Caroline C Kim1, Elizabeth G Berry2,3, Michael A Marchetti4, Susan M Swetter5,6, Geoffrey Lim7, Douglas Grossman8,9, Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski10, Emily Y Chu11, Michael E Ming11, Kathleen Zhu12, Meera Brahmbhatt2,13, Vijay Balakrishnan2,3, Michael J Davis2,3, Zachary Wolner4, Nathaniel Fleming5,6, Laura K Ferris7, John Nguyen14, Oleksandr Trofymenko10, Yuan Liu2, Suephy C Chen2,3. 1. Pigmented Lesion Clinic and Cutaneous Oncology Program, Department of Dermatology, Harvard Medical School, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts. 2. Department of Dermatology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 3. Division of Dermatology, Atlanta Veterans Administration Medical Center, Decatur, Georgia. 4. Dermatology Service, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York. 5. Pigmented Lesion and Melanoma Program, Department of Dermatology, Stanford University Medical Center, Palo Alto, California. 6. Dermatology Service, Veterans Affairs Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California. 7. Department of Dermatology, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. 8. Department of Dermatology, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City. 9. Department of Oncological Sciences, Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City. 10. Pigmented Lesion Clinic and Multidisciplinary Cutaneous Oncology Program, Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, University of Arizona, Tucson. 11. Pigmented Lesion Clinic, Department of Dermatology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia. 12. University of Massachusetts Medical School, Worcester. 13. Morehouse School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia. 14. University of Utah, Salt Lake City.
Abstract
Importance: Little evidence exists to guide the management of moderately dysplastic nevi excisionally biopsied without residual clinical pigmentation but with positive histologic margins (hereafter referred to as moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins). Objective: To determine outcomes and risk for the development of subsequent cutaneous melanoma (CM) from moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins observed for 3 years or more. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter (9 US academic dermatology sites) retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients 18 years or older with moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins and 3 years or more of follow-up data collected consecutively from January 1, 1990, to August 31, 2014. Records were reviewed for patient demographics, biopsy type, pathologic findings, and development of subsequent CM at the biopsy site or elsewhere on the body. The χ2 test, the Fisher exact test, and analysis of variance were used to assess univariate association for risk of subsequent CMs, in addition to multivariable logistic regression models. To confirm histologic grading, each site submitted 5 random representative slide cases for central dermatopathologic review. Statistical analysis was performed from October 1, 2017, to June 22, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Development of CM at a biopsy site or elsewhere on the body where there were moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins. Results: A total of 467 moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins from 438 patients (193 women and 245 men; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [16.1] years) were evaluated. No cases developed into CM at biopsy sites, with a mean (SD) follow-up time of 6.9 (3.4) years. However, 100 patients (22.8%) developed a CM at a separate site. Results of multivariate analyses revealed that history of CM was significantly associated with the risk of development of subsequent CM at a separate site (odds ratio, 11.74; 95% CI, 5.71-24.15; P < .001), as were prior biopsied dysplastic nevi (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.23-5.28; P = .01). The results of a central dermatopathologic review revealed agreement in 35 of 40 cases (87.5%). Three of 40 cases (7.5%) were upgraded in degree of atypia; of these, 1 was interpreted as melanoma in situ. That patient remains without recurrence or evidence of CM after 5 years of follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that close observation with routine skin surveillance is a reasonable management approach for moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins. However, having 2 or more biopsied dysplastic nevi (with 1 that is a moderately dysplastic nevus) appears to be associated with increased risk for subsequent CM at a separate site.
Importance: Little evidence exists to guide the management of moderately dysplastic nevi excisionally biopsied without residual clinical pigmentation but with positive histologic margins (hereafter referred to as moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins). Objective: To determine outcomes and risk for the development of subsequent cutaneous melanoma (CM) from moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins observed for 3 years or more. Design, Setting, and Participants: A multicenter (9 US academic dermatology sites) retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients 18 years or older with moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins and 3 years or more of follow-up data collected consecutively from January 1, 1990, to August 31, 2014. Records were reviewed for patient demographics, biopsy type, pathologic findings, and development of subsequent CM at the biopsy site or elsewhere on the body. The χ2 test, the Fisher exact test, and analysis of variance were used to assess univariate association for risk of subsequent CMs, in addition to multivariable logistic regression models. To confirm histologic grading, each site submitted 5 random representative slide cases for central dermatopathologic review. Statistical analysis was performed from October 1, 2017, to June 22, 2018. Main Outcomes and Measures: Development of CM at a biopsy site or elsewhere on the body where there were moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins. Results: A total of 467 moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins from 438 patients (193 women and 245 men; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [16.1] years) were evaluated. No cases developed into CM at biopsy sites, with a mean (SD) follow-up time of 6.9 (3.4) years. However, 100 patients (22.8%) developed a CM at a separate site. Results of multivariate analyses revealed that history of CM was significantly associated with the risk of development of subsequent CM at a separate site (odds ratio, 11.74; 95% CI, 5.71-24.15; P < .001), as were prior biopsied dysplastic nevi (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.23-5.28; P = .01). The results of a central dermatopathologic review revealed agreement in 35 of 40 cases (87.5%). Three of 40 cases (7.5%) were upgraded in degree of atypia; of these, 1 was interpreted as melanoma in situ. That patient remains without recurrence or evidence of CM after 5 years of follow-up. Conclusions and Relevance: This study suggests that close observation with routine skin surveillance is a reasonable management approach for moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins. However, having 2 or more biopsied dysplastic nevi (with 1 that is a moderately dysplastic nevus) appears to be associated with increased risk for subsequent CM at a separate site.
Authors: Sara Gandini; Francesco Sera; Maria Sofia Cattaruzza; Paolo Pasquini; Damiano Abeni; Peter Boyle; Carmelo Francesco Melchi Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2005-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Caroline C Kim; Susan M Swetter; Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski; James M Grichnik; Douglas Grossman; Allan C Halpern; John M Kirkwood; Sancy A Leachman; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Michael E Ming; Kelly C Nelson; Emir Veledar; Suraj S Venna; Suephy C Chen Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Kelly C Nelson; Douglas Grossman; Caroline C Kim; Suephy C Chen; Clara N Curiel-Lewandrowski; James M Grichnik; John M Kirkwood; Sancy A Leachman; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Susan M Swetter; Suraj S Venna; Michael E Ming Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2018-01-04 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: David A Gutman; Mohammed Khalilia; Sanghoon Lee; Michael Nalisnik; Zach Mullen; Jonathan Beezley; Deepak R Chittajallu; David Manthey; Lee A D Cooper Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: P H Duray; R DerSimonian; R Barnhill; K Stenn; M S Ernstoff; J Fine; J M Kirkwood Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 1992-11 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Andreas Blum; Rainer Hofmann-Wellenhof; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Giuseppe Argenziano; Horacio Cabo; Cristina Carrera; Bianca Costa Soares de Sá; Eric Ehrsam; Roger González; Josep Malvehy; Ausilia Maria Manganoni; Susana Puig; Olga Simionescu; Masaru Tanaka; Luc Thomas; Isabelle Tromme; Iris Zalaudek; Harald Kittler Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Nicholas D Flint; Michael D Bishop; Tristan C Smart; Jennifer L Strunck; Kenneth M Boucher; Douglas Grossman; Aaron M Secrest Journal: Fam Cancer Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 2.375