Surgery to Remove Sentinel Lymph Nodes With or Without Removing Lymph Nodes in the Armpit in Treating Women With Breast Cancer
A Randomized, Phase III Clinical Trial to Compare Sentinel Node Resection to Conventional Axillary Dissection in Clinically Node-Negative Breast Cancer Patients
3 other identifiers
interventional
5,611
3 countries
78
Brief Summary
RATIONALE: Removing the sentinel lymph nodes and examining them under a microscope may help plan more effective surgery for breast cancer. It is not yet known if surgery to remove the sentinel lymph nodes is more effective with or without removal of the lymph nodes in the armpit in treating breast cancer. PURPOSE: Randomized phase III trial to compare the effectiveness of surgery to remove the sentinel lymph nodes with or without removal of lymph nodes in the armpit in treating women who have breast cancer.
Trial Health
Trial Health Score
Automated assessment based on enrollment pace, timeline, and geographic reach
participants targeted
Target at P75+ for phase_3 breast-cancer
Started May 1999
Longer than P75 for phase_3 breast-cancer
78 active sites
Health score is calculated from publicly available data and should be used for screening purposes only.
Trial Relationships
Click on a node to explore related trials.
Study Timeline
Key milestones and dates
Study Start
First participant enrolled
May 1, 1999
CompletedFirst Submitted
Initial submission to the registry
November 1, 1999
CompletedFirst Posted
Study publicly available on registry
January 28, 2003
CompletedPrimary Completion
Last participant's last visit for primary outcome
September 1, 2010
CompletedStudy Completion
Last participant's last visit for all outcomes
February 1, 2014
CompletedResults Posted
Study results publicly available
December 13, 2017
CompletedDecember 13, 2017
November 1, 2017
11.3 years
November 1, 1999
May 4, 2017
November 14, 2017
Conditions
Keywords
Outcome Measures
Primary Outcomes (6)
Morbidity - Number of Participants With Residual Shoulder Abduction Deficit
Morbidity as measured by residual shoulder abduction deficit. Shoulder Abduction Deficit definition: Shoulder range of motion decreased by greater than or equal to 10% as compared with that measured prior to surgery.
Before and after surgery (within 30 days of randomization)
Morbidity - Number of Participants With Residual Arm Volume Difference
Morbidity as measured by residual arm volume difference. Residual Arm Volume Difference definition: Arm volume differences greater than or equal to 10% as compared with that measured prior to surgery
before and after surgery (within 30 days of randomization)
Morbidity - Number of Participants With Residual Arm Numbness
Morbidity as measured by residual arm numbness
before and after surgery (within 30 days of randomization)
Morbidity - Number of Participants With Residual Arm Tingling
Morbidity as measured by residual arm tingling
before and after surgery (within 30 days of randomization)
Overall Survival
Measured at the time from randomization to any death to determine the percentage of patients alive at 8 years
8 years
Disease-free Survival as Measured by Breast Cancer Recurrence, Any Second Primary Cancer, and Death From Any Cause in Patients Without a Prior Event.
Measured at time from randomization to recurrence, second primary, or death to determine the percentage of patients disease free at 8 years.
8 years
Secondary Outcomes (4)
Pathology Investigation of Sentinel Nodes in Sentinel Node Negative Patients to Identify a Group Who Were Potentially at Increased Risk of Systemic Recurrence
From the time of randomization until 5 years
Pathology Investigation of Sentinel Nodes in Sentinel Node Negative Patients to Identify a Group Who Were Potentially at Increased Risk of Systemic Recurrence
From the time of randomization until 5 years
The Percentage of Technically Successful Sentinel Node Resections as Measured by the Proportion of Patients for Whom at Least One Sentinel Node is Identified.
At time of surgery (within 30 days of randomization)
Sensitivity of the Sentinel Node to Determine Presence of Nodal Metastases.
At time of surgery (within 30 days of randomization)
Study Arms (2)
Arm I: Conventional axillary dissection
ACTIVE COMPARATORSentinel node resection immediately followed by axillary dissection
Arm II: Sentinel node resection followed by node examination
EXPERIMENTALSentinel node resection followed by node examination then axillary dissection if positive sentinel node.
