Cost-effectiveness of sentinel lymph node biopsy in thin melanomas

Is sentinel lymph node biopsy needed for lentigo maligna melanoma?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is an area of debate in the management of lentigo maligna melanoma (LMM). The utility of SLNB and its prognostic value in LMM have not yet been studied with large databases.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of the National Cancer Database (2012-2020) and the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (2010-2019) database for patients with cutaneous nonmetastatic LMM with Breslow thickness >1.0 mm. Multivariable logistic regression identified factors associated with SLNB performance and sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity. Univariable and multivariable analyses assessed overall survival (OS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) based on SLNB performance and SLN status.

RESULTS

Compared to other melanoma subtypes, LMM had lower rates of SLNB (66.6% vs. 80.0%-84.0%) and SLN positivity (11.3% vs. 18.6%-34.2%). Compared to patients who did not undergo SLNB, SLN status was significantly associated with improved OS in patients with SLN positive (HR = 0.64 [0.55-0.76]) and SLN negative (HR = 0.68 [0.49-0.94]), and worse MSS only in patients with positive SLN (HR = 3.93, p < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

The improved OS associated with SLNB likely implies surgical selection bias. Analysis of MSS confirms appropriate patient selection and suggests important prognostic value associated with SLN status. These results support continued SLNB for LMM patients according to standard guidelines.

Predictors of sentinel lymph node metastasis in very thin invasive melanomas

BACKGROUND

Melanomas < 0.8 mm in Breslow depth have less than a 5% risk for nodal positivity. Nonetheless, nodal positivity is prognostic for this group. Early identification of nodal positivity may improve the outcomes for these patients.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the degree to which ulceration and other high-risk features predict sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity for very thin melanomas.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database was reviewed from 2012 to 2018 for patients with melanoma with Breslow thickness < 0.8 mm. Data were analysed from 7 July 2022 through to 25 February 2023. Patients were excluded if data regarding their ulceration status or SLN biopsy (SLNB) performance were unknown. We analysed patient, tumour and health system factors for their effect on SLN positivity. Data were analysed using χ2 tests and logistic regressions. Overall survival (OS) was compared by Kaplan-Meier analyses.

RESULTS

Positive nodal metastases were seen in 876 (5.0%) patients who underwent SLNB (17 692). Factors significantly associated with nodal positivity on multivariable analysis include lymphovascular invasion [odds ratio (OR) 4.5, P < 0.001], ulceration (OR 2.6, P < 0.001), mitoses (OR 2.1, P < 0.001) and nodular subtype (OR 2.1, P < 0.001). Five-year OS was 75% and 92% for patients with positive and negative SLN, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Nodal positivity has prognostic significance for very thin melanomas. In our cohort, the rate of nodal positivity was 5% overall in these patients who underwent SLNB. Specific tumour factors (e.g. lymphovascular invasion, ulceration, mitoses, nodular subtype) were associated with higher rates of SLN metastases and should be used to guide clinicians in choosing which patients will benefit from SLNB.

A Clinical Decision Tool to Calculate Pretest Probability of Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Primary Cutaneous Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Although sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) status is a strong prognostic indicator for cutaneous melanoma, unnecessary SLNBs have substantial cost and morbidity burden.

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to develop, validate, and present a personalized, clinical, decision-making tool using nationally representative data with clinically actionable probability thresholds (Expected Lymphatic Metastasis Outcome [ELMO]).

METHODS

Data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Registry from 2000 to 2017 and the National Cancer Database (NCDB) from 2004 to 2015 were used to develop and internally validate a logistic ridge regression predictive model for SLNB positivity. External validation was done with 1568 patients at a large tertiary referral center.

RESULTS

The development cohort included 134,809 patients, and the internal validation cohort included 38,518 patients. ELMO (AUC 0.85) resulted in a 29.54% SLNB reduction rate and greater sensitivity in predicting SLNB status for T1b, T2a, and T2b tumors than previous models. In external validation, ELMO had an accuracy of 0.7586 and AUC of 0.7218. Limitations of this study are potential miscoding, unaccounted confounders, and effect modification.

CONCLUSIONS

ELMO ( https://melanoma-sentinel.herokuapp.com/ ) has been developed and validated (internally and externally) by using the largest publicly available dataset of melanoma patients and was found to have high accuracy compared with other published models and gene expression tests. Individualized risk estimates for SLNB positivity are critical in facilitating thorough decision-making for healthcare providers and patients with melanoma.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy for head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma using the Brigham and Women's staging system: a cost analysis

The objective is to determine the cost-effectiveness of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) according to the Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) Tumor Staging system. A decision analysis was utilized to examine costs and outcomes associated with the use of SLNB in patients with high-risk head and neck CSCC. Decision tree outcome probabilities were obtained from published literature. Costs were derived from Medicare reimbursement rates (US$) and effectiveness was represented by quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), with a willingness-to-pay set at $100,000 per QALY gained. SLNB was found to be a cost-effective tool for patients with T3 tumors, with an ICER of $18,110.57. Withholding SLNB was the dominant strategy for both T2a and T2b lesions, with ICERs of - $2468.99 and - $16,694.00, respectively. Withholding SLNB remained the dominant strategy when examining immunosuppressed patients with T2a or T2b lesions. In patients with head and neck CSCC, those with T3 or T2b lesions with additional risk factors not accounted for in the staging system alone, may be considered for SLNB, while in other tumor stages it may be impractical. SLNB should only be offered on an individual patient basis.

The 31-gene expression profile test informs sentinel lymph node biopsy decisions in patients with cutaneous melanoma: results of a prospective, multicenter study

BACKGROUND

The 31-gene expression profile test (Class 1A: low-risk; 1B/2A: intermediate-risk; 2B: high-risk) is validated to identify patients with cutaneous melanoma who can safely forego sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). The objective of the current study is to quantify SLNB reduction by clinicians using 31-GEP.

