Comment on “Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer in North Africa: A Retrospective Analysis of Feasibility, Safety, and Morbidity Reduction in a Real-World Setting”
PDF
Cite
Share
Request
Letter to Editor
VOLUME: 22 ISSUE: 4
P: 518 - 519
October 2026

Comment on “Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Breast Cancer in North Africa: A Retrospective Analysis of Feasibility, Safety, and Morbidity Reduction in a Real-World Setting”

Eur J Breast Health 2026;22(4):518-519
1. University of Health Sciences (Youcef El Khatib) Algiers, Algeria
No information available.
No information available
Received Date: 01.04.2026
Accepted Date: 04.04.2026
Online Date: 23.09.2026
Publish Date: 23.09.2026
PDF
Cite
Share
Request

Dear Editor,

We read with great interest the article by Belkhodja et al. (1) evaluating the implementation of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for early-stage breast cancer at the Maternity Center of Bizerte, Tunisia. This retrospective study of 64 patients compared SLNB with axillary lymph node dissection (ALND) and reported an 89% SLN detection rate using a dual-tracer technique (technetium-99m and methylene blue). The study demonstrates reduced postoperative morbidity in patients undergoing SLNB, including lower incidence of lymphedema, less hemoglobin loss, shorter hospital stay, less pain, and fewer limitations in arm mobility.

The study provides valuable insights, particularly through its detailed description of the SLNB technique and intraoperative procedures; comprehensive data collection from patient records, pathology reports, surgical logs, and follow-up; and its contribution of evidence from a previously underrepresented population.

However, several limitations should be noted. Providing additional details on patient characteristics, including age distribution and menopausal status, would not only help contextualize the observed outcomes but also allow a more precise comparison with international guidelines and facilitate interpretation of SLNB applicability across different patient subgroups (2).

Additionally, limited details regarding tumor grade and hormone receptor/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status restrict precise assessment of patient risk and consideration of omitting ALND or SLNB. Existing evidence highlights the importance of these parameters for informed patient selection and for guiding adjuvant therapy (3).

Furthermore, the study includes N1 patients; what criteria were used to decide whether to perform ALND after a positive SLNB? How do these criteria align with current guidelines that recommend omission in patients with one or two positive SLNs under defined conditions (4)? Additionally, could a longer follow-up period provide a more complete assessment of late recurrences, particularly among luminal subtypes? In patients receiving neoadjuvant chemotherapy (NAC), the absence of reported clipping of the target node may underestimate residual nodal disease, raising the possibility of false-negative SLNB results (5).

This study demonstrates the feasibility of SLNB and its benefits in reducing morbidity in a Tunisian setting, and highlights key aspects of its implementation.

Recent consensus suggests that SLNB may be safely omitted in select postmenopausal patients with favorable tumor characteristics, serving primarily as a staging tool rather than determining systemic therapy (2). Notably, the reported 11% SLNB failure rate appears to largely reflect cases with extensively involved nodes rather than procedural limitations.

Although the study is limited by its retrospective, single-center design and relatively small cohort, it nonetheless provides valuable real-world data. Careful patient selection, incorporation of targeted node clipping for NAC, and extended follow-up could further strengthen the safe application of axillary de-escalation strategies in similar settings, ultimately supporting evidence-based, individualized surgical management.

Keywords:
Breast cancer, sentinel lymph node biopsy, sentinel lymph nodes
Financial Disclosure: The author declared that this study received no financial support.

References

1
Belkhodja A, Chiba Y, Zaabar L, Jaafar W, Malak M, Bouassida M, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer in North Africa: a retrospective analysis of feasibility, safety, and morbidity reduction in a real-world setting. Eur J Breast Health. 2025; 22: 61-65. (
2
Park KU, Somerfield MR, Anne N, Brackstone M, Conlin AK, Couto HL, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in early-stage breast cancer: ASCO guideline update. J Clin Oncol. 2025; 43: 1720-1741. (
3
Reimer T, Stachs A, Veselinovic K, Kühn T, Heil J, Polata S, et al. Axillary surgery in breast cancer - primary results of the INSEMA trial. N Engl J Med. 2025; 392: 1051-1064. (
4
Giuliano AE, Ballman KV, McCall L, Beitsch PD, Brennan MB, Kelemen PR, 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. JAMA. 2017; 318: 918-926. (
5
Boughey JC, Suman VJ, Mittendorf EA, Ahrendt GM, Wilke LG, Taback B, et al.; Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology. Sentinel lymph node surgery after neoadjuvant chemotherapy in patients with node-positive breast cancer: the ACOSOG Z1071 (Alliance) clinical trial. JAMA. 2013; 310: 1455-1461. (