Interventions
Sentinel node resection immediately followed by axillary dissection.
Sentinel node resection followed by node examination then axillary dissection if positive sentinel node. No axillary dissection for negative sentinel node.
Eligibility Criteria
Contact the study team to discuss eligibility requirements. They can help determine if this study is right for you.
Sponsors & Collaborators
- NSABP Foundation Inclead
- National Cancer Institute (NCI)collaborator
Study Sites (78)
MBCCOP - Gulf Coast
Mobile, Alabama, 36688, United States
University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences
Little Rock, Arkansas, 72205, United States
City of Hope Comprehensive Cancer Center
Duarte, California, 91010-3000, United States
Loma Linda University Cancer Institute at Loma Linda University Medical Center
Loma Linda, California, 92354, United States
Sutter Breast Cancer Group
Sacramento, California, 95819-5156, United States
Kaiser Permanente Medical Center/Kaiser Foundation Hospital - San Diego
San Diego, California, 92120, United States
Stanford Cancer Center at Stanford University Medical Center
Stanford, California, 94305-5408, United States
Hartford Hospital
Hartford, Connecticut, 06102-5037, United States
MBCCOP - Howard University Cancer Center
Washington D.C., District of Columbia, 20060, United States
Halifax Medical Center
Daytona Beach, Florida, 32114, United States
Baptist Regional Cancer Institute - Jacksonville
Jacksonville, Florida, 32207, United States
University of Miami Sylvester Cancer Center
Miami, Florida, 33136, United States
CCOP - Mount Sinai Medical Center
Miami Beach, Florida, 33140, United States
Sarasota Memorial Hospital
Sarasota, Florida, 34239, United States
Cancer Research Center of Hawaii
Honolulu, Hawaii, 96813, United States
MBCCOP-Cook County Hospital
Chicago, Illinois, 60612, United States
Creticos Cancer Center at Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center
Chicago, Illinois, 60657, United States
CCOP - Illinois Oncology Research Association
Peoria, Illinois, 61602, United States
Methodist Cancer Center at Methodist Hospital
Indianapolis, Indiana, 46206-1367, United States
CCOP - Northern Indiana CR Consortium
South Bend, Indiana, 46601, United States
CCOP - Iowa Oncology Research Association
Des Moines, Iowa, 50309-1016, United States
CCOP - Wichita
Wichita, Kansas, 67214-3882, United States
Stanley S. Scott Cancer Center at Louisiana State University Medical Center - New Orleans
New Orleans, Louisiana, 70112, United States
Tulane University Medical Center
New Orleans, Louisiana, 70112, United States
Eastern Maine Medical Center
Bangor, Maine, 04401, United States
Franklin Square Hospital Center
Baltimore, Maryland, 21237, United States
Cancer Research Center at Boston Medical Center
Boston, Massachusetts, 02118, United States
University of Massachusetts Memorial Medical Center - University Campus
Worcester, Massachusetts, 01655, United States
CCOP - Michigan Cancer Research Consortium
Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48106, United States
Josephine Ford Cancer Center at Henry Ford Hospital
Detroit, Michigan, 48202, United States
Michigan State University
East Lansing, Michigan, 48824, United States
CCOP - Grand Rapids
Grand Rapids, Michigan, 49503, United States
CCOP - Kalamazoo
Kalamazoo, Michigan, 49007-3731, United States
CCOP - Beaumont
Royal Oaks, Michigan, 48073-6769, United States
Providence Cancer Institute at Providence Hospital
Southfield, Michigan, 48075-9975, United States
CCOP - Kansas City
Kansas City, Missouri, 64131, United States
CCOP - Montana Cancer Consortium
Billings, Montana, 59101, United States
Methodist Hospital Cancer Center at Nebraska Methodist Hospital - Omaha
Omaha, Nebraska, 68114, United States
Cancer Institute of New Jersey
New Brunswick, New Jersey, 08903, United States
Newark Beth Israel Medical Center
Newark, New Jersey, 07112, United States
New York Oncology Hematology, P.C. - Albany Regional Cancer Center
