BACKGROUND: The role for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with thin melanoma (≤1 mm) remains controversial. We examined a large cohort of patients with thin melanoma to better define predictors of SLN positivity. METHODS: From 1995 to 2011, 781 patients with thin primary melanoma and evaluable clinicopathologic data underwent SLNB at our institution. Predictors of SLN positivity were determined using univariate and multivariate regression analyses, and patients were risk-stratified using a classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. RESULTS: In the study cohort (n = 781), 29 patients (3.7%) had nodal metastases. In the univariate analysis, mitotic rate [odds ratio (OR) = 8.11, p = 0.005], Clark level (OR 4.04, p = 0.003), and thickness (OR 3.33, p = 0.011) were significantly associated with SLN positivity. In the multivariate analysis, MR (OR 7.01) and level IV-V (OR 3.45) remained significant predictors of SLN positivity. CART analysis initially stratified lesions by mitotic rate; nonmitogenic lesions (n = 273) had a 0.7% SLN positivity rate versus 5.6% in mitogenic lesions (n = 425). Mitogenic lesions were further stratified by Clark level; patients with level II-III had a 2.9% SLN positivity rate (n = 205) versus 8.2% with level IV-V (n = 220). With median follow-up of 6.3 years, five SLN-negative patients developed nodal recurrence and four SLN-positive patients died of disease. CONCLUSIONS: SLN positivity is low in patients with thin melanoma (3.7%) and exceedingly so in nonmitogenic lesions (0.7%). Appreciable rates of SLN positivity can be identified in patients with mitogenic lesions, particularly with concurrent level IV-V regardless of thickness. These factors may guide appropriate selection of patients with thin melanoma for SLNB.
BACKGROUND: The role for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with thin melanoma (≤1 mm) remains controversial. We examined a large cohort of patients with thin melanoma to better define predictors of SLN positivity. METHODS: From 1995 to 2011, 781 patients with thin primary melanoma and evaluable clinicopathologic data underwent SLNB at our institution. Predictors of SLN positivity were determined using univariate and multivariate regression analyses, and patients were risk-stratified using a classification and regression tree (CART) analysis. RESULTS: In the study cohort (n = 781), 29 patients (3.7%) had nodal metastases. In the univariate analysis, mitotic rate [odds ratio (OR) = 8.11, p = 0.005], Clark level (OR 4.04, p = 0.003), and thickness (OR 3.33, p = 0.011) were significantly associated with SLN positivity. In the multivariate analysis, MR (OR 7.01) and level IV-V (OR 3.45) remained significant predictors of SLN positivity. CART analysis initially stratified lesions by mitotic rate; nonmitogenic lesions (n = 273) had a 0.7% SLN positivity rate versus 5.6% in mitogenic lesions (n = 425). Mitogenic lesions were further stratified by Clark level; patients with level II-III had a 2.9% SLN positivity rate (n = 205) versus 8.2% with level IV-V (n = 220). With median follow-up of 6.3 years, five SLN-negative patients developed nodal recurrence and four SLN-positive patients died of disease. CONCLUSIONS:SLN positivity is low in patients with thin melanoma (3.7%) and exceedingly so in nonmitogenic lesions (0.7%). Appreciable rates of SLN positivity can be identified in patients with mitogenic lesions, particularly with concurrent level IV-V regardless of thickness. These factors may guide appropriate selection of patients with thin melanoma for SLNB.
