SEARCH

SEARCH BY CITATION

Keywords:

  • breast carcinoma;
  • axillary lymph node metastases;
  • Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER);
  • multivariate analysis

Abstract

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. REFERENCES

BACKGROUND

Over the past 20 years the proportion of invasive breast carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 cm has increased progressively. Information regarding the effect of clinical and histologic characteristics on the frequency of lymph node metastases associated with small invasive breast carcinomas is limited.

METHODS

A review of Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data was performed using cases diagnosed between January 1988 through December 1993. A total of 12,950 patients with invasive breast carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 cm undergoing a resection of the primary tumor and an axillary lymph node dissection were included in this study. The effect of clinical and histologic characteristics on the frequency of lymph node metastases was reviewed.

RESULTS

The frequency of lymph node metastases associated with T1a tumors was less than that observed from T1b tumors (9.6% vs. 14.3%; P < 0.001). Tumors with favorable histology (mucinous, papillary, and tubular carcinomas) had a lower frequency of lymph node metastases compared with all other histologic types (3.9% vs. 13.9%; P < 0.001). Increasing histologic grade was associated with an increased risk of lymph node metastases ranging from 7.8% in Grade 1 tumors to 21.0% in Grade 4 tumors (P < 0.001). Increasing patient age was associated with a progressively decreasing frequency of associated axillary lymph node metastases ranging from 22.6% in women age < 40 years to 10.2% in women age ≥ 70 years (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Cases in which an axillary lymph node dissection can be avoided are those with an associated frequency of lymph node metastases ≤ 5%, including T1a and T1b mucinous and tubular carcinomas, T1a papillary carcinomas, and T1a Grade 1 carcinomas. Cancer 1999;85:1530–6. © 1999 American Cancer Society.

Over the past 20 years screening mammography has become utilized increasingly and the quality of mammography has improved progressively.1, 2 The proportion of invasive breast carcinomas measuring < 1 cm was 5.4% of all cases identified in the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program between 1977 and 1982.3 In the subsequent 5-year time period (1983-1987), the proportion of carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 cm increased to 14.4%.4 More recently, Cady et al. reported that breast tumors measuring ≤ 1.0 cm accounted for 28% and 29%, respectively, of invasive breast malignancies diagnosed at two New England hospitals between 1989 and 1993.5 It is anticipated that the proportion of small invasive breast carcinomas will continue to rise, and the median greatest dimension of invasive breast carcinoma cases will be 1.0 cm in the near future.6

In women with invasive breast carcinomas measuring ≤ 1.0 cm, the detection of axillary lymph node metastases is the most important factor in determining whether adjuvant systemic therapy is recommended.7, 8 The reported frequency of axillary lymph node metastases associated with invasive breast malignancies measuring ≤ 1.0 cm ranges from 0-57% for T1a breast carcinomas and 7-37% for T1b breast carcinomas.3, 4, 9–15 In several recent series reporting a low frequency of axillary lymph node metastases, the authors have suggested that routine axillary lymph node dissection may be avoided in selected subsets of patients with small invasive breast carcinomas.5, 16 The avoidance of axillary lymph node dissections in selected patients has potential benefits, including significant health care savings and the prevention of morbidity associated with this procedure. The desire to perform axillary lymph node dissections selectively is balanced by the necessity of identifying those patients with lymph node metastases who would benefit from adjuvant systemic therapy.

As the frequency of small invasive breast carcinoma increases, the need to establish optimal clinical management guidelines is becoming increasingly important. The purpose of this study was to examine the effect of common clinical and histologic factors on the frequency of lymph node metastases associated with small invasive breast carcinomas.

METHODS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. REFERENCES

Cases for the study cohort were identified from data collected by nine population-based cancer registries that are part of the SEER Program of the NCI. The SEER Program collects data on cancer incidence from registries in various areas, including the states of Connecticut, Iowa, New Mexico, Utah, and Hawaii and the metropolitan areas of Detroit, San Francisco, Seattle-Puget Sound, and Atlanta.

