BACKGROUND: Although only a small proportion of thin melanomas result in lymph node metastasis, the abundance of these lesions results in a relatively large absolute number of patients with a diagnosis of nodal metastases, determined by either sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy or clinical nodal recurrence (CNR). METHODS: Independent cohorts with thin melanoma and either SLN metastasis or CNR were identified at two melanoma referral centers. At both centers, SLN metastasis patients were included. At center 1, the CNR cohort included patients with initial negative clinical nodal evaluation followed by CNR. At center 2, the CNR cohort was restricted to those presenting in the era before the use of SLN biopsy. Uni- and multivariable analyses of melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were performed. RESULTS: At center 1, 427 CNR patients were compared with 91 SLN+ patients. The 5- and 10-year survival rates in the SLN group were respectively 88 and 84 % compared with 72 and 49 % in the CNR group (p < 0.0001). The multivariate analysis showed age older than 50 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.5; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.9), present ulceration (HR 1.9; 95 % CI 1.2-2.9), unknown ulceration (HR 1.6; 95 % CI 1.3-2.1), truncal site (HR 1.6; 95 % CI 1.2-2.2), and CNR (HR 3.3; 95 % CI 1.8-6.0) to be associated significantly with decreased MSS (p < 0.01 for each). The center 2 cohort demonstrated remarkably similar findings, with a 5-year MSS of 88 % in the SLN (n = 29) group and 76 % in the CNR group (n = 39, p = 0.09). CONCLUSION: Patients with nodal metastases from thin melanomas have a substantial risk of melanoma death. This risk is lower among patients whose disease is discovered by SLN biopsy rather than CNR.
BACKGROUND: Although only a small proportion of thin melanomas result in lymph node metastasis, the abundance of these lesions results in a relatively large absolute number of patients with a diagnosis of nodal metastases, determined by either sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy or clinical nodal recurrence (CNR). METHODS: Independent cohorts with thin melanoma and either SLN metastasis or CNR were identified at two melanoma referral centers. At both centers, SLN metastasispatients were included. At center 1, the CNR cohort included patients with initial negative clinical nodal evaluation followed by CNR. At center 2, the CNR cohort was restricted to those presenting in the era before the use of SLN biopsy. Uni- and multivariable analyses of melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were performed. RESULTS: At center 1, 427 CNR patients were compared with 91 SLN+ patients. The 5- and 10-year survival rates in the SLN group were respectively 88 and 84 % compared with 72 and 49 % in the CNR group (p < 0.0001). The multivariate analysis showed age older than 50 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.5; 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.2-1.9), present ulceration (HR 1.9; 95 % CI 1.2-2.9), unknown ulceration (HR 1.6; 95 % CI 1.3-2.1), truncal site (HR 1.6; 95 % CI 1.2-2.2), and CNR (HR 3.3; 95 % CI 1.8-6.0) to be associated significantly with decreased MSS (p < 0.01 for each). The center 2 cohort demonstrated remarkably similar findings, with a 5-year MSS of 88 % in the SLN (n = 29) group and 76 % in the CNR group (n = 39, p = 0.09). CONCLUSION:Patients with nodal metastases from thin melanomas have a substantial risk of melanoma death. This risk is lower among patients whose disease is discovered by SLN biopsy rather than CNR.
Authors: Donald L Morton; John F Thompson; Alistair J Cochran; Nicola Mozzillo; Omgo E Nieweg; Daniel F Roses; Harold J Hoekstra; Constantine P Karakousis; Christopher A Puleo; Brendon J Coventry; Mohammed Kashani-Sabet; B Mark Smithers; Eberhard Paul; William G Kraybill; J Gregory McKinnon; He-Jing Wang; Robert Elashoff; Mark B Faries Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-02-13 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Dale Han; Jonathan S Zager; Yu Shyr; Heidi Chen; Lynne D Berry; Sanjana Iyengar; Mia Djulbegovic; Jaimie L Weber; Suroosh S Marzban; Vernon K Sondak; Jane L Messina; John T Vetto; Richard L White; Barbara Pockaj; Nicola Mozzillo; Kim James Charney; Eli Avisar; Robert Krouse; Mohammed Kashani-Sabet; Stanley P Leong Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-11-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Csaba Gajdos; Kent A Griffith; Sandra L Wong; Timothy M Johnson; Alfred E Chang; Vincent M Cimmino; Lori Lowe; Carol R Bradford; Riley S Rees; Michael S Sabel Journal: Cancer Date: 2009-12-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Phyllis A Gimotty; DuPont Guerry; Michael E Ming; Rosalie Elenitsas; Xiaowei Xu; Brian Czerniecki; Francis Spitz; Lynn Schuchter; David Elder Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2004-08-09 Impact factor: 44.544
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: Alexandra S Berghe; Gheorghe Cobzac; George Dindelegan; Simona C Șenilă; Corina I Baican; Carolina M Solomon; Liliana Rogojan; Daniel C Leucuța; Tudor C Drugan; Sorana D Bolboacă Journal: Exp Ther Med Date: 2021-05-05 Impact factor: 2.447