BACKGROUND: In patients with T1b-T3b cutaneous melanoma the utility of radiologic imaging at the time of diagnosis is unclear. Whether initial imaging led to a change in stage or treatment plan was investigated. METHODS: The melanoma database was searched for patients with T1b-T3b primary lesions, clinically N0, and asymptomatic for metastatic disease. Radiologic studies conducted before wide local excision +/- sentinel lymph node biopsy as well as all further imaging and investigations were analyzed. Outcome measures included upstaging, change in initial surgical management, true-positive, false-positive, true-negative, and false-negative rates of each imaging modality. RESULTS: In all, 344 preoperative imaging studies (chest x-ray [CXR], computed tomography [CT], positron emission tomography [PET]/CT) were performed on 158 patients, resulting in 49 findings suspicious for metastatic melanoma and 134 findings suggestive of nonmelanoma pathology. Only 1 of 344 (0.3%) studies, a PET/CT, correlated with confirmed metastatic melanoma. The false-positive rates were CXR 5 of 7 (71.4%), chest CT 21 of 24 (87.5%), abdomen/pelvis CT 10 of 11 (90.9%), head CT 2 of 2 (100.0%), PET/CT 3 of 5 (60.0%). No patient was upstaged or had a change in initial surgical management based on preoperative imaging. The cost of all initial imaging and imaging to follow-up abnormal findings was estimated as $555,308 for the 158 patients studied. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging at the time of initial diagnosis of T1b-T3b, clinically N0, M0 melanoma was of low yield with a high false-positive rate, and did not lead to upstaging or change in initial surgical management. These findings suggest that imaging of asymptomatic patients at the time of diagnosis may not be warranted.
BACKGROUND: In patients with T1b-T3b cutaneous melanoma the utility of radiologic imaging at the time of diagnosis is unclear. Whether initial imaging led to a change in stage or treatment plan was investigated. METHODS: The melanoma database was searched for patients with T1b-T3b primary lesions, clinically N0, and asymptomatic for metastatic disease. Radiologic studies conducted before wide local excision +/- sentinel lymph node biopsy as well as all further imaging and investigations were analyzed. Outcome measures included upstaging, change in initial surgical management, true-positive, false-positive, true-negative, and false-negative rates of each imaging modality. RESULTS: In all, 344 preoperative imaging studies (chest x-ray [CXR], computed tomography [CT], positron emission tomography [PET]/CT) were performed on 158 patients, resulting in 49 findings suspicious for metastatic melanoma and 134 findings suggestive of nonmelanoma pathology. Only 1 of 344 (0.3%) studies, a PET/CT, correlated with confirmed metastatic melanoma. The false-positive rates were CXR 5 of 7 (71.4%), chest CT 21 of 24 (87.5%), abdomen/pelvis CT 10 of 11 (90.9%), head CT 2 of 2 (100.0%), PET/CT 3 of 5 (60.0%). No patient was upstaged or had a change in initial surgical management based on preoperative imaging. The cost of all initial imaging and imaging to follow-up abnormal findings was estimated as $555,308 for the 158 patients studied. CONCLUSIONS: Imaging at the time of initial diagnosis of T1b-T3b, clinically N0, M0 melanoma was of low yield with a high false-positive rate, and did not lead to upstaging or change in initial surgical management. These findings suggest that imaging of asymptomatic patients at the time of diagnosis may not be warranted.
Authors: Yan Xing; Yulia Bronstein; Merrick I Ross; Robert L Askew; Jeffrey E Lee; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Richard Royal; Janice N Cormier Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2010-11-16 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jan Zakrzewski; Laurel N Geraghty; Amy E Rose; Paul J Christos; Madhu Mazumdar; David Polsky; Richard Shapiro; Russell Berman; Farbod Darvishian; Eva Hernando; Anna Pavlick; Iman Osman Journal: Cancer Date: 2010-11-08 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Lindsay G Wich; Heather K Hamilton; Richard L Shapiro; Anna Pavlick; Russell S Berman; David Polsky; Judith D Goldberg; Eva Hernando; Prashiela Manga; Michelle Krogsgaard; Hideko Kamino; Farbod Darvishian; Peng Lee; Seth J Orlow; Harry Ostrer; Nina Bhardwaj; Iman Osman Journal: Am J Transl Res Date: 2009-01-01 Impact factor: 4.060
Authors: Neha Singh; Nora A Alexander; Kristina Lachance; Christopher W Lewis; Aubriana McEvoy; Gensuke Akaike; David Byrd; Sanaz Behnia; Shailender Bhatia; Kelly G Paulson; Paul Nghiem Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2020-07-21 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Jacqueline Dinnes; Lavinia Ferrante di Ruffano; Yemisi Takwoingi; Seau Tak Cheung; Paul Nathan; Rubeta N Matin; Naomi Chuchu; Sue Ann Chan; Alana Durack; Susan E Bayliss; Abha Gulati; Lopa Patel; Clare Davenport; Kathie Godfrey; Manil Subesinghe; Zoe Traill; Jonathan J Deeks; Hywel C Williams Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2019-07-01