The SEER registries reported a total of 105,234 in situ and invasive female breast carcinoma cases during the inclusive period of January 1, 1988 to December 31, 1993. These cases included 26,314 cases in which the tumors were ≤ 1 cm in size. The following cases were excluded from the analysis: 6474 cases diagnosed with in situ lesions, 20 cases that were not microscopically confirmed, 10 noncarcinoma cases, 6 inflammatory carcinomas, 523 cases with extension upgrading the primary lesion to a pathologic T4 classification, 2931 cases in which no lymph nodes were examined, 3111 cases in which 1-9 lymph nodes were examined, and 289 cases in which the number of lymph nodes examined was unknown. After these exclusions, the study cohort was comprised of 12,950 invasive breast carcinoma cases.

The affect of clinical and histologic factors including primary tumor size, histologic type, histologic grade, tumor location, and patient age on the frequency of axillary lymph node metastases was reviewed. The recorded tumor size was determined utilizing abstracting and coding guidelines for cancer registrars. Tumor size was determined in priority order from the pathology report, surgical report, physical examination, and mammographic examination. In cases with tumor in more than one specimen the composite size was recorded only if indicated by a pathologist. Tumor size was not recorded in cases treated with preoperative radiation or systemic therapy. Tumors recorded as having a microscopic focus or foci of malignancy or those measuring ≤ 0.5 cm were classified as T1a malignancies. Tumors measuring 0.6-1.0 cm were classified as T1b malignancies.17 Histologic diagnoses were recorded in the SEER registry utilizing the International Classification of Diseases-Oncology (ICD-O) classification system. Histologic grading of tumors was performed with “well,” “moderately,” and “poorly” differentiated tumors approximating to Grades 1, 2, and 3. Undifferentiated or anaplastic tumors corresponded to a histologic Grade 4. Tumors located in the upper inner and lower inner quadrants were grouped as the medial breast, and tumors located in the upper outer and lower outer quadrants were grouped as the lateral breast. Tumors located in the subareolar region were recorded as the central breast. Cases were grouped by age as 0-39 years, 40-49 years, 50-59 years, 60-69 years, and ≥ 70 years.

Data Analysis

Comparisons of the frequency of axillary lymph node metastases between different subgroups of the cohort were evaluated with a chi-square test. All reported P values were two-sided. In analyses examining grade and tumor size, the Cochran-Armitage test was used to test for trend. Cases with unknown grade were not included in analyses evaluating tumor grade.

Logistic regression was used to test for the significance of clinical and pathologic variables on lymph node metastases. All analysis was performed using SAS statistical software (SAS Institute, Inc., Cary, NC).

RESULTS

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. REFERENCES

The relation between the number of axillary lymph nodes examined and the frequency of lymph node metastases is shown in Table 1. Overall, the frequency of axillary lymph node metastases increased 24.7% for T1a carcinomas and 20.2% for T1b carcinomas when cases with 1-5 examined lymph nodes were compared with cases in which ≥ 10 lymph nodes were examined. The proportion of cases with detected lymph node metastases varied significantly based on the number of lymph nodes examined (P = 0.004). Cases in which fewer than ten lymph nodes were examined histologically were excluded from the remaining analyses.

Table 1. Proportion of Cases with Axillary Lymph Node Metastases as a Function of the Number of Examined Lymph Nodes
Size (cm)Proportion with positive lymph nodes (%)
1–5 (n = 759)6–9 (n = 2352)≥10 (n = 12,950)
≥0.57.710.09.6
0.6–1.011.912.414.3
Total10.811.913.2

The relation between tumor size and the frequency of lymph node metastases is shown in Table 2. Over the size range of ≤ 0.3-1.0 cm, the proportion of carcinomas with any lymph node metastases gradually increased from 7.4% to 17.4%. In cases involving a single microscopic focus or multiple foci of malignancy, the proportion of carcinomas associated with any lymph node metastases was 10.6%. The frequency of lymph node metastases associated with T1a tumors was less than that of T1b tumors (9.6% vs. 14.3%; P < 0.001). As a proportion of all cases, those associated with four or more lymph node metastases progressively increased with increasing primary tumor size.

Table 2. Proportion of Cases with Axillary Lymph Node Metastases as a Function of Tumor Size
Lymph node metastasesMicroTumor size (cm)P value
≤0.30.40.50.60.70.80.91.0
  1. Micro: microscopic focus or foci of malignancy.