Albany, New York, 12208, United States
CCOP - Southeast Cancer Control Consortium
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27104-4241, United States
Comprehensive Cancer Center at Wake Forest University
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, 27157-1082, United States
CCOP - Merit Care Hospital
Fargo, North Dakota, 58122, United States
Akron City Hospital
Akron, Ohio, 44312, United States
Aultman Hospital Cancer Center at Aultman Health Foundation
Canton, Ohio, 44710, United States
Jewish Hospital of Cincinnati, Incorporated
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45236, United States
Charles M. Barrett Cancer Center at University Hospital
Cincinnati, Ohio, 45267-0502, United States
Ireland Cancer Center
Cleveland, Ohio, 44106-5065, United States
CCOP - Columbus
Columbus, Ohio, 43206, United States
CCOP - Dayton
Kettering, Ohio, 45429, United States
CCOP - Columbia River Oncology Program
Portland, Oregon, 97213, United States
Geisinger Medical Center
Danville, Pennsylvania, 17822-2001, United States
Kimmel Cancer Center at Thomas Jefferson University - Philadelphia
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 19107-5541, United States
Allegheny General Hospital
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 15212-4772, United States
Reading Hospital and Medical Center
Reading, Pennsylvania, 19612-6052, United States
CCOP - MainLine Health
Wynnewood, Pennsylvania, 19096, United States
CCOP - Upstate Carolina
Spartanburg, South Carolina, 29303, United States
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
San Antonio, Texas, 78284-7811, United States
Utah Valley Regional Medical Center - Provo
Provo, Utah, 84604, United States
Huntsman Cancer Institute
Salt Lake City, Utah, 84112, United States
Vermont Cancer Center at University of Vermont
Burlington, Vermont, 05401-3498, United States
Virginia Oncology Associates - Newport News
Newport News, Virginia, 23606, United States
MBCCOP - Massey Cancer Center
Richmond, Virginia, 23298-0037, United States
Puget Sound Oncology Consortium
Seattle, Washington, 98109, United States
CCOP - Northwest
Tacoma, Washington, 98405-0986, United States
Camcare Health
Charleston, West Virginia, 25304, United States
Medical College of Wisconsin Cancer Center
Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 53226, United States
Saint John Regional Hospital
Saint John, New Brunswick, E2L 4L2, Canada
Toronto Sunnybrook Regional Cancer Centre
Toronto, Ontario, M4N 3M5, Canada
St. Michael's Hospital - Toronto
Toronto, Ontario, M5B 1W8, Canada
Princess Margaret Hospital
Toronto, Ontario, M5G 2M9, Canada
Centre Hospitalier de l'Universite de Montreal
Montreal, Quebec, H2L-4M1, Canada
Royal Victoria Hospital - Montreal
Montreal, Quebec, H3A 1A1, Canada
Jewish General Hospital - Montreal
Montreal, Quebec, H3T 1E2, Canada
St. Mary's Hospital Center
Montreal, Quebec, H3T 1M5, Canada
Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Quebec
Québec, Quebec, G1R 2J6, Canada
MBCCOP - San Juan
San Juan, 00927-5800, Puerto Rico
Related Publications (11)
Land SR, Ritter MW, Costantino JP, Julian TB, Cronin WM, Haile SR, Wolmark N, Ganz PA. Compliance with patient-reported outcomes in multicenter clinical trials: methodologic and practical approaches. J Clin Oncol. 2007 Nov 10;25(32):5113-20. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2007.12.1749.
PMID: 17991930BACKGROUNDWeaver DL, Le UP, Dupuis SL, Weaver KA, Harlow SP, Ashikaga T, Krag DN. Metastasis detection in sentinel lymph nodes: comparison of a limited widely spaced (NSABP protocol B-32) and a comprehensive narrowly spaced paraffin block sectioning strategy. Am J Surg Pathol. 2009 Nov;33(11):1583-9. doi: 10.1097/PAS.0b013e3181b274e7.
PMID: 19730364RESULTLand SR, Kopec JA, Lee M, et al.: Quality of life in breast cancer patients receiving sentinel-node (SN) biopsy alone or with axillary dissection (AD): results from NSABP protocol B-32. [Abstract] J Clin Oncol 26 (Suppl 15): A-9533, 2008.
