OpenLB
Open Library of Bioscience
Advanced Search
Cytopathology : official journal of the British Society for Clinical Cytology
Mar 27, 2025;

Optimising Axillary Staging in Resource-Constrained Settings: A Prospective Validation of Axillary Ultrasound and Touch Imprint Cytology in Predicting Pathologically Negative Axillae in cT2-3 Breast Cancer.

Balmik Chaturvedi, Muktesh Khandare, Devashish Mishra, Sanjay Kumar Yadav, Pawan Agarwal, Dhananjaya Sharma
Author Information
  1. Balmik Chaturvedi: Department of Pathology, NSCB Medical College, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India.
  2. Muktesh Khandare: Department of Pathology, NSCB Medical College, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India.
  3. Devashish Mishra: Department of Radiodiagnosis, NSCB Medical College, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India.
  4. Sanjay Kumar Yadav: Department of Surgery, NSCB Medical College, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India. ORCID
  5. Pawan Agarwal: Department of Surgery, NSCB Medical College, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India. ORCID
  6. Dhananjaya Sharma: Department of Surgery, NSCB Medical College, Jabalpur, Madhya Pradesh, India. ORCID
PMID: 40151007 DOI: 10.1111/cyt.13484

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Management of axillary lymph nodes (ALNs) in breast cancer patients remains pivotal for staging and planning therapeutic strategies. However, In low-resource settings, achieving accurate axillary staging while avoiding overtreatment remains a challenge as the majority of patients present with advanced stage. In this prospective validation study, we assessed the efficacy of axillary ultrasound (AUS) combined with touch imprint cytology (TIC) for predicting negative axillary status in cT2-3 breast cancer patients.
METHODS: This study was a prospective, single-centre validation study conducted in the Breast and Endocrine Unit of the Department of Surgery and the Department of Pathology in a tertiary teaching hospital in central India from September 2022 to April 2024. Eligible participants included adult female patients (aged ������18���years) with core needle biopsy-proven invasive breast cancer classified as cT2-3, cN0, and scheduled for primary surgical treatment. The primary outcomes were the Sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV) and accuracy of the AUS���+���TIC approach in predicting pathologically negative axillary status.
RESULTS: AUS���+���TIC had a sensitivity of 100% (95% CI: 47.82%-100%), a specificity of 100% (95% CI: 91.19%-100%) and an overall accuracy of 100% (95% CI: 92.13%-100%). There were no false negatives.
CONCLUSION: Our findings suggest that the combination of AUS���+���TIC provides a reliable technique with high diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity, and specificity for assessing ALN in low resource settings.

