Back

Heterogeneity of survival outcomes in ypN1 breast cancer after neoadjuvant therapy: The role of residual nodal burden in axillary de-escalation

Luz, F. A. C. d.; Araujo, R. A. d.; Araujo, L. B. d.; Silva, M. J. B.

2026-03-05 oncology
10.64898/2026.03.04.26347623 medRxiv
Show abstract

BackgroundThe management of residual axillary disease after neoadjuvant therapy (NAT) remains controversial, as current recommendations often treat ypN1 breast cancer as a homogeneous entity despite potential prognostic heterogeneity. Evidence supporting uniform axillary surgical strategies across different levels of residual nodal burden is limited. We investigated whether survival associations related to axillary surgical evaluation differ according to residual nodal burden in ypN1 disease, using an adjuvant cohort to validate a SEER-based proxy for surgical extent. MethodsPatients with 1-3 positive lymph nodes were identified in the SEER database (2000-2022) and stratified into neoadjuvant (NAT; n=30,560) and adjuvant (AT; n=197,586) cohorts. Axillary surgical evaluation was categorized as limited (2-3 examined nodes) or extensive ([≥]10 examined nodes). Survival was analyzed using Kaplan-Meier methods and log-logistic accelerated failure-time models, adjusted with inverse probability of treatment weighting. ResultsIn the ypN1 cohort, limited axillary evaluation was not associated with inferior overall survival among patients with a single residual positive node (IPTW-adjusted HR: 1.15, p=0.134; time ratio [TR]: 0.86, p=0.184). In contrast, limited evaluation was associated with worse survival in patients with two positive nodes (HR: 1.70, 95%CI 1.54-1.87; TR: 0.58, 95%CI 0.53-0.64). The findings were similar when using breast cancer-specific survival as the endpoint. ConclusionsSurvival associations related to axillary surgical evaluation after NAT vary according to residual nodal burden. Axillary de-escalation appears feasible in patients with a single residual positive node but cannot be extrapolated to those with multiple residual nodes, underscoring heterogeneity within ypN1 disease.

Matching journals

The top 5 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
npj Breast Cancer
23 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
18.2%
2
JNCI Cancer Spectrum
10 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.7%
3
Breast Cancer Research
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
11.7%
4
PLOS ONE
5266 papers in training set
Top 25%
6.6%
5
Cancers
213 papers in training set
Top 1%
5.4%
50% of probability mass above
6
Annals of Oncology
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
5.1%
7
European Journal of Cancer
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
4.3%
8
International Journal of Cancer
49 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.7%
9
Clinical Cancer Research
64 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
2.7%
10
Frontiers in Oncology
103 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
11
BMC Cancer
67 papers in training set
Top 1%
2.1%
12
JAMA Network Open
130 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.1%
13
British Journal of Cancer
49 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.9%
14
Scientific Reports
3612 papers in training set
Top 51%
1.9%
15
Nature Communications
5641 papers in training set
Top 44%
1.9%
16
BMJ Open
601 papers in training set
Top 10%
1.5%
17
eLife
5828 papers in training set
Top 53%
1.4%
18
PeerJ
308 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.3%
19
Diagnostics
50 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.1%
20
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2444 papers in training set
Top 42%
0.8%
21
Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention
20 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.6%
22
The Journal of Pathology
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%
23
Cancer Medicine
26 papers in training set
Top 1%
0.6%