Literature DB >> 11391592

A micromorphometry-based concept for routine classification of sentinel lymph node metastases and its clinical relevance for patients with melanoma.

H Starz1, B R Balda, K U Krämer, H Büchels, H Wang .   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) as the primary targets for lymphatic metastases can be removed selectively by gamma probe-guided sentinel lymph nodectomy (SLNE) in nearly all patients with cutaneous melanoma. Correspondingly high standards in terms of specificity, sensitivity, and microstaging are required for the evaluation of SLNs.
METHODS: Since 1995, the authors have performed SLNE in 389 lymph node regions (LNRs) on 342 patients with melanoma. The harvested 636 SLNs and a further 1394 nonsentinel lymph nodes (non-SLNs) were evaluated by standardized, semiserial section histology, including immunohistochemistry. For each LNR, this technique permitted routine S classification using two simple morphometric parameters: the number of tumor-involved, 1-mm slices of the SLNs (n) and the centripetal depth of metastatic cell invasion (d). S1 was defined by 1 < or = n < or = 2 and d < or = 1 mm, equivalent to localized peripheral tumor cell deposits; S2 was defined by n > 2 and d < or = 1 mm, indicating more extended peripheral metastases; S3 was defined by d > 1 mm in SNLs with deeper metastatic infiltration; and S0 meant no detectable tumor cells (n = 0).
RESULTS: The authors diagnosed 325 SLNs as S0, 24 SLNs as S1, 22 SLNs as S2, and 18 SLNs as S3. The occurrence of at least one melanoma-positive non-SLN subsequent regional completion lymph node dissection (RCLND) significantly increased from 0 of 12 in S1 SLNs to 2 of 13 in S2 SLNs and 9 of 15 in S3 SLNs (P = 0.001; chi-square test). Like the T classification of the primary melanoma, the S classification proved to be a highly significant predictor for distant metastasis (P < 0.001). It turned out to be an independent factor of influence on distant metastasis and survival in multivariate Cox analyses, which included tumor thickness, primary tumor site, patient gender, and patient age as covariates.
CONCLUSIONS: The data presented recommend the S-staging concept as a promising option to fill a gap between the T and conventional N component of the pTNM classification. If its predictive capacity can be confirmed in multicenter studies, then the S classification may become the decisive criterion for or against RCLND, and a combined T plus S staging system will help to improve prognostically relevant stratification of melanoma patients in adjuvant therapy trials. Copyright 2001 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11391592

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  37 in total

Review 1.  [Sentinel node biopsy. What are the facts?].

Authors:  M Möhrle; H Breuninger
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2005-05       Impact factor: 0.751

2.  Anatomic location of breast cancer micrometastasis in sentinel lymph node predicts axillary status.

Authors:  Luca Di Tommaso; Carmelo Arizzi; Daoud Rahal; Annarita Destro; Massimo Roncalli; Marco Alloisio; Sergio Orefice; Arianna Rubino; Emanuela Morenghi; Giovanna Masci; Armando Santoro; Ivan Del Prato; Roberto Sacco
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 12.969

3.  Low incidence of nonsentinel node-positivity after complete lymph node dissection in melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes.

Authors:  Arata Tsutsumida; Hiroshi Furukawa; Yuhei Yamamoto; Katsumi Horiuchi; Tetsunori Yoshida; Satoru Fujii
Journal:  Int J Clin Oncol       Date:  2007-06-27       Impact factor: 3.402

4.  EANM-EORTC general recommendations for sentinel node diagnostics in melanoma.

Authors:  Annette H Chakera; Birger Hesse; Zeynep Burak; James R Ballinger; Allan Britten; Corrado Caracò; Alistair J Cochran; Martin G Cook; Krzysztof T Drzewiecki; Richard Essner; Einat Even-Sapir; Alexander M M Eggermont; Tanja Gmeiner Stopar; Christian Ingvar; Martin C Mihm; Stanley W McCarthy; Nicola Mozzillo; Omgo E Nieweg; Richard A Scolyer; Hans Starz; John F Thompson; Giuseppe Trifirò; Giuseppe Viale; Sergi Vidal-Sicart; Roger Uren; Wendy Waddington; Arturo Chiti; Alain Spatz; Alessandro Testori
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2009-10       Impact factor: 9.236

Review 5.  [Cutaneous malignant melanoma. Excision margins and lymph node dissections].

Authors:  G Sebastian
Journal:  Hautarzt       Date:  2006-09       Impact factor: 0.751

6.  The impact of nodal tumour burden on lymphoscintigraphic imaging in patients with melanomas.

Authors:  Lutz Kretschmer; Hans Peter Bertsch; Pawel Bardzik; Johannes Meller; Simin Hellriegel; Kai-Martin Thoms; Michael Peter Schön; Carsten Oliver Sahlmann
Journal:  Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging       Date:  2014-10-15       Impact factor: 9.236

7.  Melanoma controversies: clinical significance of nodal micrometastases and the future of melanoma vaccines.

Authors:  Kelly M McMasters
Journal:  World J Surg       Date:  2005-06       Impact factor: 3.352

8.  Use of fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) to distinguish intranodal nevus from metastatic melanoma.

Authors:  Scott R Dalton; Pedram Gerami; Nicholas A Kolaitis; Susan Charzan; Rob Werling; Philip E LeBoit; Boris C Bastian
Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol       Date:  2010-02       Impact factor: 6.394

Review 9.  Sentinel lymph node biopsy progress in surgical treatment of cancer.

Authors:  T Schulze; A Bembenek; P M Schlag
Journal:  Langenbecks Arch Surg       Date:  2004-06-09       Impact factor: 3.445

10.  [Sentinel lymph node in melanoma].

Authors:  T Meyer; M Möhrle; C Garbe; W Hohenberger
Journal:  Chirurg       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 0.955

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.