| Literature DB >> 28731044 |
Brooke E Rosenbaum1, Christine N Schafer1, Sung Won Han2, Iman Osman1, Hua Zhong3, Nooshin Brinster1.
Abstract
Current staging guidelines are insufficient to predict which patients with thin primary melanoma are at high risk of recurrence. Computer-assisted image analysis may allow for more practical and objective histopathological analysis of primary tumors than traditional light microscopy. We studied a prospective cohort of stage IB melanoma patients treated at NYU Langone Medical Center from 2002 to 2014. Primary tumor width, manual area, digital area, and conformation were evaluated in a patient subset via computer-assisted image analysis. The associations between histologic variables and survival were evaluated using Cox proportional hazards model. Logistic regressions were used to build a classifier with clinicopathological characteristics to predict recurrence status. Of the 655 patients with stage IB melanoma studied, a subset of 149 patient tumors (63 recurred, 86 did not recur) underwent computer-assisted histopathological analysis. Increasing tumor width (hazard ratios (HR): 1.17, P=0.01) and digital area (HR: 1.08, P<0.01) were significantly associated with worse recurrence-free survival, whereas non-contiguous conformation (HR: 0.57, P=0.05) was significantly associated with better recurrence-free survival. The novel histopathological classifier composed of digital area, conformation, and baseline variables effectively distinguished recurrent cases from non-recurrent cases (AUC: 0.733, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.647-0.818), compared to the baseline classifier alone (AUC: 0.635, 95% CI: 0.545-0.724). Primary tumor cross-sectional area, width, and conformation measured via computer-assisted analysis may help identify high-risk patients with stage IB melanoma.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28731044 PMCID: PMC5640153 DOI: 10.1038/modpathol.2017.64
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Mod Pathol ISSN: 0893-3952 Impact factor: 7.842
Baseline patient and tumor characteristics (n=655).
| Characteristic | Total |
|---|---|
| Sex, n (%) | |
| Male | 374 (57.1) |
| Female | 281 (42.9) |
| Age (years), median (SD) | 58.0 (16.6) |
| Thickness (mm), median (SD) | 0.98 (0.44) |
| Ulceration, n (%) | |
| Present | 28 (4.3) |
| Absent | 621 (95.7) |
| Mitotic rate (per mm2), median (SD) | 1.0 (2.3) |
| Mitoses, n (%) | |
| No | 571 (88.1) |
| Yes | 78 (11.9) |
| Histological subtype, n (%) | |
| Superficial spreading | 379 (67.3) |
| Nodular | 104 (18.5) |
| Other | 80 (14.2) |
| Recurrence, n (%) | |
| Not Recurred | 578 (88.2) |
| Recurred | 77 (11.8) |
| Type of recurrence, n (%) | |
| Local | 5 (6.5) |
| Only local | 0 (0.0) |
| Regional | 37 (48.1) |
| Only regional | 11 (14.3) |
| Distant | 52 (67.5) |
| Only distant | 22 (28.6) |
| Distant + local | 4 (5.2) |
| Distant + regional | 25 (32.5) |
| Distant + regional + local | 1 (2.3) |
| Unknown | 14 (18.2) |
| Death, n (%) | |
| Alive | 578 (88.4) |
| Dead | 76 (11.6) |
SD=standard deviation
Local=tumor recurrence within 2 cm of the surgical scar following definitive excision of a primary melanoma with sufficient surgical margins.
Regional=tumor recurrence in the regional lymph node basinor that is intralymphatic (satellites or in transit metastases).
Distant= tumor recurrence in distant lymph nodes, skin or subcutaneous tissue >2 cm from the original primary tumor site, or distant organs.
Baseline patient and primary tumor characteristics of the patients that underwent digital histopathological analysis (n=149), only those whose disease recurred (n=63), and only those with non-recurrent disease (n=86).