Absent
%89.492.691.890.190.289.487.286.782.6
No.83131243810559511184169211263646< 0.001
Present
%10.67.48.29.99.810.612.813.317.4
No.992539116103141249173770

The relation between histology and the frequency of lymph node metastases is shown in Table 3. The frequency of axillary lymph node metastases associated with T1a infiltrating ductal carcinomas and infiltrating lobular carcinomas was 9.9% and 14.8%, respectively. The difference in the frequency of lymph node metastases is attributable in large part to differences among the subgroup of microscopically measured tumors. Among T1a carcinomas, microscopic foci of malignancy were associated more frequently with infiltrating lobular carcinoma than with infiltrating ductal carcinoma (38.2% vs. 29.1%). In cases with microscopic foci of malignancy the frequency of lymph node metastases was 18.7% for infiltrating lobular carcinoma and 11.6% for infiltrating ductal carcinoma. In T1b primary tumors the frequency of associated lymph node metastases was 15.1% and 15.2% for infiltrating ductal carcinoma and infiltrating lobular carcinoma, respectively. Tumors with favorable histology (mucinous, papillary, and tubular carcinomas) had a lower frequency of lymph node metastases than all other histologic types (3.9% vs. 13.9%; P < 0.001).

Table 3. Proportion of Cases with Lymph Node Metastases as a Function of Tumor Size and Histology
Size, cmHistologyP value
IDCILCMedullaryMucinousPapillaryTubularAdenocarcinoma NOSOther
  1. IDC: infiltrating ductal carcinoma; ILC: infiltrating lobular carcinoma; NOS: not otherwise specified.

≤0.52189 (9.9%)196 (14.8%)11 (18.2%)58 (0.0%)24 (0.0%)119 (5.0%)251 (7.6%)67 (9.0%)
0.6–1.08137 (15.1%)625 (15.2%)73 (17.8%)256 (3.5%)74 (6.8%)289 (4.2%)419 (14.1%)162 (11.1%)
Total10326 (14.0%)821 (15.1%)84 (17.9%)314 (2.9%)98 (5.1%)408 (4.4%)670 (11.6%)229 (10.5%)< 0.001

The frequency of lymph node metastases was related to the histologic grade as shown in Table 4. A large proportion of tumors (45.2%) included in the SEER registry were ungraded. When T1a and T1b tumors were compared the proportion of Grade 1 tumors decreased with increasing tumor size (P < 0.001) and the proportion of Grade 2 and Grade 3 tumors increased with increasing tumor size (P < 0.001). The proportion of Grade 4 tumors was not significantly different over the size range studied (P = 0.208). Increasing histologic grade was associated with an increased risk of lymph node metastases ranging from 7.8% in Grade 1 tumors to 21.0% in Grade 4 tumors (P < 0.001).

Table 4. Proportion of Cases with Axillary Lymph Node Metastases as a Function of Tumor Size and Histologic Grade
Size (cm)Histologic gradeP value
1234Unknown
≤0.5365 (3.0%)587 (9.4%)289 (15.2%)47 (12.8%)1627 (10.0%)
0.6–1.01349 (9.0%)2759 (14.6%)1518 (20.0%)182 (23.1%)4227 (13.3%)
Total1714 (7.8%)3346 (13.7%)1807 (19.3%)229 (21.0%)5854 (12.4%)< 0.001

The frequency of lymph node metastases varied with the breast primary location as shown in Table 5. Carcinomas of the medial and central breast had a frequency of lymph node metastases that was lower than that in carcinomas of the lateral breast. In cases in which the primary tumor was located in overlapping or in unspecified regions, the frequency of lymph node metastases was similar to the frequency of lymph node metastases in the breast as a whole. Variation in the frequency of lymph node metastases among the primary tumor locations in the breast (medial, central, lateral) was significant (P < 0.001).

Table 5. Proportion of Cases with Axillary Lymph Node Metastases as a Function of Tumor Size and Location
Size (cm) (%)Primary siteP value
Upper outer quadrantLower outer quadrantCentralUpper inner quadrantLower inner quadrantOthera
  • a

    Other includes overlapping sites and unspecified locations.

