Tina J Hieken1, John M Kane2, Sandra L Wong3. 1. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA. hieken.tina@mayo.edu. 2. Department of Surgical Oncology, Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center, Buffalo, NY, USA. 3. Department of Surgery, Geisel School of Medicine at Dartmouth, Hanover, NH, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE AND METHODS: Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma patients has been guideline-concordant standard of care since adoption of lymphatic mapping and SLN biopsy for the management of clinically node-negative melanoma patients more than 20 years ago. However, a trend for omission of CLND has been observed over the past decade, and we now have randomized, controlled clinical trial data to help guide treatment recommendations. Publication of these data prompted an American Society of Clinical Oncology-Society of Surgical Oncology 2018 clinical practice guideline update for these patients. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Systematic review of current evidence supports a selective, individualized approach to CLND for SLN-positive melanoma. For low-risk, low-volume micrometastatic disease, SLN biopsy may be both diagnostic and therapeutic, and close clinical follow-up with imaging or CLND are reasonable options for appropriately selected patients. For higher-risk patients, omission of CLND requires careful consideration of risks versus benefits, relevant histopathology, and individualized patient discussion. This should address patient comorbidities and life expectancy, the predicted likelihood of additional positive nodes, availability of imaging surveillance, likelihood of adherence to imaging and clinical follow-up, consequences of regional recurrence, and the prognostic value of complete nodal staging and its impact on adjuvant therapy recommendations or clinical trial participation. Data on long-term outcomes, cost, and patient-reported quality of life measures are not yet available.
PURPOSE AND METHODS: Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanomapatients has been guideline-concordant standard of care since adoption of lymphatic mapping and SLN biopsy for the management of clinically node-negative melanomapatients more than 20 years ago. However, a trend for omission of CLND has been observed over the past decade, and we now have randomized, controlled clinical trial data to help guide treatment recommendations. Publication of these data prompted an American Society of Clinical Oncology-Society of Surgical Oncology 2018 clinical practice guideline update for these patients. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Systematic review of current evidence supports a selective, individualized approach to CLND for SLN-positive melanoma. For low-risk, low-volume micrometastatic disease, SLN biopsy may be both diagnostic and therapeutic, and close clinical follow-up with imaging or CLND are reasonable options for appropriately selected patients. For higher-risk patients, omission of CLND requires careful consideration of risks versus benefits, relevant histopathology, and individualized patient discussion. This should address patient comorbidities and life expectancy, the predicted likelihood of additional positive nodes, availability of imaging surveillance, likelihood of adherence to imaging and clinical follow-up, consequences of regional recurrence, and the prognostic value of complete nodal staging and its impact on adjuvant therapy recommendations or clinical trial participation. Data on long-term outcomes, cost, and patient-reported quality of life measures are not yet available.
Authors: Kristy Kummerow Broman; Tasha Hughes; Lesly Dossett; James Sun; Dennis Kirichenko; Michael J Carr; Avinash Sharma; Edmund K Bartlett; Amanda A G Nijhuis; John F Thompson; Tina J Hieken; Lisa Kottschade; Jennifer Downs; David E Gyorki; Emma Stahlie; Alexander van Akkooi; David W Ollila; Jill Frank; Yun Song; Giorgos Karakousis; Marc Moncrieff; Jenny Nobes; John Vetto; Dale Han; Jeffrey M Farma; Jeremiah L Deneve; Martin D Fleming; Matthew C Perez; Michael C Lowe; Roger Olofsson Bagge; Jan Mattsson; Ann Y Lee; Russell S Berman; Harvey Chai; Hidde M Kroon; Juri Teras; Roland M Teras; Norma E Farrow; Georgia Beasley; Jane Yuet Ching Hui; Lukas Been; Schelto Kruijff; Youngchul Kim; Syeda Mahrukh Hussnain Naqvi; Amod A Sarnaik; Vernon K Sondak; Jonathan S Zager Journal: Cancer Date: 2021-04-07 Impact factor: 6.921
Authors: Karolina Richter; Tomasz Stefura; Krzysztof Macheta; Jonasz Tempski; Jakub Kazoń; Magdalena Szeremeta; Paweł Klimont; Marta Kołodziej-Rzepa; Tomasz Wojewoda; Wojciech M Wysocki Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-07-04 Impact factor: 4.964