| Characteristic | Total | Recurred | Did not recur | P-value |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sex, n (%) | ||||
| Male | 94 (63.1) | 39 (61.9) | 55 (64.0) | 0.93 |
| Female | 55 (36.9) | 24 (38.1) | 31 (36.0) | |
| Age (years), median (SD) | 60 (15.8) | 58 (15.8) | 62 (15.7) | 0.16 |
| Thickness (mm), median (SD) | 1.14 (0.43) | 1.10 (0.48) | 1.15 (0.39) | 0.88 |
| Ulceration, n (%) | ||||
| Present | 14 (9.6) | 6 (9.8) | 8 (9.4) | 1.00 |
| Absent | 132 (90.4) | 55 (90.2) | 77 (90.6) | |
| Mitoses, n (%) | ||||
| No | 5 (5.8) | 16 (25.4) | 21 (14.1) | <0.01 |
| Yes | 81 (94.2) | 47 (74.6) | 128 (85.9) | |
| Mitotic rate (per mm2), median (SD) | 2 (2.7) | 3 (2.4) | 2 (2.9) | 0.73 |
| Histological subtype, n (%) | ||||
| Superficial spreading | 89 (61.0) | 37 (59.7) | 52 (61.9) | 0.50 |
| Nodular | 47 (32.2) | 19 (30.6) | 28 (33.3) | |
| Other | 10 (6.8) | 6 (9.7) | 4 (4.8) | |
| Novel histopathological variables | ||||
| Width (mm), median (SD) | 3.73 (1.88) | 4.19 (2.01) | 3.41 (1.73) | 0.03 |
| Manual area (mm2), median (SD) | 3.97 (3.32) | 4.38 (3.64) | 3.70 (3.03) | 0.14 |
| Digital area (mm2), median (SD) | 2.10 (2.97) | 2.47 (4.00) | 1.90 (1.69) | 0.01 |
| Conformation, n (%) | ||||
| Contiguous | 95 (63.8) | 45 (71.4) | 50 (58.1) | 0.14 |
| Non-contiguous | 54 (36.2) | 18 (28.6) | 36 (41.9) |
SD=standard deviation
Figure 1Primary tumor H&Es demonstrating digital histopathological variables. (A) Manual area was estimated by multiplying the Breslow thickness by the width of the invasive dermal tumor (thickness 1.72 mm, width 3.49 mm, manual area 5.99 mm2). To measure digital area, the invasive dermal tumor was manually outlined and calculated by the Aperio software algorithm, as demonstrated in a (B) contiguous (digital area 4.99 mm2) and a (C) non-contiguous (digital area 0.36 mm2). (D) Tumor width was measured as the cumulative sum of widths of the tumor’s invasive dermal components in the greatest horizontal dimension (width 2.75 mm).
Univariate and multivariate analyses of primary tumor width, manual area, digital area, and conformation with recurrence-free and overall survival (n=149).
| Univariate analysis | Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
|
| |||
| HR (95% CI) | P-value | HR (95% CI) | P-value | |
| Width (mm) | 1.17 (1.04–1.32) | 0.008 | 1.20 (1.06–1.37) | 0.004 |
| Manual area (mm2) | 1.06 (1.00–1.13) | 0.069 | 1.08 (0.99–1.18) | 0.069 |
| Digital area (mm2) | 1.08 (1.03–1.14) | 0.003 | 1.10 (1.04–1.17) | 0.002 |
| Conformation | 0.57 (0.32–0.99) | 0.046 | 0.55 (0.30–1.00) | 0.048 |
| Width (mm) | 1.05 (0.91–1.21) | 0.492 | 1.01 (0.87–1.17) | 0.924 |
| Manual area (mm2) | 1.02 (0.94–1.10) | 0.690 | 0.98 (0.89–1.08) | 0.641 |
| Digital area (mm2) | 1.04 (0.97–1.11) | 0.305 | 1.02 (0.93–1.13) | 0.643 |
| Conformation | 1.11 (0.60–2.06) | 0.745 | 1.10 (0.57–2.10) | 0.782 |
HR=hazard ratio; CI=confidence interval
Reference value = contiguous
Cox model adjusted for gender, age at diagnosis, thickness (mm), mitoses (yes/no) in addition to the variable of interest.
Figure 2Sensitivity and specificity for prediction of recurrence using a risk score derived from novel histopathological predictive model.
Figure 3Progression-free survival (PFS) of patients stratified by the novel histopathological predictive model. Using the risk score previously defined by the novel histopathological predictive model, high and low risk groups were plotted in a Kaplan-Meier survival curve and statistical analysis performed by the log-rank test.
Figure 4Regression analysis of manual versus digital tumor area for (A) all patients (estimate 0.64, p<0.01) and (B) stratified into those with contiguous tumors and those with non-contiguous tumors (estimate 0.75 and 0.49, respectively; p<0.01).