≤0.51171 (10.8%)144 (8.3%)183 (7.1%)239 (6.3%)122 (9.8%)1056 (9.5%)
0.6–1.04056 (16.0%)579 (17.6%)605 (14.4%)963 (9.9%)615 (12.2%)3217 (13.3%)
Total5227 (14.8%)723 (15.8%)788 (12.7%)1202 (9.2%)737 (11.8%)4273 (12.4%)< 0.001

The frequency of associated lymph node metastases progressively decreased with increasing age as shown in Table 6 (P < 0.001). Despite a lower frequency of lymph node metastases with increasing age, the frequency of axillary lymph node metastases associated with T1a and T1b tumors was 7.0% and 11.0%, respectively, in women age ≥ 70 years. The maximal risk of axillary lymph node metastases (25.9%) was detected in women age < 40 years with T1b tumors.

Table 6. Proportion of Cases with Axillary Lymph Node Metastases as a Function of Tumor Size and Age
Size (cm)Age (yrs)P value
0–3940–4950–5960–69≥70
≤0.5157 (13.4%)493 (12.4%)638 (9.2%)841 (9.9%)786 (7.0%)
0.6–1.0444 (25.9%)1449 (17.3%)1974 (15.7%)3122 (13.5%)3046 (11.0%)
Total601 (22.6%)1942 (16.3%)2612 (14.1%)3963 (12.7%)3832 (10.2%)< 0.001

All variables that were found to be statistically significant based on the univariate analyses were included in a multivariate modeling of the data. Variables were entered into the model in a stepwise building process and interactions were evaluated at each stage of the modeling. None of the interactions evaluated was statistically significant, so the final model included only main effects. In the final model (Table 7 ), tumor size, histologic grade, location, and age at diagnosis all remained as significant independent predictors of the frequency of lymph node metastases.

Table 7. Association Between the Frequency of Axillary Lymph Node Metastases and Clinical/Histologic Characteristicsa
VariableOdds ratioP value
  • a

    Eight hundred fifty-four cases with unknown grade were excluded from this analysis.

  • b

    Cases diagnosed as infiltrating ductal carcinoma, infiltrating lobular carcinoma, medullary, adenocarcinoma, and other breast carcinoma (unfavorable) were compared with cases diagnosed as mucinous, papillary, and tubular breast carcinoma (favorable).

Tumor size, T1b vs. T1a1.78< 0.0001
Histology, unfavorable vs. favorableb2.35< 0.0012
Grade, 2 vs. 11.70< 0.0001
Grade, 3 vs. 12.38< 0.0001
Grade, 4 vs. 12.74< 0.0001
Location, central vs. medial1.61< 0.0056
Location, lateral vs. medial1.83< 0.0001
Location, other vs. medial1.32< 0.0205
Age, 0–39 yrs vs. ≥ 70 yrs2.56< 0.0001
Age, 40–49 yrs vs. ≥ 70 yrs1.71< 0.0001
Age, 50–59 yrs vs. ≥ 70 yrs1.40< 0.0014
Age, 60–69 yrs vs. ≥ 70 yrs1.24< 0.0254

Carcinomas with an associated frequency of axillary lymph node metastases ≤ 5% were T1a and T1b mucinous and tubular carcinomas, T1a papillary carcinomas, and T1a Grade 1 carcinomas. Invasive breast carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 cm with clinical and histologic features associated with a frequency of lymph node metastases ≤ 5% accounted for 8.2% of the case cohort.

DISCUSSION

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. REFERENCES

In cases of invasive breast carcinoma both the frequency of any axillary lymph node metastases and the number of lymph nodes detected with metastatic disease increase as the number of examined lymph nodes increases, up to a plateau at ten examined lymph nodes.18–20 Based on these observations, the evaluation of a minimum of ten lymph nodes was chosen for this study. The exclusion of cases in which fewer than ten axillary lymph nodes were examined may indicate to some that there was a selection bias to include only cases with unfavorable primary tumor characteristics or cases with clinically palpable axillary lymph nodes. Under these circumstances the frequency of axillary lymph node metastases would be elevated artificially.

