AXillary Surgery After NeoAdjuvant Treatment (AXSANA)
|The safety and scientific validity of this study is the responsibility of the study sponsor and investigators. Listing a study does not mean it has been evaluated by the U.S. Federal Government. Know the risks and potential benefits of clinical studies and talk to your health care provider before participating. Read our disclaimer for details.|
|ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04373655|
Recruitment Status : Recruiting
First Posted : May 4, 2020
Last Update Posted : July 7, 2020
|Condition or disease|
For many decades, axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) has been considered standard of care in breast cancer (BC) patients. The procedure aimed at assessing the pN status to guide adjuvant therapy decisions as well as ensuring adequate locoregional control. However, ALND is associated with high morbidity and may therefore lead to reduced quality of life in BC patients.
In women undergoing primary surgery, ALND as a staging tool has been replaced by the less invasive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) without compromising the disease-free or overall survival (DFS, OS). Since then, the therapeutic benefit of ALND in patients with clinically occult metastasis in the sentinel lymph node (SLN) has been challenged as well. According to the current national and international guidelines (e.g. ESMO, NCCN, German S3 guideline and AGO recommendations) completion ALND can be safely omitted in selected patients with 1-2 positive sentinel lymph nodes.
The feasibility and safety of the SLNB after neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NACT) has been controversially discussed, particularly regarding women who initially presented with positive lymph nodes (cN+) and converted to ycN0 following NACT. In these patients, two large prospective multicenter trials reported a false-negative rate (FNR) of 12 and 14%, respectively, thus exceeding the generally accepted (albeit arbitrarily chosen) cutoff of 10%. The clinical relevance of an FNR > 10% and its impact on oncological endpoints (DFS, OS) remains unclear. For this reason, numerous national guidelines still recommend ALND in these patients.
Possible ways to further reduce the FNR in cN+ patients have been extensively discussed in the recent years. In 2016, a novel surgical approach (TAD = targeted axillary dissection) has been reported that consists of inserting a marking (e.g. a clip or a radioactive tracer) into the metastatic lymph node before NACT. In patients in whom the marked lymph node (target lymph node = TLN) and the sentinel node had been successfully removed, the FNR was as low as 1.4%. These retrospectively analyzed data from a prospective register support the hypothesis that TAD can improve the relatively low success rates of SLNB and reduce the long-term morbidity of patients undergoing axillary surgery in the neoadjuvant setting.
Several issues regarding currently used axillary staging techniques remain yet to be clarified. Based on the unclear evidence, the guideline recommendations for the cN+ → ycN0 patients differ strongly. The current ESMO guidelines state that (1) SLNB may be carried out in selected cases, and, if negative, further axillary surgery may be avoided and (2) the FNR of SLNB alone can be improved by marking the biopsied positive node(s) to verify the removal. In Germany, the S3 guideline (last version: 2020) recommends ALND in patients with initial nodal involvement. In contrast, the German Working Group Gynecological Oncology (AGO) changed their recommendations in 2019 and endorsed TAD as a technique of choice for this patient subgroup. In several European countries (Sweden, Norway, Finland) ALND is still considered standard of care for these patients. In others, such as Italy, most patients receive SLNB alone without marking and removing the target lymph node. In the current NCCN guidelines the TAD is considered an optional technique. A prospective analysis comparing different techniques regarding feasibility, safety, morbidity and surgical effort is urgently needed. Due to high complexity and discordant recommendations, a randomized trial comparing different techniques is hardly feasible and therefore would not clarify currently open issues within a reasonable timeframe.
Based on the lack of sufficient evidence and discrepancies between different national and institutional standards, the EUBREAST study group (www.eubreast.com) decided to initiate a prospective cohort study as an international project that aims at comparatively evaluating data on axillary staging after NACT.
|Study Type :||Observational [Patient Registry]|
|Estimated Enrollment :||3000 participants|
|Target Follow-Up Duration:||5 Years|
|Official Title:||A Prospective Multicenter Cohort Study to Evaluate Different Surgical Methods of Axillary Staging (Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy, Targeted Axillary Dissection, Axillary Dissection) in Clinically Node-positive Breast Cancer Patients Treated With Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy|
|Actual Study Start Date :||April 28, 2020|
|Estimated Primary Completion Date :||April 2030|
|Estimated Study Completion Date :||April 2030|
- Invasive disease-free survival (iDFS) [ Time Frame: 5 years ]iDFS is defined as time from surgery to the first clinical, radiological or histological diagnosis of invasive relapse
- Axillary recurrence rate [ Time Frame: 3 years ]Axillary recurrence is defined as radiological and/or histological diagnosis of tumor recurrence in the axilla
- Health-related quality of life [ Time Frame: 5 years ]Health-related QoL will be assessed with the EORTC Quality of life questionnaires
- Arm morbidity [ Time Frame: 5 years ]Arm morbidity will be assessed with the Lymph IFC questionnaire
To learn more about this study, you or your doctor may contact the study research staff using the contact information provided by the sponsor.
Please refer to this study by its ClinicalTrials.gov identifier (NCT number): NCT04373655
|Contact: Thorsten Kühn, Prof.||+49711 3103-3051 ext +email@example.com|
|Contact: Maggie Banys-Paluchowski, PD Dr.||firstname.lastname@example.org|
|Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, University of Aachen||Recruiting|
|Contact: Elmar Stickeler, Prof.|
|Anregiomed gKU Klinikum Ansbach||Recruiting|
|Contact: Martin C Koch, Dr.|
|Klinikum Aschaffenburg-Alzenau gGmbH||Recruiting|
|Contact: Michael Schrauder, PD Dr.|
|Marienhospital Bottrop gGmbH||Recruiting|
|Contact: Hans-Christian Kolberg, PD Dr.|
|Klinikum Esslingen GmbH||Recruiting|
|Contact: Thorsten Kühn, Prof.|
|Ev. Diakoniekrankenhaus Freiburg i. Br.||Recruiting|
|Contact: Dirk Watermann, Prof.|
|Contact: Benno Lex, Dr.|
|Universitätsfrauenklinik und Poliklinik, Klinikum-Südstadt Rostock||Recruiting|
|Contact: Steffi Hartmann, Dr.|
|Leopoldina-Krankenhaus der Stadt Schweinfurt GmbH||Recruiting|
|Contact: Michael Weigel, Prof.|
|Study Chair:||Thorsten Kühn, Prof.||EUROPEAN BREAST CANCER RESEARCH ASSOCIATION OF SURGICAL TRIALISTS|