Is completion lymph node dissection needed in case of minimal melanoma metastasis in the sentinel node? Ann Surg. 2009;249:1003-1007. [PMID: 19474678 DOI: 10.1097/sla.0b013e3181a77eba]

Clinical performance indicators for monitoring the management of cutaneous melanoma: a population-based perspective

The prognosis of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) is based on disease progression. The highly heterogeneous clinical-pathological characteristics of CMM necessitate standardized diagnostic and therapeutic interventions tailored to cancer's stage. This study utilizes clinical performance indicators to assess the quality of CMM care in Veneto (Northeast Italy). This population-based study focuses on all incidences of CMMs registered by the Veneto Cancer Registry in 2015 (1279 patients) and 2017 (1368 patients). An interdisciplinary panel of experts formulated a set of quality-monitoring indicators for diagnostic, therapeutic, and end-of-life clinical interventions for CMM. The quality of clinical care for patients was assessed by comparing the reference thresholds established by experts to the actual values obtained in clinical practice. The prevalence of stage I-CMM decreased significantly from 2015 to 2017 (from 71.8 to 62.4%; P < 0.001), and almost all the pathology reports mentioned the number of nodes dissected during a lymphadenectomy. More than 90% of advanced CMMs were promptly tested for molecular BRAF status, but the proportion of patients given targeted therapies fell short of the desired threshold (61.1%). The proportion of stage I-IIA CMM patients who inappropriately underwent computerized tomography/MRI/PET dropped from 17.4 to 3.3% ( P < 0.001). Less than 2% of patients received medical or surgical anticancer therapies in the month preceding their death. In the investigated regional context, CMM care exhibited both strengths and weaknesses. The evaluated clinical indicators shed essential insight on the clinical procedures requiring corrective action. It is crucial to monitor clinical care indicators to improve care for cancer patients and promote the sustainability of the healthcare system.

The Use and Technique of Sentinel Node Biopsy for Skin Cancer

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Understand the indications for and prognostic value of sentinel lymph node biopsy in skin cancer. 2. Learn the advantages and disadvantages of various modalities used alone or in combination when performing sentinel lymph node biopsy. 3. Understand how to perform sentinel lymph node biopsy in skin cancer patients.

SUMMARY

Advances in technique used to perform sentinel lymph node biopsy to assess lymph node status have led to increased accuracy of the procedure and improved patient outcomes.

Sentinel Lymph Node Tumor Burden Using Digital Cell Count Estimation Predicts Outcomes in Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous melanoma often metastasizes in primis to sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs). Currently, there is no standardized method of characterizing micrometastatic tumor burden in SLN biopsies for melanoma. Different criteria have been developed to evaluate SLN biopsies, yet none consider the number of cells identified.

AIM

Here, we used software analysis to digitally quantify metastatic tumor burden within SLNs and correlated these data with clinicopathologic and prognostic information.

METHODS

We identified 246 cases of SLN biopsies, including 63 positive (26%) and 183 (74%) negative for metastatic melanoma. Digital cell counting was performed within the greatest metastatic focus and the entire metastatic tumor burden within the same SLN.

RESULTS

Increasing cell count in the largest metastatic deposit correlated with the previously described Rotterdam (Spearman's r = 0.91; 95% CI: 0.84, 0.94), Starz (Spearman's r = 0.78; 95% CI: 0.68, 0.87), and Dewar criteria (p < 0.01), validating our method of using cell count to define SLN tumor burden. Additionally, increasing cell count was associated with decreased metastasis free survival (HR = 2.29; 95% CI: 1.22, 4.31).

CONCLUSION

These data support the use of computerized cell count analysis for prognostication of outcomes in patients undergoing SLN biopsy.

Use of Completion Lymph Node Dissection for Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Melanoma

BACKGROUND

For patients with sentinel node-positive melanoma (SNPM), randomized trials, first reported in 2015, found no benefit for routine completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in selected patients. This study examines time trends in CLND and explores institutional and clinical factors associated with CLND.

