BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Solitary dermal melanoma (SDM) is melanoma confined to subcutaneous and/or dermal layers in the absence of a known primary cutaneous lesion. We hypothesized that sentinel node biopsy is an effective staging strategy for this rare disease. METHODS: A Markov decision model was constructed to represent two management strategies for SDM: wide local excision followed by observation, and wide local excision followed by sentinel node biopsy. Utilities, likelihood of positive sentinel node biopsy, and cancer progression rates during a five year time horizon were assigned based on institutional data and a review of existing literature. Estimated costs were derived using Medicare reimbursements. RESULTS: Excision followed by sentinel node biopsy provides greater utility, yielding 3.85 discounted quality-adjusted life years (dQALY) compared to 3.66 for excision alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for sentinel node biopsy is $19,102 per dQALY. Sensitivity analyzes demonstrated that observation is more cost-effective if greater than 23% of sentinel node biopsies are positive (16% reported), or if 5-year survival for observed patients is greater than 76% (69% reported). CONCLUSIONS: Based on existing clinical evidence, sentinel node biopsy yields greater utility than excision alone and is cost-effective for patients presenting with solitary dermal melanoma.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Solitary dermal melanoma (SDM) is melanoma confined to subcutaneous and/or dermal layers in the absence of a known primary cutaneous lesion. We hypothesized that sentinel node biopsy is an effective staging strategy for this rare disease. METHODS: A Markov decision model was constructed to represent two management strategies for SDM: wide local excision followed by observation, and wide local excision followed by sentinel node biopsy. Utilities, likelihood of positive sentinel node biopsy, and cancer progression rates during a five year time horizon were assigned based on institutional data and a review of existing literature. Estimated costs were derived using Medicare reimbursements. RESULTS: Excision followed by sentinel node biopsy provides greater utility, yielding 3.85 discounted quality-adjusted life years (dQALY) compared to 3.66 for excision alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for sentinel node biopsy is $19,102 per dQALY. Sensitivity analyzes demonstrated that observation is more cost-effective if greater than 23% of sentinel node biopsies are positive (16% reported), or if 5-year survival for observed patients is greater than 76% (69% reported). CONCLUSIONS: Based on existing clinical evidence, sentinel node biopsy yields greater utility than excision alone and is cost-effective for patients presenting with solitary dermal melanoma.
Authors: Kenneth A Katz; Eric Jonasch; F Stephen Hodi; Robert Soiffer; Kimberly Kwitkiwski; Arthur J Sober; Frank G Haluska Journal: Melanoma Res Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: B Schlagenhauff; W Stroebel; U Ellwanger; F Meier; C Zimmermann; H Breuninger; G Rassner; C Garbe Journal: Cancer Date: 1997-07-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: C M Balch; S J Soong; J E Gershenwald; J F Thompson; D S Reintgen; N Cascinelli; M Urist; K M McMasters; M I Ross; J M Kirkwood; M B Atkins; J A Thompson; D G Coit; D Byrd; R Desmond; Y Zhang; P Y Liu; G H Lyman; A Morabito Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-08-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: K K Anbari; L M Schuchter; L P Bucky; R Mick; M Synnestvedt; D Guerry; R Hamilton; A C Halpern Journal: Cancer Date: 1997-05-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Doreen M Agnese; Shahab F Abdessalam; William E Burak; Cynthia M Magro; Rodney V Pozderac; Michael J Walker Journal: Surgery Date: 2003-10 Impact factor: 3.982
Authors: Keith Wheatley; Natalie Ives; Barry Hancock; Martin Gore; Alexander Eggermont; Stefan Suciu Journal: Cancer Treat Rev Date: 2003-08 Impact factor: 12.111
Authors: Matthew P Doepker; Zachary J Thompson; Jennifer N Harb; Jane L Messina; Christopher A Puleo; Kathleen M Egan; Amod A Sarnaik; Ricardo J Gonzalez; Vernon K Sondak; Jonathan S Zager Journal: J Surg Oncol Date: 2015-12-10 Impact factor: 3.454