HER2 Support Group Forums - View Single Post - totally new approach--cryoablation of tumor,followed immunotherapy wth lymphnodecells

Lani · 09-19-2006, 08:36 AM

or perhaps they were trying to both treat it and utilize the lymph node cells in a vaccine!

1: Am J Surg. 2006 Oct;192(4):462-70. Links
Prospective randomized study comparing cryo-assisted and needle-wire localization of ultrasound-visible breast tumors.

Tafra L,
Fine R,
Whitworth P,
Berry M,
Woods J,
Ekbom G,
Gass J,
Beitsch P,
Dodge D,
Han L,
Potruch T,
Francescatti D,
Oetting L,
Smith JS,
Snider H,
Kleban D,
Chagpar A,
Akbari S.
Anne Arundel Medical Center, 2002 Medical Pkwy., Suite 120, Annapolis, MD 21401, USA.
BACKGROUND: This study compared the surgical results of 2 localization methods-cryo-assisted localization (CAL) and needle-wire localization (NWL)-in patients undergoing breast lumpectomy for breast cancer. METHODS: A total of 310 patients were treated in an institutional review board-approved study with 18 surgeons at 17 sites. Patients were randomized 2:1 to undergo either intraoperative CAL or NWL. A cryoprobe was inserted under ultrasound guidance in the operating room and an ice ball created an 8- to 10-mm margin around the lesion. The palpable ice ball then was dissected. NWL was placed according to institutional practice and resection was performed in a standard fashion. Surgical margins, complications, re-excisions, tissue volume, procedure times, ease of localization, specimen quality, and patient satisfaction were evaluated. Positive margins were defined as any type of disease present 1 mm or less from any specimen edge. RESULTS: Positive margin status did not differ between the 2 groups (28% vs. 31%). The volume of tissue removed was significantly less in the CAL group (49 vs. 66 mL, P = .002). Re-excisions were similar in both groups. CAL was superior in ease of lumpectomy, quality of specimen, acute surgical cosmesis, short-term cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and overall procedure time for the patient. CAL had a lower invasive positive margin rate (11% vs. 20%, P = .039) but a higher observed ductal carcinoma in situ-positive margin rate (30% vs. 18%, approaching statistical significance, P = .052). CONCLUSIONS: CAL is a preferred alternative to standard wire localization because it provides a palpable template, removes less tissue and improves cosmesis, decreases overall procedure time, and is more convenient for the patient and surgeon.
PMID: 16978950 [PubMed - in process]

09-19-2006, 08:36 AM	#5
Lani Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 4,778	perhaps this is what they were trying--cryoassistance to help localize tumor or perhaps they were trying to both treat it and utilize the lymph node cells in a vaccine! 1: Am J Surg. 2006 Oct;192(4):462-70. Links Prospective randomized study comparing cryo-assisted and needle-wire localization of ultrasound-visible breast tumors. Tafra L, Fine R, Whitworth P, Berry M, Woods J, Ekbom G, Gass J, Beitsch P, Dodge D, Han L, Potruch T, Francescatti D, Oetting L, Smith JS, Snider H, Kleban D, Chagpar A, Akbari S. Anne Arundel Medical Center, 2002 Medical Pkwy., Suite 120, Annapolis, MD 21401, USA. BACKGROUND: This study compared the surgical results of 2 localization methods-cryo-assisted localization (CAL) and needle-wire localization (NWL)-in patients undergoing breast lumpectomy for breast cancer. METHODS: A total of 310 patients were treated in an institutional review board-approved study with 18 surgeons at 17 sites. Patients were randomized 2:1 to undergo either intraoperative CAL or NWL. A cryoprobe was inserted under ultrasound guidance in the operating room and an ice ball created an 8- to 10-mm margin around the lesion. The palpable ice ball then was dissected. NWL was placed according to institutional practice and resection was performed in a standard fashion. Surgical margins, complications, re-excisions, tissue volume, procedure times, ease of localization, specimen quality, and patient satisfaction were evaluated. Positive margins were defined as any type of disease present 1 mm or less from any specimen edge. RESULTS: Positive margin status did not differ between the 2 groups (28% vs. 31%). The volume of tissue removed was significantly less in the CAL group (49 vs. 66 mL, P = .002). Re-excisions were similar in both groups. CAL was superior in ease of lumpectomy, quality of specimen, acute surgical cosmesis, short-term cosmesis, patient satisfaction, and overall procedure time for the patient. CAL had a lower invasive positive margin rate (11% vs. 20%, P = .039) but a higher observed ductal carcinoma in situ-positive margin rate (30% vs. 18%, approaching statistical significance, P = .052). CONCLUSIONS: CAL is a preferred alternative to standard wire localization because it provides a palpable template, removes less tissue and improves cosmesis, decreases overall procedure time, and is more convenient for the patient and surgeon. PMID: 16978950 [PubMed - in process]