those of 33 - 36 denoted micro-metastases. The values of CK-19 under 29 indicated SLN macro-metastases and those of 29 -31 denoted micro-metastases. Conclusion As an accurate and rapid intra-operative assay for breast sentinel lymph nodes, the GeneSearchTM BLN Assay may replace FS and TIC in general medical practice.
出处 《中华医学杂志》 CAS CSCD 北大核心 2011年第2期81-85,共5页 National Medical Journal of China
基金 基金项目:中国抗癌协会乳腺癌专业委员会CBCSG-001项目(CBCSG-001a,NCT00869674)
关键词 乳腺肿瘤 前哨淋巴结活组织检查 逆转录聚合酶链反应 Breast neoplasms Sentinel lymph node biopsy Reverse transcription-polymerasechain reaction
  • 相关文献

参考文献16

  • 1Veronesi U,Paganelli G,Viale G,et al.Sentinel lymph node biopsy and axillary dissection in breast cancer:results in a large series.J Natl Cancer Inet,1999,91:368-373.
  • 2Posther KE,Wilke LG,Giuliano AE.Sentinel lymph node dissection and the current status of American trials on breast lymphatic mapping.Semin Oncol,2004,31:426-436.
  • 3王永胜,欧阳涛,王启堂,苏逢锡,朱时光,吴炅,尉承泽,王水,曹苏生,李济宇.中国前哨淋巴结活检多中心协作研究CBCSG-001最新资料报告[J].中华乳腺病杂志(电子版),2009,3(3):8-12. 被引量:54
  • 4Cserni G,Bianchi S,Vezzosi V,et al.Variations in sentinel node isolated tumor cells/micrometastasis and non-sentinel node involvement rates according to different interpretations of the TNM definitions.Eur J Cancer,2008,44:2185-2191.
  • 5Goldhirsch A,Ingle JN,Gelber RD,et al.Thresholds for therapies:highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the Primary Therapy of Early Breast Cancer 2009.Ann Oncol,2009,20:1319-1329.
  • 6Silverstein MJ,Lagios MD,Recht A,et al.Image-detected breast cancer:state of the art diagnosis and treatment.J Am Coll Surg,2005,201:586-597.
  • 7van de Vrande S,Meijer J,Rijnders A,et al.The value of intraoperative frozen section examination of sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer.Eur J Surg Oncol,2009,35:276-280.
  • 8Chicken DW,Kocjian G,Falzon M,et al.Intraoprative touch imprint cytology for the diagnosis of sentinel lymph node metastases in breast cancer.Br J Surg,2006,93:573-576.
  • 9Tew K,Irwig L,Matthews A,et al.Meta-analysis of sentinel node imprint cytology in breast cancer.Br J Surg,2005,92:1068-1080.
  • 10Ishida M,Kitamura K,Kinoshita J,et al.Detection of micrometastssis in the sentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer.Surgery,2002,131:211-226.

共引文献53

同被引文献54

  • 1杨红健,胡桂女.早期乳腺癌腋窝前哨淋巴结活检的假阴性率及对策[J].肿瘤学杂志,2009,15(9):810-814. 被引量:4
  • 2Fleissig A, Fallowfield LJ, Langridge CI, et al. Post-operative arm morbidity and quality of life. Results of the ALMANAC random- ised trial comparing sentinel node biopsy with standard axillary treatment in the management of patients with early breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res Treat,2006,95 (3) :279-293.
  • 3Veronesi U, Paganelli G, Viale G, et al. A randomized compari- son of sentinel-node biopsy with routine axillary dissection in breast cancer. N Engl J Med,2003,349(6) :546-553.
  • 4Krag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB,et al. Sentinel4ymph-node re- section compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall sur- vival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lan- cet Onco1,2010,11 (10) :927-933.
  • 5Helyer LK, Coburn NG, Law CH, et al. Axillary staging is more accurate today than ever before: no increase in the false negative rate with wide-spread adoption of sentinel node technique. Breast Cancer Res Treat, 2007,106( Suppl 1 ) : s127-s128.
  • 6Goldhirsch A, Ingle JN, Gelber RD, et al. Thresholds for thera- pies : highlights of the St Gallen International Expert Consensus on the primary therapy of early breast cancer 2009. Ant, Onco1,2009, 20(8) :1319-1329.
  • 7Spillane AJ, Brennan ME. Accuracy of sentinel lymph node biopsy in large and muhifocal/muhicentric breast carcinoma-a systematic review. Eur J Surg Onco1,2011 , 37 ( 5 ) : 371-385.
  • 8Holwitt DM, Gillanders WE, Aft RL, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with muhicentric/muhifocal breast cancer: low false-negative rate and lack of axillary recurrence. Am J Surg, 2008,196 (4) : 562-565.
  • 9Port ER, Garcia-Etienne CA, Park J, et al. Reope:rative sentinel lymph node biopsy: a new frontier in the management of ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence. Ann Surg Oncol,2007,14(8 ) :2209-2214.
  • 10Nasser SM, Smith SG, Chagpar AB. The role of sentinel node bi- opsy in women undergoing prophylactic mastectomy. J Surg Res, 2010 ,164(2) :188-192.

引证文献4

二级引证文献7

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部