RESULTJulian TB, Anderson SJ, Fourchotte V, et al.: Is completion axillary dissection always required after a positive sentinel node biopsy? NSABP B-32. [Abstract] Breast Cancer Res Treat 106 (1): A-51, S15, 2007.
RESULTJulian TB, Anderson SJ, Fourchotte V, et al.: Is intraoperative cytology of sentinel nodes useful and predictive for non-sentinel axillary nodes? NSABP B-32. [Abstract] Breast Cancer Res Treat 106 (1): A-3001, 2007.
RESULTKrag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Ashikaga T, Weaver DL, Miller BJ, Jalovec LM, Frazier TG, Noyes RD, Robidoux A, Scarth HM, Mammolito DM, McCready DR, Mamounas EP, Costantino JP, Wolmark N; National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project. Technical outcomes of sentinel-lymph-node resection and conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in patients with clinically node-negative breast cancer: results from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase III trial. Lancet Oncol. 2007 Oct;8(10):881-8. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(07)70278-4.
PMID: 17851130RESULTJulian B, Fourchotte V, Anderson S, et al.: Predictive factors that identify patients not requiring a sentinel node biopsy: continued analysis of the NSABP B-32 sentinel node trial. [Abstract] Breast Cancer Res Treat 100 (Suppl 1): A-2003, S80-1, 2006.
RESULTWeaver DL, Krag DN, Manna EA, Ashikaga T, Waters BL, Harlow SP, Bauer KD, Julian TB. Detection of occult sentinel lymph node micrometastases by immunohistochemistry in breast cancer. An NSABP protocol B-32 quality assurance study. Cancer. 2006 Aug 15;107(4):661-7. doi: 10.1002/cncr.22074.
PMID: 17024757RESULTHarlow SP, Krag DN, Julian TB, Ashikaga T, Weaver DL, Feldman SA, Klimberg VS, Kusminsky R, Moffat FL Jr, Noyes RD, Beitsch PD. Prerandomization Surgical Training for the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) B-32 trial: a randomized phase III clinical trial to compare sentinel node resection to conventional axillary dissection in clinically node-negative breast cancer. Ann Surg. 2005 Jan;241(1):48-54. doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000149429.39656.94.
PMID: 15621990RESULTWeaver DL, Ashikaga T, Krag DN, Skelly JM, Anderson SJ, Harlow SP, Julian TB, Mamounas EP, Wolmark N. Effect of occult metastases on survival in node-negative breast cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011 Feb 3;364(5):412-21. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1008108. Epub 2011 Jan 19.
PMID: 21247310DERIVEDKrag DN, Anderson SJ, Julian TB, Brown AM, Harlow SP, Costantino JP, Ashikaga T, Weaver DL, Mamounas EP, Jalovec LM, Frazier TG, Noyes RD, Robidoux A, Scarth HM, Wolmark N. Sentinel-lymph-node resection compared with conventional axillary-lymph-node dissection in clinically node-negative patients with breast cancer: overall survival findings from the NSABP B-32 randomised phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2010 Oct;11(10):927-33. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(10)70207-2.
PMID: 20863759DERIVED
MeSH Terms
Conditions
Condition Hierarchy (Ancestors)
Results Point of Contact
- Title
- Director, Department of Regulatory Affairs
- Organization
- NSABP Foundation, Inc
Study Officials
- PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
Norman Wolmark, MD
NSABP Foundation Inc
Publication Agreements
- PI is Sponsor Employee
- No
- Restriction Type
- LTE60
- Restrictive Agreement
- Yes
Study Design
- Study Type
- interventional
- Phase
- phase 3
- Allocation
- RANDOMIZED
- Masking
- NONE
- Purpose
- TREATMENT
- Intervention Model
- PARALLEL
- Sponsor Type
- NETWORK
- Responsible Party
- SPONSOR
Study Record Dates
First Submitted
November 1, 1999
First Posted
January 28, 2003
Study Start
May 1, 1999
Primary Completion
September 1, 2010
Study Completion
February 1, 2014
Last Updated
December 13, 2017
Results First Posted
December 13, 2017
Record last verified: 2017-11