METHODS

Patients with T1-T2 tumors eligible for SLNB were seen by surgical oncologists (89.1%), dermatologists (7.8%), and medical oncologists (3.1%). After receiving 31-GEP results but before SLNB, clinicians were asked which clinical and pathological features influenced SLNB decisions (n = 191). The Exact binomial test was used to compare SLNB procedure rates to a contemporary study (78% SLNB baseline rate). Logistic regression modeling (odds ratio [OR], 95% CI) was used to identify features associated with SLNB procedure rates.

RESULTS

One hundred clinical decisions (52.4%) were influenced by the 31-GEP to forego SLNB and 70% (70/100) were not performed. Of the 30 performed, 0% (0/30) were positive. The 31-GEP influenced sixty-three clinical decisions (33.0%) to perform SLNB, and 92.1% (58/63) were performed. There was a clinically meaningful 29.4% reduction of SLNBs performed in patients with a Class 1A result relative to the baseline rate of 78.0% (p < .01). In patients ≥55 or ≥65-year-old, SLNB reduction was 32.3% (p < .01), 28.3% (p < .01), respectively. Overall, 85.3% of decisions relating to SLNB were influenced by 31-GEP results.

CONCLUSION

In this prospective, multicenter study, clinicians demonstrated clinically meaningful use of the 31-GEP test to forego or pursue SLNB in patients with T1-T2 tumors resulting in a significant, risk appropriate decrease in SLNBs.

Cost evaluation of the Merlin assay for predicting melanoma sentinel lymph node biopsy metastasis

BACKGROUND

The Merlin assay for melanoma-risk assessment has become commercially available to reduce the rate of unnecessary sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) in SLNB-eligible patients with cutaneous melanoma. Merlin low-risk patients are recommended to undergo wide local excision (WLE) of the primary tumor, whereas Merlin high-risk patients are recommended to undergo both SLNB and WLE. Here, we compared the cost of a Merlin testing strategy to that of a no-testing strategy (usual care) before prescribing SLNB.

METHODS

We identified T1 and T2 patients who underwent WLE and SLNB but not completion lymph node dissection between 2007 and 2018. Controls were T1 patients who only underwent WLE. Costs for WLE and SLNB were calculated by converting institutional cost data to standardized Medicare reimbursement rates. We then developed a decision tree to compare the cost of Merlin testing to that of a no-testing strategy (usual care).

RESULTS

The average standardized cost of WLE was $2066, whereas the cost of WLE and SLNB was $11,976 based on Medicare rates. At a cost below $7350 for T1b melanoma and $4600 for T1b to T2 melanoma, Merlin testing was cost-saving compared to a no-testing strategy (usual care), assuming Medicare reimbursement rates.

CONCLUSION

Merlin testing for T1b and T2 melanoma is potentially cost saving depending on the cost of the molecular assay and SLNB reimbursement rates. In addition to being cost saving, Merlin is expected to improve health-related quality of life.

Cost Analysis of Adjuvant Whole-Brain Radiotherapy Treatment Versus No Whole-Brain Radiotherapy After Stereotactic Radiosurgery and/or Surgery Among Adults with One to Three Melanoma Brain Metastases: Results from a Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

We aimed to compare Australian health system costs at 12 months for adjuvant whole-brain radiotherapy (WBRT) treatment after stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS) and/or surgery versus observation among adults with one to three melanoma brain metastases. We hypothesized that treatment with adjuvant WBRT and subsequent healthcare would be more expensive than SRS/surgery alone.

METHODS

The analysis was conducted alongside a multicentre, randomized phase III trial. A bespoke cost questionnaire was used to measure healthcare use, including hospitalizations, specialist and primary care visits, imaging, and medicines over 12 months. Mean per-patient costs were calculated based on the quantity of resources used and unit costs, reported in Australian dollars ($AU), year 2018 values. Skewness of cost data was determined using normality tests and censor-adjusted costs reported using the Kaplan-Meier sample average method. The analysis of difference in mean costs at each 2-month time point and at 12 months was performed and checked using Kruskal-Wallis, generalized linear models with gamma distribution and log link, modified Park test, ordinary least squares, and non-parametric bootstrapping.

RESULTS

In total, 89 patients with similar characteristics at baseline were included in the cost analysis (n = 43 WBRT; n = 46 observation). Hospitalization cost was the main cost, ranging from 63 to 89% of total healthcare costs. The unadjusted 12-monthly cost for WBRT was $AU71,138 ± standard deviation 41,475 and for observation $AU69,848 ± 33,233; p = 0.7426. The censor-adjusted 12-monthly cost for WBRT was $AU90,277 ± 36,274 and $AU82,080 ± 34,411 for observation. There was no significant difference in 2-monthly costs between groups (p > 0.30 for all models).

CONCLUSIONS

Most costs were related to inpatient hospitalizations associated with disease recurrence. Adding WBRT after local SRS/surgery for patients with one to three melanoma brain metastases did not significantly increase health system costs during the first 12 months.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ACTRN12607000512426, prospectively registered 14 September 2007.

Utility of a Model for Predicting the Risk of Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis in Patients With Cutaneous Melanoma

Importance

A neural network-based model (i31-GEP-SLNB) that uses clinicopathologic factors (thickness, mitoses, ulceration, patient age) plus molecular analysis (31-gene expression profiling) has become commercially available to guide selection for sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in cutaneous melanoma, but its clinical utility is not well characterized.

Objective

To determine if use of the i31-GEP-SLNB model is associated with clinical benefit when used to select patients for SLN biopsy.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This decision-analytic study used data derived from a published external validation study of the i31-GEP-SLNB prediction model. Participants included patients with primary cutaneous melanoma.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the net benefit associated with using the i31-GEP-SLNB model for SLN biopsy selection compared with other selection strategies (SLN biopsy for all patients and SLN biopsy for no patients) at a 5% risk threshold. Analyses were stratified by American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) T category. The reduction in the number of avoidable SLN biopsies and relative utility were also calculated.

