Evan Stiegel1, David Xiong2, Jason Ya2, Pauline Funchain3, Raymond Isakov4, Brian Gastman4, Alok Vij2. 1. Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. Electronic address: estiegel1@gmail.com. 2. Department of Dermatology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 3. Department of Hematology and Oncology, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. 4. Department of Plastic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is widely performed for melanoma with certain histologic parameters and offers important prognostic and staging information. Breslow thickness (BT) by itself also provides meaningful prognostic information. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether SLN status provides prognostic information independent from that which is already provided by BT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 896 patients who underwent SLN biopsy for primary cutaneous melanoma. Stratified analysis of the impact of SLN status within BT groups (0.01-1 mm, 1.01-2.00 mm, 2.01-4.00 mm, and >4.00 mm) was performed. In addition, a Cox proportional hazard model was fit to evaluate the interaction between BT unadjusted and then adjusted for SLN status to determine whether predictive ability is improved. RESULTS: Having a negative SLN did not confer a statistically significant survival advantage for any BT subgroup (P = .54, .075, .17, and .95 for subgroups 0.01-1 mm, 1.01-2.00 mm, 2.01-4.00 mm, and >4.00 mm, respectively). In multivariate analysis, SLN status did not demonstrate independent prognostic ability over that of BT alone (P = .067). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study, single institution. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that SLN status does not offer better prognostic information for patients than BT alone.
BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is widely performed for melanoma with certain histologic parameters and offers important prognostic and staging information. Breslow thickness (BT) by itself also provides meaningful prognostic information. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether SLN status provides prognostic information independent from that which is already provided by BT. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 896 patients who underwent SLN biopsy for primary cutaneous melanoma. Stratified analysis of the impact of SLN status within BT groups (0.01-1 mm, 1.01-2.00 mm, 2.01-4.00 mm, and >4.00 mm) was performed. In addition, a Cox proportional hazard model was fit to evaluate the interaction between BT unadjusted and then adjusted for SLN status to determine whether predictive ability is improved. RESULTS: Having a negative SLN did not confer a statistically significant survival advantage for any BT subgroup (P = .54, .075, .17, and .95 for subgroups 0.01-1 mm, 1.01-2.00 mm, 2.01-4.00 mm, and >4.00 mm, respectively). In multivariate analysis, SLN status did not demonstrate independent prognostic ability over that of BT alone (P = .067). LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study, single institution. CONCLUSION: Our data suggest that SLN status does not offer better prognostic information for patients than BT alone.
Authors: Stephanie A Blankenstein; Johannes J Bonenkamp; Maureen J B Aarts; Franchette W P J van den Berkmortel; Christian U Blank; Willeke A M Blokx; Marye J Boers-Sonderen; Alfons J M van den Eertwegh; Margreet G Franken; Jan Willem B de Groot; John B A G Haanen; Geke A P Hospers; Ellen W Kapiteijn; Olivier J van Not; Djura Piersma; Rozemarijn S van Rijn; Karijn P M Suijkerbuijk; Astrid A M van der Veldt; Gerard Vreugdenhil; Hans M Westgeest; Michel W J M Wouters; Alexander C J van Akkooi Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2022-10-06 Impact factor: 4.339
Authors: M Claeson; P Baade; M Marchetti; S Brown; H P Soyer; B M Smithers; A C Green; D C Whiteman; K Khosrotehrani Journal: Br J Dermatol Date: 2021-07-22 Impact factor: 11.113
Authors: Stefanie Seidl; Barbara Schuster; Melvin Rüth; Tilo Biedermann; Alexander Zink Journal: J Med Internet Res Date: 2018-05-02 Impact factor: 5.428
Authors: Loeki Aldenhoven; Caroline Frotscher; Rachelle Körver-Steeman; Milou H Martens; Damir Kuburic; Alfred Janssen; Geerard L Beets; James van Bastelaar Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2022-10-14 Impact factor: 4.638