The influence of the number of lymph nodes examined on the frequency of lymph node metastases was explored separately by the evaluation of cases in which one to five and six to nine lymph nodes were examined. The frequency of lymph node metastases associated with T1a and T1b carcinomas, in cases for which at least 1 lymph node was histologically examined, was 9.5% and 13.9%, respectively. These frequencies did not differ markedly from the frequencies of lymph node metastases associated with cases in which ten or more lymph nodes were examined. Based on the low proportion of cases with one to nine examined lymph nodes and the frequency of lymph node metastases in this group, the data from this study suggest that there was not a significant selection bias in the performance of an axillary lymph node dissection rather than an axillary lymph node sampling in cases with unfavorable characteristics. We conclude that the proportion of lymph node metastases noted in this large patient cohort with ten or more histologically examined lymph nodes represents the frequency of lymph node metastases when an adequate axillary lymph node dissection is performed.

This study has three limitations related to a lack of central histologic review. First, the method of tumor size determination was not recorded. As a result the proportion of lymph node metastases associated with the most precise measurement, microscopic measurement of the invasive tumor size, could not be determined. Second, the definition of microscopic invasion varied among the reporting institutions. It is anticipated that acceptance of a uniform definition of microscopic invasion (now restricted to invasive carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 mm beyond the basement membrane) will result in future studies demonstrating a lower frequency of lymph node metastases than noted in this series.21 Third, cases with multicentric and multifocal involvement are not well defined in the SEER database. In the case of T1a infiltrating lobular carcinoma, a higher proportion of cases with microscopic foci of malignancy and a higher frequency of lymph node metastases was noted when compared with infiltrating ductal carcinoma. We attribute these differences to an increased frequency of multicentricity, multifocality, and indistinct tumor margins among infiltrating lobular carcinomas.22–24 Among infiltrating lobular carcinomas identified as limited to microscopic foci of malignancy the factors mentioned earlier likely resulted in an underestimation of the extent of disease in an unknown percentage of cases. Despite these limitations, the frequency of lymph node metastases associated with microscopically invasive carcinomas and the progressive increase in the frequency of lymph node metastases with increasing tumor size demonstrate that invasive carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 cm are associated with a significant frequency of lymph node metastases.

The necessity of performing routine axillary lymph node dissections recently has been questioned based on a failure to demonstrate a statistically significant survival advantage among any of the treatment arms in NSABP (National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project) B-04.25 Selective avoidance of axillary lymph node dissection has been suggested for cases of invasive breast carcinoma that will require adjuvant systemic therapy based on the characteristics of the primary tumor alone, patient age > 70 years, or for those cases with a low likelihood of having lymph node metastases.5, 11, 13, 16, 26–29 Recently, the threshold value below which the frequency of associated lymph node metastases is “low enough” to avoid an axillary lymph node dissection has been suggested to be ≤ 5%.30 It generally is accepted that pure tubular carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 cm, which have a frequency of associated axillary lymph node metastases < 5%, do not require an axillary lymph node dissection.31–33

In the future, it may be possible to perform therapeutic axillary lymph node dissections selectively. The accuracy of the sentinel lymph node biopsy technique at specialized centers indicates that it is promising technique in the management of breast malignancies. However, this technique can be technically challenging with significant variation in success rates among surgeons.34 Confirmation of reproducibility and a low false-negative rate is required prior to recommending that this technique be applied in the general medical community.35 Currently, the performance of an axillary lymph node dissection is the only method by which the presence or absence of lymph node metastases can be determined reliably. Due to the substantial change in the management of breast carcinoma with lymph node metastases, a Level I and Level II axillary lymph node dissection is recommended to stage the majority of cases with invasive breast carcinomas measuring ≤ 1 cm in greatest dimension.