Results

Compared with other SLN biopsy selection strategies, use of the i31-GEP-SLNB model had greater net benefit for patients with T1b (+0.012), T2a (+0.002), and T2b melanoma (+0.002) but not for those with high-risk T1a (-0.003) disease. The improvement in relative utility was +22% in patients with T1b, +1% in T2a, and +2% in T2b melanoma. Compared with SLN biopsy for all patients, use of the model would equate to a 23% decrease in SLN biopsies among patients with T1b disease without an SLN metastasis with no increase in the number of patients with an SLN metastasis left untreated; among patients with T2a and T2b melanoma, the net decrease in avoidable biopsies compared with SLN biopsy for all was 3% and 4%, respectively.

Conclusions and Relevance

The findings of this decision-analytic study suggest that i31-GEP SLNB has significant potential for risk-stratifying patients with T1b melanoma if using a 5% risk threshold; its role among patients with T1a and T2 melanoma or using other risk thresholds requires further study. A prospective validation study confirming the added clinical benefit and cost-effectiveness of i31-GEP-SLNB compared with free clinicopathologic-based prediction models is needed in patients with T1b melanoma.

Predictive Values of Pathological and Clinical Risk Factors for Positivity of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Thin Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background

The indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for thin melanoma are still unclear. This meta-analysis aims to determine the positive rate of SLNB in thin melanoma and to summarize the predictive value of different high-risk features for positive results of SLNB.

Methods

Four databases were searched for literature on SLNB performed in patients with thin melanoma published between January 2000 and December 2020. The overall positive rate and positive rate of each high-risk feature were calculated and obtained with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Both unadjusted odds ratios (ORs) and adjusted ORs (AORs) of high-risk features were analyzed. Pooled effects were estimated using random-effects model meta-analyses.

Results

Sixty-six studies reporting 38,844 patients with thin melanoma who underwent SLNB met the inclusion criteria. The pooled positive rate of SLNB was 5.1% [95% confidence interval (CI) 4.9%-5.3%]. Features significantly predicted a positive result of SLNB were thickness≥0.8 mm [AOR 1.94 (95%CI 1.28-2.95); positive rate 7.0% (95%CI 6.0-8.0%)]; ulceration [AOR 3.09 (95%CI 1.75-5.44); positive rate 4.2% (95%CI 1.8-7.2%)]; mitosis rate >0/mm2 [AOR 1.63 (95%CI 1.13-2.36); positive rate 7.7% (95%CI 6.3-9.1%)]; microsatellites [OR 3.8 (95%CI 1.38-10.47); positive rate 16.6% (95%CI 2.4-36.6%)]; and vertical growth phase [OR 2.76 (95%CI 1.72-4.43); positive rate 8.1% (95%CI 6.3-10.1%)].

Conclusions

The overall positive rate of SLNB in thin melanoma was 5.1%. The strongest predictor for SLN positivity identified was microsatellites on unadjusted analysis and ulceration on adjusted analysis. Breslow thickness ≥0.8 mm and mitosis rate >0/mm² both predict SLN positivity in adjusted analysis and increase the positive rate to 7.0% and 7.7%. We suggest patients with thin melanoma with the above high-risk features should be considered for giving an SLNB.

Machine learning directed sentinel lymph node biopsy in cutaneous head and neck melanoma

BACKGROUND

The specificity of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for detecting lymph node metastasis in head and neck melanoma (HNM) is low under current National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) treatment guidelines.

METHODS

Multiple machine learning (ML) algorithms were developed to identify HNM patients at very low risk of occult nodal metastasis using National Cancer Database (NCDB) data from 8466 clinically node negative HNM patients who underwent SLNB. SLNB performance under NCCN guidelines and ML algorithm recommendations was compared on independent test data from the NCDB (n = 2117) and an academic medical center (n = 96).

RESULTS

The top-performing ML algorithm (AUC = 0.734) recommendations obtained significantly higher specificity compared to the NCCN guidelines in both internal (25.8% vs. 11.3%, p < 0.001) and external test populations (30.1% vs. 7.1%, p < 0.001), while achieving sensitivity >97%.

CONCLUSION

Machine learning can identify clinically node negative HNM patients at very low risk of nodal metastasis, who may not benefit from SLNB.

More sentinel lymph node biopsies for thin melanomas after transition to AJCC 8th edition do not increase positivity rate: A Danish population-based study of 7148 patients

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the outcome of sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB) in patients with thin melanoma before and after the implementation of AJCC 8th edition (AJCC8) and identified predictors of positive sentinel lymph nodes (+SLN).

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with T1 melanomas (Breslow thickness ≤1 mm) during 2016-2017 as per AJCC 7th edition (AJCC7) (n = 3414) and 2018-2019 as per AJCC8 (n = 3734) were identified in the Danish Melanoma Database.

RESULTS

More SLNBs were performed in the AJCC8 cohort compared to the AJCC7 (22.2% vs. 16.2%, p < 0.001), with no significant difference in +SLN rates (4.7% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.118). In the AJCC7 + SLN subgroup, no melanomas were ulcerated, 94.6% had mitotic rate (MR) ≥ 1, 67.6% were ≥0.8 mm and 32.4% would be T1a according to AJCC8. In the AJCC8 + SLN subgroup, 10.3% were ulcerated, 74.4% had MR≥ 1, 97.4% were ≥0.8 mm and 23.1% would be T1a according to AJCC7. On multivariable analysis younger age and MR ≥ 1 were significant predictors of +SLN.

CONCLUSION

More SLNBs were performed in T1 melanomas after transition to AJCC8 without an increase in +SLN rate. None of the AJCC8 T1b criteria were significant predictors of +SLN. We suggest that mitosis and younger age should be considered as indications for SLNB in thin melanoma.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy: Indications and Technique

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is a key tool in the care of many patients with melanoma. The indications for the procedure have gradually become clearer over the 3 decades since the technique was developed. For appropriately selected patients, it carries enormous significance. Although it is a minimally invasive procedure, it does carry some risk. It is also a multidisciplinary procedure, requiring knowledge and experience from several specialties including nuclear medicine, surgery, and pathology.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy guideline concordance in melanoma: Analysis of the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

This study investigated the impact of treating facility type on guideline-concordant sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) management in T1a* (defined as a Breslow depth <0.76 mm without ulceration or mitoses) and T2/T3 melanoma.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study utilizing the National Cancer Database from 2012 to 2016.