STUDY DESIGN

The National Cancer Database was queried for patients older than 18 years from 2012 to 2016 with SNPM. A high-volume center was defined as >80th percentile for number of sentinel node procedures. Poisson regression assessed temporal trends and identified patient, pathologic, and institutional characteristics associated with CLND.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2016, we identified 7,146 patients with SNPM. The proportion of patients undergoing CLND was steady in 2012 to 2014 (61% to 63%), but decreased to 57% in 2015 and 50% in 2016 (p < 0.0001). The proportion of patients with SNPM who underwent CLND decreased over time for both high- (66% to 52%; p < 0.0001) and lower-volume centers (55% to 45%; p = 0.06). Female sex (relative risk [RR] 0.97; p < 0.001) and increasing age (RR 0.98; p < 0.0001) were associated with lower likelihood of CLND. Increased Breslow depth (RR 1.015; p = 0.006), ulceration (RR 1.067; p = 0.02), and high-volume centers (RR 1.180; p < 0.0001) were associated with higher likelihood of CLND. Regional differences in likelihood of CLND were also present (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Completion lymph node dissection in SNPM decreased over time, with the greatest change in 2016. Several patient, pathologic, and institutional characteristics were associated with likelihood of CLND. As evidence supports close observation for selected patients, efforts should be undertaken to improve and standardize patient selection for CLND across institutions caring for patients with melanoma.

Evolving management of positive regional lymph nodes in melanoma: Past, present and future directions

Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has become the standard of care for lymph node staging in melanoma and the most important predictor of survival in clinically node-negative disease. Previous guidelines recommend completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in cases of positive SLN; however, the lymph nodes recovered during CLND are only positive in a minority of these cases. Recent evidence suggests that conservative management (i.e. observation) has similar outcomes compared to CLND. We sought to review the most current literature regarding the management of SLN in metastatic melanoma and to discuss potential future directions.

Current management of patients with melanoma who are found to be sentinel node-positive

Background

The results of the DeCOG‐SLT and MSLT‐II studies, published in 2016 and mid‐2017, indicated no survival benefit from completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes (SNs). Subsequently, several studies have been published reporting a benefit of adjuvant systemic therapy in patients with stage III melanoma. The current study assessed how these findings influenced management of SN‐positive patients in a dedicated melanoma treatment centre.

Methods

SN‐positive patients treated at Melanoma Institute Australia between July 2017 and December 2018 were prospectively identified. Surgeons completed a questionnaire documenting the management of each patient. Information on patients, primary tumours, SNs, further treatment and follow‐up was collected from patient files, the institutional research database and pathology reports.

Results

During the 18‐month study period, 483 patients underwent SN biopsy. A positive SN was found in 61 (13%). Two patients (3%) requested CLND because of anxiety about observation in view of unfavourable primary tumour and SN characteristics. The other 59 patients (97%) were followed with a four‐monthly ultrasound examination of the relevant lymph node field(s). Two of them (3%) developed an isolated nodal recurrence after 4 and 11 months of follow‐up. Fifty‐seven patients (93%) were seen following the publication of the first two adjuvant systemic therapy studies in November 2017; 46 (81%) were referred to a medical oncologist to discuss adjuvant systemic therapy, which 32 (70%) chose to receive.

Conclusion

At Melanoma Institute Australia most patients with an involved SN are now managed without CLND. The majority are referred to a medical oncologist and receive adjuvant systemic therapy.

The Role of Completion Lymphadenectomy in Positive Regional Lymph Nodes in Melanoma: A Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The optimal management of melanoma with positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) remains unclear. Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) only yields additional positive non-SLN in 20% of cases and its benefits on survival remains debatable.