Authors: Donald L Morton; Alistair J Cochran; John F Thompson; Robert Elashoff; Richard Essner; Edwin C Glass; Nicola Mozzillo; Omgo E Nieweg; Daniel F Roses; Harald J Hoekstra; Constantine P Karakousis; Douglas S Reintgen; Brendon J Coventry; He-jing Wang Journal: Ann Surg Date: 2005-09 Impact factor: 12.969
Authors: Jaime M Ranieri; Jeffrey D Wagner; Stacie Wenck; Cynthia S Johnson; John J Coleman Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-05-22 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Susan B Kesmodel; Giorgos C Karakousis; Jeffrey D Botbyl; Robert J Canter; Robert T Lewis; Peter M Wahl; Kyla P Terhune; Abass Alavi; David E Elder; Michael E Ming; DuPont Guerry; Phyllis A Gimotty; Douglas L Fraker; Brian J Czerniecki; Francis R Spitz Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2005-04-19 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Giorgos C Karakousis; Phyllis A Gimotty; Brian J Czerniecki; David E Elder; Rosalie Elenitsas; Michael E Ming; Douglas L Fraker; DuPont Guerry; Francis R Spitz Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2007-02-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Dan D Hershko; Bruce W Robb; Andrew M Lowy; Syed A Ahmad; Go H Ramadas; Debbie A Soldano; Jeffrey J Sussman Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2006-03-15 Impact factor: 3.454
Authors: Melanie A Warycha; Jan Zakrzewski; Quanhong Ni; Richard L Shapiro; Russell S Berman; Anna C Pavlick; David Polsky; Madhu Mazumdar; Iman Osman Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-02-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Giorgos C Karakousis; Phyllis A Gimotty; Jeffrey D Botbyl; Susan B Kesmodel; David E Elder; Rosalie Elenitsas; Michael E Ming; DuPont Guerry; Douglas L Fraker; Brian J Czerniecki; Francis R Spitz Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2006-03-07 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Charles M Balch; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Seng-Jaw Soong; John F Thompson; Michael B Atkins; David R Byrd; Antonio C Buzaid; Alistair J Cochran; Daniel G Coit; Shouluan Ding; Alexander M Eggermont; Keith T Flaherty; Phyllis A Gimotty; John M Kirkwood; Kelly M McMasters; Martin C Mihm; Donald L Morton; Merrick I Ross; Arthur J Sober; Vernon K Sondak Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-11-16 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christina Bluemel; Ken Herrmann; Francesco Giammarile; Omgo E Nieweg; Julien Dubreuil; Alessandro Testori; Riccardo A Audisio; Odysseas Zoras; Michael Lassmann; Annette H Chakera; Roger Uren; Sotirios Chondrogiannis; Patrick M Colletti; Domenico Rubello Journal: Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging Date: 2015-07-25 Impact factor: 9.236
Authors: Giorgos Karakousis; Phyllis A Gimotty; Edmund K Bartlett; Myung-Shin Sim; Madalyn G Neuwirth; Douglas Fraker; Brian J Czerniecki; Mark B Faries Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2016-11-02 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Andrew J Sinnamon; Madalyn G Neuwirth; Pratyusha Yalamanchi; Phyllis Gimotty; David E Elder; Xiaowei Xu; Rachel R Kelz; Robert E Roses; Emily Y Chu; Michael E Ming; Douglas L Fraker; Giorgos C Karakousis Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Edmund K Bartlett; Madalyn G Peters; Anne Blair; Mark S Etherington; David E Elder; Xiaowei G Xu; DuPont Guerry; Michael E Ming; Douglas L Fraker; Brian J Czerniecki; Phyllis A Gimotty; Giorgos C Karakousis Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2015-07-28 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Andrew J Marek; Michael E Ming; Edmund K Bartlett; Giorgos C Karakousis; Emily Y Chu Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2016-07-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Antonio Tejera-Vaquerizo; Simone Ribero; Susana Puig; Aram Boada; Sabela Paradela; David Moreno-Ramírez; Javier Cañueto; Blanca de Unamuno; Ana Brinca; Miguel A Descalzo-Gallego; Simona Osella-Abate; Paola Cassoni; Cristina Carrera; Sergi Vidal-Sicart; Antoni Bennássar; Ramón Rull; Llucìa Alos; Celia Requena; Isidro Bolumar; Víctor Traves; Ángel Pla; A Fernández-Orland; Ane Jaka; María T Fernández-Figueres; Josep M Hilari; Pol Giménez-Xavier; Ricardo Vieira; Rafael Botella-Estrada; Concepción Román-Curto; Lara Ferrándiz; Nicolás Iglesias-Pena; Carlos Ferrándiz; Josep Malvehy; Pietro Quaglino; Eduardo Nagore Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2019-06-18 Impact factor: 4.452