Keywords

ALND SLNB breast cancer touch imprint cytology ultrasound

References

  1. R. E. Mansel, L. Fallowfield, M. Kissin, et al., ���Randomized Multicenter Trial of Sentinel Node Biopsy Versus Standard Axillary Treatment in Operable Breast Cancer: The ALMANAC Trial,��� Journal of the National Cancer Institute 98, no. 9 (2006): 599���609, https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djj158.
  2. A. E. Giuliano, K. V. Ballman, L. McCall, et al., ���Effect of Axillary Dissection vs no Axillary Dissection on 10���Year Overall Survival Among Women With Invasive Breast Cancer and Sentinel Node Metastasis: The ACOSOG Z0011 (Alliance) Randomized Clinical Trial,��� Journal of the American Medical Association 318, no. 10 (2017): 918���926, https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.11470.
  3. O. D. Gentilini, E. Botteri, C. Sangalli, et al., ���SOUND Trial Group. Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy vs no Axillary Surgery in Patients With Small Breast Cancer and Negative Results on Ultrasonography of Axillary Lymph Nodes: The SOUND Randomized Clinical Trial,��� JAMA Oncology 9, no. 11 (2023): 1557���1564, https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2023.3759.
  4. N. Perez, S. Vidal���Sicart, G. Zanon, et al., ���A Practical Approach to Intraoperative Evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Breast Carcinoma and Review of the Current Methods,��� Annals of Surgical Oncology 12, no. 4 (2005): 313���321, https://doi.org/10.1245/ASO.2005.07.003.
  5. S. Kumar Yadav, D. Sharma, D. Bala Sharma, R. Kintu���Luwaga, C. K. Jha, and S. Shekhar, ���Barriers and Challenges in Providing Standard Breast Cancer Care in Low Resource Settings,��� Tropical Doctor 52, no. 4 (2022): 532���537, https://doi.org/10.1177/00494755221092899.
  6. A. Anand, A. Mishra, H. Damde, A. Saxena, S. K. Yadav, and D. Sharma, ���Molecular Profile and Clinico���Pathological Characteristics of Breast Cancer in Central India: First Investigative Report,��� Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology 13, no. 2 (2022): 421���425, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193���022���01502���0.
  7. V. Rathod, C. K. Jha, U. Sinha, et al., ���First Comprehensive Report of Clinicopathological Profile of Breast Cancer From Bihar, India,��� Indian Journal of Surgical Oncology 12, no. 3 (2021): 598���602, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13193���021���01404���7.
  8. S. Bharath, D. Sharma, S. K. Yadav, S. Shekhar, and C. K. Jha, ���A Systematic Review and Meta���Analysis of Touch Imprint Cytology and Frozen Section Biopsy and Their Comparison for Evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Node in Breast Cancer,��� World Journal of Surgery 47, no. 2 (2023): 478���488, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268���022���06800���w.
  9. R. Khanna, S. Bhadani, S. Khanna, M. Pandey, and M. Kumar, ���Touch Imprint Cytology Evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Node in Breast Cancer,��� World Journal of Surgery 35, no. 6 (2011): 1254���1259, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268���011���1094���7.
  10. S. Deo, A. Samaiya, P. Jain, et al., ���Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Assessment Using Intraoperative Imprint Cytology in Breast Cancer Patients: Results of a Validation Study,��� Asian Journal of Surgery 27, no. 4 (2004): 294���298, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1015���9584(09)60054���3.
  11. J. Chavda, A. Mishra, A. Silodia, et al., ���Validation Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Study in cN0 Axilla Using Low���Cost Dual Dye Technique: Potential Solution for Resource Poor Settings,��� Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 193, no. 1 (2022): 105���110, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10549���022���06556���w.
  12. I. Jatoi, J. R. Benson, and M. Toi, ���De���Escalation of Axillary Surgery in Early Breast Cancer,��� Lancet Oncology 17, no. 10 (2016): e430���e441, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470���2045(16)30311���4.
  13. R. Liang, J. Craik, E. S. Juhasz, and C. R. Harman, ���Imprint Cytology Versus Frozen Section: Intraoperative Analysis of Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Breast Cancer,��� ANZ Journal of Surgery 73, no. 8 (2003): 597���599, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1445���2197.2003.02728.x.
  14. K. Motomura, H. Inaji, Y. Komoike, et al., ���Intraoperative Sentinel Lymph Node Examination by Imprint Cytology and Frozen Sectioning During Breast Surgery,��� British Journal of Surgery 87, no. 5 (2000): 597���601, https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365���2168.2000.01423.x.
  15. F. Celebioglu, M. Sylvan, L. Perbeck, L. Bergkvist, and J. Frisell, ���Intraoperative Sentinel Lymph Node Examination by Frozen Section, Immunohistochemistry and Imprint Cytology During Breast Surgery���A Prospective Study,��� European Journal of Cancer 42, no. 5 (2006): 617���620, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2005.12.003.
  16. S. Upender, H. Mohan, U. Handa, and A. K. Attri, ���Intraoperative Evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Nodes in Breast Carcinoma by Imprint Cytology, Frozen Section and Rapid Immunohistochemistry,��� Diagnostic Cytopathology 37, no. 12 (2009): 871���875, https://doi.org/10.1002/dc.21120.
  17. L. Sun, G. Chen, Y. Zhou, et al., ���Clinical Significance of MSKCC Nomogram on Guiding the Application of Touch Imprint Cytology and Frozen Section in Intraoperative Assessment of Breast Sentinel Lymph Nodes,��� Oncotarget 8, no. 44 (2017): 78105���78112, https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.17490.
  18. V. Seenu, S. Mathur, S. Guduru, S. Vuthaluru, and A. Srivastava, ���Combined Frozen Section and Imprint Smear Assessment of Sentinel Node Improves Accuracy and Reduces False Negative Rates in Breast Cancer: A Prospective Study,��� Indian Journal of Surgery 84 (2022): 335���339, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12262���021���02877���0.
  19. N. Pathmanathan, J. Renthawa, J. R. French, et al., ���Intraoperative Sentinel Lymph Node Assessment in Breast Cancer: A Comparison of Rapid Diagnostic Method Based on CK19 mRNA Expression and Imprint Cytology,��� ANZ Journal of Surgery 84, no. 10 (2014): 730���734, https://doi.org/10.1111/ans.12668.
  20. M. Keshtgar, J. J. Zaknun, D. Sabih, et al., ���Implementing Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Programs in Developing Countries: Challenges and Opportunities,��� World Journal of Surgery 35, no. 6 (2011): 1159���1168, https://doi.org/10.1007/s00268���011���0956���3.
  21. T. Nagashima, M. Suzuki, H. Yagata, et al., ���Intraoperative Cytologic Diagnosis of Sentinel Node Metastases in Breast Cancer,��� Acta Cytologica 47, no. 6 (2003): 1028���1032, https://doi.org/10.1159/000326640.
  22. M. H. Leidenius, L. A. Krogerus, T. S. Toivonen, and K. J. von Smitten, ���The Feasibility of Intraoperative Diagnosis of Sentinel Lymph Node Metastases in Breast Cancer,��� Journal of Surgical Oncology 84, no. 2 (2003): 68���73, https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.10296.
  23. A. Mannell, B. Wium, and C. Thatcher, ���Intraoperative Examination of Sentinel Lymph Nodes Using Scrape Cytology,��� South African Journal of Surgery 52, no. 3 (2014): 75���78, https://doi.org/10.7196/sajs.1954.
Journal Article

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0axillarybreastcancerpatientsstudynegativecT2-3specificityaccuracyAUS���+���TIC100%95%CI:remainsstagingsettingsprospectivevalidationultrasoundtouchimprintcytologypredictingstatusBreastDepartmentprimarypredictivevaluesensitivityAxillaryBACKGROUND:ManagementlymphnodesALNspivotalplanningtherapeuticstrategiesHoweverlow-resourceachievingaccurateavoidingovertreatmentchallengemajoritypresentadvancedstageassessedefficacyAUScombinedTICMETHODS:single-centreconductedEndocrineUnitSurgeryPathologytertiaryteachinghospitalcentralIndiaSeptember2022April2024Eligibleparticipantsincludedadultfemaleaged������18���yearscoreneedlebiopsy-proveninvasiveclassifiedcN0scheduledsurgicaltreatmentoutcomesSensitivitypositivePPVNPVapproachpathologicallyRESULTS:4782%-100%9119%-100%overall9213%-100%falsenegativesCONCLUSION:findingssuggestcombinationprovidesreliabletechniquehighdiagnosticassessingALNlowresourceOptimisingStagingResource-ConstrainedSettings:ProspectiveValidationUltrasoundTouchImprintCytologyPredictingPathologicallyNegativeAxillaeCancerALNDSLNB

Similar Articles

Cited By

No available data.