METHODS

An online database search of Medline was performed; key bibliographies were reviewed. Studies comparing outcomes after CLND versus observation were included. Odds ratios (ORs) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by random fixed effects models of pooled data were calculated. The primary endpoints were disease-free survival (DFS), melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Search strategy yielded 117 publications. Twelve studies were selected for inclusion, comprising 7966 SLN-positive patients. Among these patients, 5306 (66.6%) subjects underwent CLND and 2660 (33.4%) patients were observed. Median Breslow thickness and ulceration were similar between groups (2.8 ± 0.6 mm versus 2.5 ± 0.8 mm, P = 0.721; and 38.8% versus 37.2%, P = 0.136, CLND versus observation, respectively). CLND was associated with statistically significant improved 3-y (71.0% versus 66.2%, OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.69-0.97, P = 0.02) and 5-y DFS (48.3% versus 47.8%, OR 0.75, 95% CI 0.59-0.96, P = 0.02) compared with observation. However, no difference was demonstrated in 3-y MSS (83.7% versus 84.7%, OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88-1.35, P = 0.41), 5-y MSS (68.4% versus 69.8%, OR 1.02, 95% CI 0.88-1.19, P = 0.78), or OS (68.2% versus 78.9%, OR 0.93, 95% CI 0.55-1.57, P = 0.78).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on this large-scale analysis, CLND improved both 3- and 5-y DFS, possibly because of increased rates of local control; however, this did not translate in improved MSS or OS. Efforts toward the identification of molecular markers associated with poor outcomes in SLN-positive patients who undergo observation are warranted.

Measuring the quality of melanoma surgery - Highlighting issues with standardization and quality assurance of care in surgical oncology

In an attempt to ensure high standards of cancer care, there is increasing interest in determining and monitoring the quality of interventions in surgical oncology. In recent years, this has been particularly the case for melanoma surgery. The vast majority of patients with melanoma undergo surgery. Usually, this is with combinations of wide excision, sentinel lymph node biopsy and lymphadenectomy. The indications for these procedures evolved during a time when no effective systemic adjuvant therapy was available, and whilst the rationale has been sound, the justification for differences in extent and thoroughness has generally been supported by inadequate or low-level evidence. This has led to a substantial variation among melanoma centres or even among surgeons within a centre in how these procedures are done. With recent rapid progress in the efficacy of systemic treatments that are impacting on overall survival, the prospect of long-term survival in these previously high risk patients means that more than ever long-term locoregional control of melanoma is imperative. Furthermore, the understanding of effects of systemic therapy on locoregional disease will only be interpretable if surgeons use standardized, high quality techniques. This article focuses on standardization and evolution of quality indicators for melanoma surgery and how these might have a positive impact on patient care.

Clinical utilities and biological characteristics of melanoma sentinel lymph nodes

An estimated 73870 people will be diagnosed with melanoma in the United States in 2015, resulting in 9940 deaths. The majority of patients with cutaneous melanomas are cured with wide local excision. However, current evidence supports the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) given the 15%-20% of patients who harbor regional node metastasis. More importantly, the presence or absence of nodal micrometastases has been found to be the most important prognostic factor in early-stage melanoma, particularly in intermediate thickness melanoma. This review examines the development of SLNB for melanoma as a means to determine a patient’s nodal status, the efficacy of SLNB in patients with melanoma, and the biology of melanoma metastatic to sentinel lymph nodes. Prospective randomized trials have guided the development of practice guidelines for use of SLNB for melanoma and have shown the prognostic value of SLNB. Given the rapidly advancing molecular and surgical technologies, the technical aspects of diagnosis, identification, and management of regional lymph nodes in melanoma continues to evolve and to improve. Additionally, there is ongoing research examining both the role of SLNB for specific clinical scenarios and the ways to identify patients who may benefit from completion lymphadenectomy for a positive SLN. Until further data provides sufficient evidence to alter national consensus-based guidelines, SLNB with completion lymphadenectomy remains the standard of care for clinically node-negative patients found to have a positive SLN.

Evaluation of Melanoma Features and Their Relationship with Nodal Disease: The Importance of the Pathological Report

Background

The pathological features of melanoma biopsies can provide significant prognostic information that can help the surgeon evaluate the risk of nodal disease. The aim of this study was to attempt to determine the relationship between pathological features of primary melanoma and nodal disease, by sentinel node biopsy (SNB) and complete node dissection (CND).

Methods

A retrospective analysis was completed of patients who underwent SNB at AC Camargo Cancer Center, Sao Paulo, Brazil, between 2000 and 2010.