RESULTS

Our cohort included 109,432 patients. For T1a* melanomas, 85% of patients received guideline-concordant SLNB management at community and academic facilities versus 75% of patients at integrated network facilities (p < .001). Over 83% of patients with T2/T3 melanoma treated at an academic facility received guideline-concordant SLNB management versus 77% treated at a community facility (p < .001). Adjusting for demographic and clinical factors, integrated (adjusted odds ratio, aOR = 0.54), and comprehensive community (aOR = 0.74) facilities were less likely to provide guideline-concordant SLNB management in patients with T1a* melanoma compared to academic facilities. Community facilities (aOR = 0.72) were less likely to provide guideline-concordant SLNB management in patients with T2/T3 melanoma compared to academic facilities.

CONCLUSION

Academic facilities provide the highest rate of guideline-concordant sentinel lymph node management. Comparatively, community programs may underutilize SLNB in T2/T3 disease, while integrated and comprehensive community facilities may over-utilize SLNB in T1a* disease.

Use and Costs of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Non-Ulcerated T1b Melanoma: Analysis of a Population-Based Registry

BACKGROUND

The utility of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for non-ulcerated T1b melanoma is debated and associated costs are poorly characterized. Prior work using institutional registries may overestimate the incidence of nodal positivity in this population.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to estimate the use of SLNB, positivity prevalence, and procedural costs in patients with non-ulcerated T1b melanoma using a population-based registry.

METHODS

We identified patients with clinically node-negative, non-ulcerated melanoma 0.8-1.0 mm thick (T1b according to the 8th edition standard of the American Joint Committee on Cancer) in the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database from 2010 to 2016. The prevalence of SLNB procedures and positive sentinel nodes were calculated. Factors associated with SLNB and sentinel node positivity were assessed using logistic regression. Medicare reimbursement costs and patient out-of-pocket expenses for SLNB and wide local excision (WLE) versus WLE alone were estimated.

RESULTS

Among 7245 included patients, 3835(53%) underwent SLNB, 156 (4.1%, 95% confidence interval 3.5-4.7) of whom had a positive SLNB. Younger age, >1 mitosis per mm², female sex, and truncal tumor location were associated with higher odds of positivity. The estimated SLNB cost to identify one patient with stage III disease was $71,700 (range $54,648-$83,172). Out-of-pocket expenses for a Medicare patient were estimated to be $652 for a WLE and SLNB and $79 for a WLE alone.

CONCLUSIONS

In this population-based study, only 4% of selected non-ulcerated T1b patients had a positive SLNB, which is lower than prior reports. At the population level, SLNB is associated with high costs per prognostic information gained.

Redefining Criteria to Ensure Adequate Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy With Dual Tracer for Breast Cancer

Background

For sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in patients with breast cancer, the dual tracer of blue dye and radioisotope with the 10% rule that all nodes with radioactive count of 10% or more of the hottest node ex vivo should be removed is widely accepted. However, the cut-off point of radioactivity is being questioned for possibly excessive removal of negative nodes.

Methods

To compare different percentile rules and optimize the criteria for identifying SLNs, we established a database which prospectively collected the radioactivity, status of blue dye and the pathological results of each SLN in breast cancer patients who successfully underwent SLNB with a combination of methylene blue and radioisotope.

Results

A total of 2,529 SLNs from 1,039 patients were identified from August 2010 to August 2019. 16.4% (414/2,529) positive nodes were removed at a cost of 83.6% (2115/2,529) negative nodes removed excessively. Up to 17.9% (375/2,115) negative nodes were removed as radioactively hot nodes without blue staining. By gradually increasing the threshold by each 10%, the number of negative nodes identified reduced by 18.2% (385/2,115) with only three node-positive patients (1.0%) missed to be identified using the “40% + blue” rule. In patients with ≥ 2 SLNs removed, 12.3% (238/1,942) negative nodes avoided unnecessary removal with only 0.8% (2/239) positive patients missed with the “hottest two + blue” rule.

Conclusions

Our data indicated that the “40% + blue” rule or the “hottest two + blue” rule for SLNB with the dual tracer of blue dye and radioisotope may be considered as a potential alternative rule to minimize extra nodes resected. Nonetheless, it should be validated by prospective trials with long-term follow-up.

What is the Cost-Effective Treatment for Melanoma Patients with a Positive Sentinel Node?

BACKGROUND

Survival for positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) patients does not differ between completion lymph node dissection (CLND) and nodal observation (OBS). However, treating these patients with CLND and checkpoint inhibitors, such as pembrolizumab (PEM), improves outcomes. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of OBS, CLND, and CLND with PEM (CLND-PEM) treatments.

METHODS

A Markov model was designed to simulate treatment for a theoretical cohort of 1000 positive SLN patients per therapy with a 5-year follow-up period. An intervention was cost-effective if its incremental cost-effectiveness ratio among therapies was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY).

RESULTS

Compared with CLND or CLND-PEM, OBS resulted in fewer lymphedema cases but in more disease recurrences. Compared with OBS, CLND had higher costs and lower QALYs. Although CLND-PEM had a lower number of recurrences and deaths than OBS or CLND, it had higher costs and lower QALYs than OBS, and thus was not cost-effective. However, with the effects of CLND from CLND-PEM removed, allowing evaluation of PEM effects alone (PEM alone), the resulting QALYs were the highest, but PEM alone still was not cost-effective compared with OBS ($1.2 million per QALY). By reducing the drug cost to less than $14,404 per patient, PEM alone would become cost-effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with CLND, CLND-PEM, and PEM alone, OBS was cost-effective for managing positive SLN patients. Although CLND-PEM and PEM alone result in fewer recurrences and deaths, these therapies were not cost-effective due to the quality-of-life decrement of CLND and the current high drug cost of PEM.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is associated with increased cost in higher risk thin melanoma

INTRODUCTION

National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines recommend that sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) be discussed with patients with thin melanoma at higher risk for lymph node metastasis (T1b or T1a with positive deep margins, lymphovascular invasion, or high mitotic index). We examined the association between SLNB and resource utilization in this cohort.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients that underwent wide local excision for higher risk thin melanomas from 2009 to 2018 at a tertiary care center. Patients who underwent SLNB were compared to those who did not undergo SLNB with regard to resource utilization, including total hospital cost.

