Gerd Grözinger1, Steven Mann2, Tarun Mehra3, Bernhard Klumpp2, Ulrich Grosse2, Konstantin Nikolaou2, Claus Garbe3, Stephan Clasen2. 1. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University hospital Tübingen, Hoppe- Seylerstr. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. gerd.groezinger@med.uni-tuebingen.de. 2. Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University hospital Tübingen, Hoppe- Seylerstr. 3, 72076, Tübingen, Germany. 3. Department of Dermatology, University hospital Tübingen, Liebermeisterstraße 25, 72076, Tübingen, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Melanomas arising from mucosa are rare and associated with a poor prognosis. This study aims to provide an analysis of metastatic pathways, time intervals, factors influencing metastatic spread and organs for distant metastases. METHODS: A total of 116 patients with mucosal melanomas of different sites were included. The mean follow-up interval was 47 ± 52 months. Patients were assigned to two different metastatic pathways, either presenting loco-regional lymph node metastases as first spread or direct distant metastases. The distribution of distant metastases was assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients presented with a pre-existing metastatic spread and were not assigned to pathways. Of the included patients, 44 developed metastases after treatment of the primary tumour; 25 patients directly developed distant metastases; 16 patients developed regional lymph node metastases prior to distant metastases. Location of the primary tumour in the upper airway or GI tract and advanced T stage were significant risk factors of direct distant metastases. Distant metastases are mainly located in the lung, the liver and non-regional lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS: Mucosal melanomas show a high rate of direct distant metastases rather than regional lymph node metastases. Thus the follow-up should always include a whole-body cross-sectional imaging in high-risk tumours. KEY POINTS: • Mucosal melanomas show a high rate of direct distant metastases. • T stage and primary location are predictors for direct distant metastases. • Distant metastases were mainly found in lung, liver and lymph nodes. • Follow-up of a high-risk mucosal melanoma should include whole-body imaging.
OBJECTIVES:Melanomas arising from mucosa are rare and associated with a poor prognosis. This study aims to provide an analysis of metastatic pathways, time intervals, factors influencing metastatic spread and organs for distant metastases. METHODS: A total of 116 patients with mucosal melanomas of different sites were included. The mean follow-up interval was 47 ± 52 months. Patients were assigned to two different metastatic pathways, either presenting loco-regional lymph node metastases as first spread or direct distant metastases. The distribution of distant metastases was assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients presented with a pre-existing metastatic spread and were not assigned to pathways. Of the included patients, 44 developed metastases after treatment of the primary tumour; 25 patients directly developed distant metastases; 16 patients developed regional lymph node metastases prior to distant metastases. Location of the primary tumour in the upper airway or GI tract and advanced T stage were significant risk factors of direct distant metastases. Distant metastases are mainly located in the lung, the liver and non-regional lymph nodes. CONCLUSIONS:Mucosal melanomas show a high rate of direct distant metastases rather than regional lymph node metastases. Thus the follow-up should always include a whole-body cross-sectional imaging in high-risk tumours. KEY POINTS: • Mucosal melanomas show a high rate of direct distant metastases. • T stage and primary location are predictors for direct distant metastases. • Distant metastases were mainly found in lung, liver and lymph nodes. • Follow-up of a high-risk mucosal melanoma should include whole-body imaging.
Authors: John A Curtin; Jane Fridlyand; Toshiro Kageshita; Hetal N Patel; Klaus J Busam; Heinz Kutzner; Kwang-Hyun Cho; Setsuya Aiba; Eva-Bettina Bröcker; Philip E LeBoit; Dan Pinkel; Boris C Bastian Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Gladys C Alvarado; Nicholas E Papadopoulos; Wen-Jen Hwu; Agop Y Bedikian; Jade Homsi; Jeffrey N Myers; Yulia Bronstein; Roland L Bassett; Patrick Hwu; Kevin B Kim Journal: Melanoma Res Date: 2011-04 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Anne Brecht Francken; Neil A Accortt; Helen M Shaw; Martin Wiener; Seng-jaw Soong; Harald J Hoekstra; John F Thompson Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2008-01-15 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Kevin O'Regan; Micheál Breen; Nikhil Ramaiya; Jyothi Jagannathan; Pamela J DiPiro; F Stephen Hodi; Annick D Van den Abbeele Journal: Cancer Imaging Date: 2013-12-30 Impact factor: 3.909
Authors: Ahmed E Othman; Thomas K Eigentler; Georg Bier; Christina Pfannenberg; Hans Bösmüller; Christian Thiel; Claus Garbe; Konstantin Nikolaou; Bernhard Klumpp Journal: Eur Radiol Date: 2016-10-17 Impact factor: 5.315