A variety of histologic and clinical factors previously have been noted to affect the frequency of axillary lymph node metastases in breast malignancies.3, 11, 25, 31, 32 In this current study (limited to T1a and T1b breast carcinomas) lower size, favorable histology (mucinous, papillary, and tubular carcinomas), lower histologic grade, and increasing age were associated significantly with a lower frequency of axillary lymph node metastases. Statistically significant variation also was noted in the frequency of lymph node metastases among tumor location sites in the breast. The clinical relevance of variation in the frequency of lymph node metastases based on tumor location is questionable. Future analyses including combinations of factors utilized in this current study will permit the frequency of axillary lymph node metastases to be more precisely determined. Irrespective of other considerations, such as a limited life expectancy, an axillary lymph node dissection reasonably can be avoided in cases that lack palpable axillary adenopathy and have an associated frequency of lymph node metastases similar to that of tubular carcinomas (≤ 5%).30 Based on the data presented in this study it is unnecessary to perform a routine axillary lymph node dissection in cases of T1a and T1b mucinous and tubular carcinomas, T1a papillary carcinomas, and T1a Grade 1 carcinomas unless palpable axillary adenopathy is present.

Acknowledgements

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. REFERENCES

The authors thank Ms. Tsui Ying-Kau for contributing to the statistical analysis of this project.