RESULTS

A total of 70 patients were included in the analysis and 50 patients (71.4%) underwent SLNB. SLNB was associated with increased hospital costs ($6700 vs. $3767; p < .01) and increased operative time (68.5 vs. 36.0 min; p < .01). This cost difference persisted in multivariable regression (p < .01). Of patients who underwent successful SLN mapping, 3 out of 49 patients had a positive SLN (6.1%). The cost to identify a single positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) was $47,906.

CONCLUSION

In patients with a higher risk of thin melanoma, SLNB is associated with increased cost despite a low likelihood of SLN positivity. These data better inform patient-provider discussions as the role of SLNB in thin melanoma evolves.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for T1b Melanoma: Balancing Prognostic Value and Cost

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study is to report the additional prognostic information and cost associated with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for patients with T1b melanoma.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

An institutional database was queried for patients with T1b melanoma (0.8-1.0 mm or < 0.8 mm with ulceration) with at least 5 years of follow-up. Results of SLNB, completion lymphadenectomy (CLND), recurrence, and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were assessed. Institutional costs of melanoma care were converted to Medicare proportional dollars. A Markov model was created to estimate long-term costs.

RESULTS

Among the total 392 patients, 238 underwent SLNB. Median follow-up was 10.5 years. SLNB was positive in 19 patients (8.0%). Patients who underwent SLNB had higher 10-year nodal recurrence-free survival (98.6% vs. 91.2%, p < 0.001) but not MSS (94.4% vs. 93.2%, p = 0.55). Ulceration (HR 4.7, p = 0.022) and positive sentinel node (HR 11.5, p < 0.001) were associated with worse MSS. Estimates for 5-year costs reflect a fourfold increase in total costs of care associated with SLNB. However, a treatment plan that forgoes adjuvant therapy for resected stage IIIA melanoma but offers systemic therapy for a node-basin recurrence would nullify the additional cost of SLNB.

CONCLUSIONS

SLNB is prognostic for T1b melanoma. Its impact on the overall cost of melanoma care is intimately tied to systemic therapy in the adjuvant and recurrent settings.

A nomogram to predict node positivity in patients with thin melanomas helps inform shared patient decision making

OBJECTIVE

To develop a nomogram to estimate the probability of positive sentinel lymph node (+SLN) for patients with thin melanoma and to characterize its potential impact on sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) rates.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with thin (0.5-1.0 mm) melanoma were identified from the National Cancer Database 2012 to 2015. A multivariable logistic regression model was used to examine factors associated with +SLN, and a nomogram to predict +SLN was constructed. Nomogram performance was evaluated and diagnostic test statistics were calculated.

RESULTS

Of the 21 971 patients included 10 108 (46.0%) underwent SLNB, with a 4.0% +SLN rate. On multivariable analysis, age, Breslow thickness, lymphovascular invasion, ulceration, and Clark level were significantly associated with SLN status. The area under the receiver operating curve was 0.67 (95% confidence interval, 0.65-0.70). While 15 249 (69.4%) patients had either T1b tumors or T1a tumors with at least one adverse feature, only 2846 (13.0%) had a nomogram predicted probability of a +SLN ≥5%. Using this cut-off, the indication for a SLNB in these patients would be reduced by 81.3% as compared to the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition staging criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The risk predictions obtained from the nomogram allow for more accurate selection of patients who could benefit from SLNB.

Guidance of sentinel lymph node biopsy decisions in patients with T1–T2 melanoma using gene expression profiling

Aim: Can gene expression profiling be used to identify patients with T1–T2 melanoma at low risk for sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity? Patients & methods: Bioinformatics modeling determined a population in which a 31-gene expression profile test predicted <5% SLN positivity. Multicenter, prospectively-tested (n = 1421) and retrospective (n = 690) cohorts were used for validation and outcomes, respectively. Results: Patients 55–64 years and ≥65 years with a class 1A (low-risk) profile had SLN positivity rates of 4.9% and 1.6%. Class 2B (high-risk) patients had SLN positivity rates of 30.8% and 11.9%. Melanoma-specific survival was 99.3% for patients ≥55 years with class 1A, T1–T2 tumors and 55.0% for class 2B, SLN-positive, T1–T2 tumors. Conclusion: The 31-gene expression profile test identifies patients who could potentially avoid SLN biopsy.

The prognostic value of sentinel lymph nodes on distant metastasis-free survival in patients with high-risk squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is the second most common cutaneous cancer worldwide. Several tumour characteristics are considered to pose an elevated risk for systemic spread of carcinoma cells ('high-risk' features). Early detection of subclinical metastases could permit early treatment and improve overall survival. To detect occult metastases and evaluate risk of future distant metastases, diagnostic extirpation of the sentinel lymph node (SLNE) is routinely performed in cutaneous melanoma and can be offered in high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (hrcSCC). However, the clinical utility of SLNE in patients with hrcSCC remains unknown.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An ambidirectional cohort study with prospective patient recruitment was performed. Between July 2008 and April 2017, of 139 eligible patients, SLNE was performed in 114 cases (25 patients refused). Median follow-up was 23.7 months.

RESULTS

We analysed the characteristics of 114 patients with hrcSCC who underwent SLNE. Eighty-nine patients (78.1%) were men, and 25 patients (21.9%) were women (median age 72.2 years). In multivariable analyses, histopathological detection of ulceration (hazard ratio, HR 2.9 [95% confidence interval, CI 0.7-12.2]), perineural growth (HR 3.0 [95% CI 0.6-14.6]) and clinically occult SLN metastases (HR 10.7 [95% CI 1.9-60.6]) were strongly associated with future occurrence of distant metastases. A positive predictive value of 50% was noted for patients where SLN metastasis was detected to develop distant metastases. However, distant metastases also occurred in seven patients when histopathological SLN evaluation had shown no evidence of metastases.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest SLNE is not a reliable diagnostic approach to evaluate the risk of future systemic carcinoma spread and development of distant metastases in patients with hrcSCC.

Vertical Growth Phase as a Prognostic Factor for Sentinel Lymph Node Positivity in Thin Melanomas: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

The 2010 American Joint Committee on Cancer guidelines recommended consideration of sentinel lymph node biopsy for thin melanoma (Breslow thickness <1.0 mm) with aggressive pathologic features such as ulceration and/or high mitotic rate. The therapeutic benefit of biopsy-based treatment remains controversial. The authors conducted a meta-analysis to estimate the risk and outcomes of sentinel lymph node positivity in thin melanoma, and examined established and potential novel predictors of positivity.

METHODS

Three databases were searched by two independent reviewers for sentinel lymph node positivity in patients with thin melanoma. Study heterogeneity, publication bias, and quality were assessed. Data collected included age, sex, Breslow thickness, mitotic rate, ulceration, regression, Clark level, tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes, and vertical growth phase. Positivity was estimated using a random effects model. Association of positivity and clinicopathologic features was investigated using meta-regression.

RESULTS

Ninety-three studies were identified representing 35,276 patients with thin melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy. Of these patients, 952 had a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy, for an event rate of 5.1 percent (95 percent CI, 4.1 to 6.3 percent). Significant associations were identified between positivity and Breslow thickness greater than 0.75 mm but less than 1.0 mm, mitotic rate, ulceration, and Clark level greater than IV. Seven studies reported on vertical growth phase, which was strongly associated with positivity (OR, 4.3; 95 percent CI, 2.5 to 7.7).

CONCLUSIONS

To date, this is the largest meta-analysis to examine predictors of sentinel lymph node biopsy positivity in patients with thin melanoma. Vertical growth phase had a strong association with biopsy positivity, providing support for its inclusion in standardized pathologic reporting.

Transected thin melanoma: Implications for sentinel lymph node staging

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Indications for sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy in patients with thin melanoma (≤1 mm thick) are controversial. We asked whether deep margin (DM) positivity at initial biopsy of thin melanoma is associated with SLN positivity.

METHODS

Cases were identified using prospectively maintained databases at two melanoma centers. Patients who had undergone SLN biopsy for melanoma ≤1 mm were included. DM status was assessed for association with SLN metastasis in univariate and multivariate analyses.

RESULTS

1413 cases were identified, but only 1129 with known DM status were included. 39% of patients had a positive DM on original biopsy. DM-positive and DM-negative patients did not differ significantly in primary thickness, ulceration, or mitotic activity. DM-positive and DM-negative patients had similar incidence of SLN metastasis (5.7% vs 3.5%; P = 0.07). Positive DM was not associated with SLN metastasis on univariate analysis (OR 1.69, 95% CI: 0.95-3.00, P = 0.07) or on multivariate analysis adjusted for Breslow depth, Clark level, mitotic rate, and ulceration (OR = 1.59, 95% CI: 0.89-2.85; P = 0.12).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients with thin melanoma, a positive DM on initial biopsy is not associated with risk of SLN metastasis, so DM positivity should not be considered an indication for SLN staging in an otherwise low-risk patient.

Sentinel Node Biopsy for Thin Melanomas: Which Patients Should be Considered?

BACKGROUND

As the incidence of melanoma increases, thin melanomas are being diagnosed at an increasingly frequent rate. Currently available prognostic factors are limited in their ability to reliably discriminate which patients will manifest regional nodal metastasis and would be identified early through sentinel node biopsy.

METHODS

We summarized our experience with sentinel node biopsy for patients with cutaneous melanomas less than 1.00 mm in Breslow thickness, with evaluation of Clark level as a predictor of positive sentinel node metastasis.

RESULTS

Among the 409 patients identified, micrometastases were found in the sentinel node in 20 patients, for an overall incidence of nodal progression of 4.9%. A total of 252 (62%) were Clark level II or III (11 of whom had a positive sentinel node) and 157 (38%) were Clark level IV (9 of whom had a positive sentinel node). We reviewed the literature to identify reliable indicators that might be helpful in determining which patients with "thin melanomas" would be likely to manifest regional progression to warrant routinely undergoing a preoperative lymphoscintigraphy followed by a sentinel node biopsy.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on available data, patients with melanomas between 0.75 and 1.00 mm are appropriate candidates to be considered for sentinel node biopsy after discussing the likelihood of finding evidence of nodal progression, the risks of sentinel node biopsy (including the risk of a false-negative result), and the lack of proven survival benefit from any form of surgical nodal staging.

Sentinel node biopsy in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma of any thickness: A cost-effectiveness analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess the cost-effectiveness of the sentinel node biopsy with lymphadenectomy for nodal metastases (SNB) in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma (CM) of different Breslow thickness (intermediate, thick, thin).

METHODS

Decision tree models were constructed to compare two different strategies of management of patients with CM, wide excision of the primary lesion and SNB and wide excision only (WE). Tree models were created for every Breslow thickness over 1-, 5- and 10-year time horizons. Mean and total direct healthcare costs, life years saved (LYSs), quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), cost effectiveness ratio (CER), and incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) were estimated. Every model was considered as a base case, and its results tested with sensitivity analyses.