REFERENCES

  1. Top of page
  2. Abstract
  3. METHODS
  4. RESULTS
  5. DISCUSSION
  6. Acknowledgements
  7. REFERENCES
  • 1
    Osteen RT, Cady B, Chmiel JS, Clive RE, Doggett RLS, Friedman MA, et al. 1991 National survey of carcinoma of the breast by the commission on cancer. J Am Coll Surg 1994; 178:213-9.
  • 2
    Newcomb PA, Lantz PM. Recent trends in breast cancer incidence, mortality, and mammography. Breast Cancer Res Treat 1993; 28:97-106.
  • 3
    Carter CL, Allen C, Henson DE. Relation of tumor size, lymph node status, and survival in 24,740 breast cancer cases. Cancer 1989; 63:181-7.
  • 4
    Gloeckler-Ries LA, Henson DE, Harras A. Survival from breast cancer according to tumor size and nodal status. Surg Oncol Clin N Am 1994; 3:35-53.
  • 5
    Cady B, Stone MD, Schuler JG, Thakur R, Wanner MA, Lavin PT. The new era in breast cancer. Invasion, size, and nodal involvement dramatically decreasing as a result of mammographic screening. Arch Surg 1996;131:301-8.
  • 6
    Cady B. Traditional and future management of nonpalpable breast cancer. Am Surg 1997; 63:55-8.
  • 7
    National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Panel. Consensus statement: treatment of early-stage breast cancer. Monogr Natl Cancer Inst 1992; 11:1-5.
  • 8
    NIH Consensus Conference. Treatment of early-stage breast cancer. JAMA 1991; 265:391-5.
  • 9
    Seidman JD, Schnaper LA, Aisner SC. Relationship of the size of the invasive component of the primary breast carcinoma to axillary lymph node metastasis. Cancer 1995; 75:65-71.
  • 10
    Silverstein MJ, Gierson ED, Waisman JR, Colburn WJ, Gamagami P. Predicting axillary node positivity in patients with invasive carcinoma of the breast by using a combination of T category and palpability. J Am Coll Surg 1995; 180:700-4.
  • 11
    Halverson KJ, Taylor ME, Perez CA, Garcia DM, Myerson R, Philpott G, et al. Management of the axilla in patients with breast cancers one centimeter or smaller. Am J Clin Oncol 1994; 17:461-6.
  • 12
    Ciatto S, Del Turco MR, Bonardi R, Cataliotti L, Distante V, Cardona G, et al. Non-palpable lesions of the breast detected by mammography: review of 1182 consecutive histologically confirmed cases. Eur J Cancer 1994; 30A:40-4.
  • 13
    Lin PP, Allison DC, Wainstock J, Miller KD, Dooley WC, Friedman N, et al. Impact of axillary lymph node dissection on the therapy of breast cancer patients. J Clin Oncol 1993; 11:1536-44.
  • 14
    Wilhelm MC, Edge SB, Cole DD, DeParedes E, Frierson HF. Nonpalpable invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg 1991; 213:600-5.
  • 15
    Schwartz GF, Feig SA, Rosenberg AL, Patchefsky AS, Schwartz AB. Staging and treatment of clinically occult breast cancer. Cancer 1984; 53:1379-84.
  • 16
    Silverstein MJ, Gierson ED, Waisman JR, Senofsky GM, Colburn WJ, Gamagami P. Axillary lymph node dissection for T1a breast carcinoma. Is it indicated? Cancer 1994;73:664-7.
  • 17
    American Joint Committee on Cancer. American Joint Committee on Cancer manual for staging of cancer. 4th edition. Philadelphia: J.B. Lippincott Co., 1992.
  • 18
    Fisher B, Wolmark N, Bauer M, Redmond C, Gebhardt M. The accuracy of clinical nodal staging and of limited axillary dissection as a determinant of histologic nodal status in carcinoma of the breast. Surg Gynecol Obstet 1981; 152:765-72.
  • 19
    Kiricuta CI, Tausch J, Math D. A mathematical model of axillary lymph node involvement based on 1446 complete axillary dissections in patients with breast carcinoma. Cancer 1992; 69:2496-501.
  • 20
    Axelsson CK, Mouridsen HT, Zedeler K. Axillary dissection of level I and II lymph nodes is important in breast cancer classification. Eur J Cancer 1992; 28A:1415-8.
  • 21
    American Joint Committee on Cancer. American Joint Committee on Cancer cancer staging manual. 5th edition. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1997.
  • 22
    Dixon JM, Anderson TJ, Page DL, Lee D, Duffy SW, Stewert HJ. Infiltrating lobular carcinoma of the breast: an evaluation of the incidence and consequence of bilateral disease. Br J Surg 1983; 70:513-6.
  • 23
    Lesser ML, Rosen PP, Kinne DW. Multicentricity and bilaterality in invasive breast carcinoma. Surgery 1982; 91:234-40.
  • 24
    Rosen PP. Invasive mammary carcinoma. In: HarrisJR, LippmanME, MorrowM, HellmanS, editors. Diseases of the breast. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven, 1996:420-1.
  • 25
    Fisher B, Redmond C, Fisher ER, Bauer M, Wolmark N, Wickerham DL, et al. Ten-year results of a randomized clinical trial comparing radical mastectomy and total mastectomy with or without radiation. N Engl J Med 1985; 312:674-81.
  • 26
    Mustafa IA, Cole B, Wanebo HJ, Bland KI, Chang HR. The impact of histopathology on nodal metastases in minimal breast cancer. Arch Surg 1997; 132:384-91.
  • 27
    Feigelson BJ, Acosta JA, Feigelson HS, Findley A, Saunders EL. T1 breast carcinoma in women 70 years of age and older may not require axillary lymph node dissection. Am J Surg 1996; 172:487-90.
  • 28
    Cady B, Stone MD, Wayne J. New therapeutic possibilities in primary invasive breast cancer. Ann Surg 1993; 218:338-49.
  • 29
    Margolese RG, Foster RS. Tamoxifen as an alternative to surgical resection for selected geriatric patients with primary breast cancer. Arch Surg 1989; 124:548-51.
  • 30
    Craig PH, Silverstein MJ. Small invasive carcinomas: the role of axillary lymph node dissection. In: BlandKI, Copeland, EM, editors. The breast: comprehensive management of benign and malignant diseases. 2nd edition. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1998:107293.
  • 31
    McDivitt RW, Boyce W, Gersell D. Tubular carcinoma of the breast. Clinical and pathological observations concerning 135 cases. Am J Surg Pathol 1982;6:401-11.
  • 32
    Peters GN, Wolff M, Haagensen CD. Tubular carcinoma of the breast. Clinical pathologic correlations based on 100 cases. Ann Surg 1981;193:138-49.
  • 33
    Morrow M. Role of axillary dissection in breast cancer management. Ann Surg Oncol 1996; 3:233-4.
  • 34
    Krag D, Weaver D, Ashikaga T, Moffat F, Klimberg VS, Shriver C, et al. The sentinel node in breast cancer. A multicenter validation study. N Engl J Med 1998;339:941-6.
  • 35
    McMasters KM, Giuliano AE, Ross MI, Reintgen DS, Hunt KK, Byrd DR, et al. Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy for breast cancer-not yet the standard of care. N Engl J Med 1998; 339:990-4.