RESULTS

Base case analyses showed that the best results were obtained for intermediate CM over 10-year time horizon. In this case, ICER for SNB was 130,508€/QALY, well over the threshold of acceptance (30,000€/QALY). In patients with intermediate CM over 1 and 5 years, and for those with thick and thin CM at any time horizon, negative ICER values were estimated since SNB was proved to be more expensive and less effective than WE. Sensitivity analyses confirmed the robustness of our results.

CONCLUSIONS

SNB caused no improvement in health outcomes in terms of LYSs and QALYs in patients with thick and thin CM, and only a slight benefit in those with intermediate CM. WE was more cost-effective compared with SNB for any CM thickness over any time horizon up to 10 years.

Molecular markers to complement sentinel node status in predicting survival in patients with high-risk locally invasive melanoma

Sentinel lymph node status is a major prognostic marker in locally invasive cutaneous melanoma. However, this procedure is not always feasible, requires advanced logistics and carries rare but significant morbidity. Previous studies have linked markers of tumour biology to patient survival. In this study, we aimed to combine the predictive value of established biomarkers in addition to clinical parameters as indicators of survival in addition to or instead of sentinel node biopsy in a cohort of high-risk melanoma patients. Patients with locally invasive melanomas undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy were ascertained and prospectively followed. Information on mortality was validated through the National Death Index. Immunohistochemistry was used to analyse proteins previously reported to be associated with melanoma survival, namely Ki67, p16 and CD163. Evaluation and multivariate analyses according to REMARK criteria were used to generate models to predict disease-free and melanoma-specific survival. A total of 189 patients with available archival material of their primary tumour were analysed. Our study sample was representative of the entire cohort (N = 559). Average Breslow thickness was 2.5 mm. Thirty-two (17%) patients in the study sample died from melanoma during the follow-up period. A prognostic score was developed and was strongly predictive of survival, independent of sentinel node status. The score allowed classification of risk of melanoma death in sentinel node-negative patients. Combining clinicopathological factors and established biomarkers allows prediction of outcome in locally invasive melanoma and might be implemented in addition to or in cases when sentinel node biopsy cannot be performed.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Thin Cutaneous Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Most patients with melanoma have a thin (≤1.00 mm) lesion. There is uncertainty as to which patients with thin melanoma should undergo sentinel lymph node (SN) biopsy. We sought to quantify the proportion of SN metastases in patients with thin melanoma and to determine the pooled effect of high-risk features of the primary lesion on SN positivity.

METHODS

Published literature between 1980 and 2015 was searched and critically appraised. Primary outcome was the proportion of SN metastases in patients with thin cutaneous melanoma. Secondary outcomes included the effect of high-risk pathological features of the primary lesion on the proportion of SN metastases. Summary measures were estimated by Mantel-Haenszel method using random effects meta-analyses.

RESULTS

Sixty studies (10,928 patients) met the criteria for inclusion. Pooled SN positivity was 4.5 % [95 % confidence interval (CI) 3.8-5.2 %]. Predictors of a positive SN were: thickness ≥0.75 mm [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) 1.90 (95 % CI 1.08-3.34); with a likelihood of SN metastases of 8.8 % (95 % CI 6.4-11.2 %)]; Clark level IV/V [AOR 2.24 (95 % CI 1.23-4.08); with a likelihood of 7.3 % (95 % CI 6.2-8.4 %)]; ≥1 mitoses/mm² [AOR 6.64 (95 % CI 2.77-15.88); pooled likelihood 8.8 % (95 % CI 6.2-11.4 %)]; and the presence of microsatellites [unadjusted OR 6.94 (95 % CI 2.13-22.60); likelihood 26.6 % (95 % CI 4.3-48.9 %)].

CONCLUSIONS

The pooled proportion of SN metastases in thin melanoma is 4.5 %. Thickness ≥0.75 mm, Clark level IV/V, mitoses, and microsatellites significantly increased the odds of SN positivity and should prompt strong consideration of SN biopsy.

Surgical Management of Melanoma

The surgical management of melanoma has undergone considerable changes over the past several decades, as new strategies and treatments have become available. Surgeons play a pivotal role in all aspects of melanoma care: diagnostic, curative, and palliative. There is a high potential for cure in patients with early-stage melanoma and the selection of an appropriate operation is very important for this reason. Staging the nodal basin has become widespread since the adoption of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for the management of melanoma. This operation provides the best prognostic information that is currently available for patients with melanoma. The surgeon plays a central role in the palliation of symptoms resulting from nodal disease and metastases, as melanoma has a propensity to spread to almost any site in the body.

Discordance of histopathologic parameters in cutaneous melanoma: Clinical implications

BACKGROUND

Histopathologic analysis remains the gold standard for the diagnosis of melanoma, however previous studies have shown a substantial rate of interobserver variability in the evaluation of melanocytic lesions.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate discordance in the histopathological diagnosis and microstaging parameters of melanoma and subsequent impact on clinical management.

METHODS

This was a retrospective review of 588 cases of cutaneous melanoma and melanoma in situ from January 2009 to December 2014 that were referred to Emory University Hospital, Atlanta, GA, for treatment. Per institutional policy, all outside melanoma biopsy specimens were reviewed internally. Outside and institutional reports were compared.

RESULTS

Disagreement between outside and internal reports resulted in a change in American Joint Committee on Cancer pathologic stage in 114/588 (19%) cases, resulting in a change in management based on National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines in 105/588 (18%) cases.

LIMITATIONS

Given the retrospective nature of data collection and the bias of a tertiary care referral center, cases in this study may not be representative of all melanoma diagnoses.

CONCLUSION

These findings confirm consistent subjectivity in the histopathologic interpretation of melanoma. This study emphasizes that a review of the primary biopsy specimen may lead to significant changes in tumor classification, resulting in meaningful changes in clinical management.

A retrospective, multicenter analysis of the predictive value of mitotic rate for sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity in thin melanomas

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of studies to substantiate whether the presence of a single mitosis justifies sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy (SLNB) in thin melanomas.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to determine if mitotic rate is associated with SLNB outcome when taking into account other prognostic factors.

METHODS

All cases of melanoma that underwent SLNB in the province of Alberta, Canada, between 2007 and 2013 were reviewed through a provincial tumor database.

RESULTS

A total of 1072 patients fulfilled inclusion criteria. When analyzing all melanomas regardless of thickness, mitotic rate was a good predictor of SLN status. When stratified by Breslow thickness, only intermediate melanomas (1.01-2.0 mm) demonstrated a significant relationship between mitotic rate and positive SLN status (P = .010). For melanomas 1 mm or smaller, mitotic rate was not associated with SLN status. A statistically significant interaction was identified between Breslow thickness and mitotic rate such that for decreasing Breslow depth, the effect of mitotic rate on SLNB status diminished (P = .028).

LIMITATIONS

The study was retrospective in nature. There is underlying variability in mitotic rate reporting methods over time, and between different dermatopathologists.

CONCLUSIONS

Mitotic rate does not have unequivocal utility in predicting SLNB status in thin melanomas. There is a significant interaction between mitotic rate and Breslow depth, such that the predictive value of mitotic rate on SLN positivity may be dependent on Breslow thickness.

Utility of sentinel lymph node biopsy for solitary dermal melanomas

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Solitary dermal melanoma (SDM) is melanoma confined to subcutaneous and/or dermal layers in the absence of a known primary cutaneous lesion. We hypothesized that sentinel node biopsy is an effective staging strategy for this rare disease.

METHODS

A Markov decision model was constructed to represent two management strategies for SDM: wide local excision followed by observation, and wide local excision followed by sentinel node biopsy. Utilities, likelihood of positive sentinel node biopsy, and cancer progression rates during a five year time horizon were assigned based on institutional data and a review of existing literature. Estimated costs were derived using Medicare reimbursements.

RESULTS

Excision followed by sentinel node biopsy provides greater utility, yielding 3.85 discounted quality-adjusted life years (dQALY) compared to 3.66 for excision alone. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio for sentinel node biopsy is $19,102 per dQALY. Sensitivity analyzes demonstrated that observation is more cost-effective if greater than 23% of sentinel node biopsies are positive (16% reported), or if 5-year survival for observed patients is greater than 76% (69% reported).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on existing clinical evidence, sentinel node biopsy yields greater utility than excision alone and is cost-effective for patients presenting with solitary dermal melanoma.

Cost-effectiveness of therapies for melanoma

Melanoma presents an important burden worldwide. Until recently, the prognosis for unresectable and metastatic melanoma was poor, with 10% of metastatic melanoma patients surviving for 2 years. The introduction of newer therapies including ipilimumab, vemurafenib, dabrafenib and trametinib improved progression-free survival, with additional benefits anticipated from the forthcoming class of programmed cell death 1 inhibitors. Cost of therapy and resulting cost-effectiveness is an important factor in determining patient access to specific treatments. The objective of this study was to review the published evidence regarding cost-effectiveness of melanoma therapies and provide an overview of the relative cost-effectiveness of available therapies by disease stage. For earlier-stage disease, IFN-α has been found to be cost-effective, although its clinical benefits have not been well established. For unresectable and metastatic melanoma, newer therapies provide benefits over standard-of-care chemotherapy, but comprehensive analyses will need to be conducted to determine the most cost-effective therapy.

The role of sentinel lymph node biopsy for thin cutaneous melanomas of the head and neck

From 18% to 35% of cutaneous melanomas are located in the head and neck, and nearly 70% are thin (Breslow thickness ≤ 1 mm). Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has an established role in staging of intermediate-thickness melanomas, however its use in thin melanomas remains controversial. In this article, we review the literature regarding risk factors for occult nodal metastasis in thin cutaneous melanoma of the head and neck (CMHN). Based on the current literature, we recommend SLNB for all lesions with Breslow thickness ≥ 0.75 mm, particularly when accompanied by adverse features including mitotic rate ≥ 1 per mm(2), ulceration, and extensive regression. SLNB should also be strongly considered in younger patients (e.g. < 40 years old), especially in the presence of additional adverse features. All patients who do not proceed with sentinel lymph node biopsy must be carefully followed to monitor for regional relapse.

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma: controversies and current guidelines

ABSTRACT: 

Melanoma is a global health problem and the incidence of this disease is rising. While localized melanoma has an excellent prognosis, regional and distant disease is associated with much poorer outcomes. Optimal treatment for clinically localized melanoma requires surgical control of the primary site and accurate staging of the regional nodal basin with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). While further data are required to determine if SLNB is associated with a survival advantage, currently available data supports the use of SLNB for staging of appropriate patients and the procedure may offer benefits beyond staging. This article reviews current data that shapes guidelines regarding patient selection for SLNB in melanoma and highlights areas where performing this procedure remains controversial.

Secondary review of external histopathology on cutaneous oncology patients referred for sentinel lymph node biopsy: how often does it happen and is it worth it?

BACKGROUND

We reviewed the data on external histopathology review for patients referred to our institution for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) associated with melanoma, Merkel cell carcinoma and adnexal carcinoma.

METHODS

We calculated the incidence of external histopathology review and the rate of discordance between internal and external histopathology diagnoses between January 1, 2010 and February 28, 2011. We conducted an anonymous poll of our community pathologists' experience with external histopathology review prior to SLNB. Financial charges and payments from 10 Medicare patients who underwent SLNB were obtained from our hospital's finance department.

RESULTS

Sixty-eight cases were identified (63 melanomas, 4 Merkel cell carcinomas and 1 spiradenocarcinoma). The external histopathology was reviewed as part of the patient's care in 14 of 68 cases. In 3 of 14 reviewed cases, SLNB was deemed unnecessary. Nine of eleven community pathologists reported reviewing external histopathology material in less than 11% SLNB patients in their hospitals. The average Medicare reimbursement for SLNB and secondary pathology review was $5738 and $80 respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data show that review of external cutaneous histopathology diagnoses on patients referred for SLNB is uncommon in our practice area, but is cost-effective and should be required to reduce unnecessary treatment.