Results

A total of 697 patients were evaluated. By univariate analysis, it was found that histology, Clark level, Breslow depth, mitotic index, ulceration, regression, lymphatic and perineural invasion and satellitosis were significantly associated with SNB positivity. In the multivariate analysis, it was found that Breslow depth, mitotic index, ulceration, regression, lymphatic invasion and satellitosis were significant factors. In patients with a positive SNB, the primary tumor site, Clark level and Breslow depth greater than 2 mm were significantly related to non-sentinel node (NSN) positivity by univariate analysis. By multivariate analysis, Breslow depth greater than 2 mm was the only primary tumor feature that was significantly related (p = 0.038).

Conclusions

The indication of SNB should not be based solely on Breslow depth and ulceration or mitotic index. A complete evaluation of the pathological report should improve the identification of high-risk patients.

The prognostic significance of sentinel node tumour burden in melanoma patients: an international, multicenter study of 1539 sentinel node-positive melanoma patients

INTRODUCTION

Sentinel node (SN) biopsy (SNB) and completion lymph node dissection (CLND) when SN-positive have become standard of care in most cancer centres for melanoma. Various SN tumour burden parameters are assessed to determine the heterogeneity of SN-positivity. The aim of the present study was to validate the prognostic significance of various SN tumour burden micromorphometric features and classification schemes in a large cohort of SN-positive melanoma patients.

METHODS

In 1539 SN-positive patients treated between 1993 and 2008 at 11 melanoma treatment centres in Europe and Australia, indices of SN tumour burden (intranodal location, tumour penetrative depth (TPD) and maximum size of SN tumour deposits) were evaluated.

RESULTS

Non-subcapsular location, increasing TPD and increasing maximum size were all predictive factors for non-SN (NSN) status and were independently associated with poorer melanoma-specific survival (MSS). Patients with subcapsular micrometastases <0.1mm in maximum dimension had the lowest frequency of NSN metastasis (5.5%). Despite differences in SN biopsy protocols and clinicopathologic features of the patient cohorts (between centres), most SN parameters remained predictive in individual centre populations. Maximum SN tumour size>1mm was the most reliable and consistent parameter independently associated with higher non-SN-positivity, poorer disease-free survival (DFS) and poorer MSS.

CONCLUSIONS

In this large retrospective, multicenter cohort study, several parameters of SN tumour burden including intranodal location, TPD and maximum size provided prognostic information, but their prognostic significance varied considerably between the different centres. This could be due to sample size limitations or to differences in SN detection, removal and examination techniques.

SLN melanoma micrometastasis predictivity of nodal status: a long term retrospective study

Background

Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) is the gold standard treatment for patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy. Considering the morbidity associated with CLND it is important to identify histological features of the primary tumor and/or of SLN metastasis that could help to spare from CLND a subset of patients who have a very low risk of non-SLN metastasis. The objective of this study is to identify patients with a very low risk to develop non-SLNs recurrences and to limit unnecessary CLND.

Methods

A retrospective long-term study of 80 melanoma patients with positive SLN, undergone CLND, was assessed to define the risk of additional metastasis in the regional nodal basin, on the basis of intranodal distribution of metastatic cells, using the micro-morphometric analysis (Starz classification).

Results

This study demonstrates that among the demographic and pathologic features of primary melanoma and of SLN only the Starz classification shows prognostic significance for non-SLN status (p<0.0001). This parameter was also significantly associated with disease-free survival rate (p<0.0013).

Conclusion

The Starz classification can help to identify, among SLN positive patients, those who can have a real benefit from CLND. From the clinical point of view this easy and reliable method could lead to a significant reduction of unnecessary CLND in association with a substantial decrease in morbidity. The study results indicate that most of S1 subgroup patients might be safely spared from completion lymphatic node dissection. Furthermore, our experience demonstrated that Starz classification of SLN is a safe predictive index for patient stratification and treatment planning.

Is complete lymph node dissection after a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy for cutaneous melanoma always necessary? A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The current recommendation for patients with cutaneous melanoma and a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy is a complete lymph node dissection (CLND). However, metastatic melanoma is not present in approximately 80% of CLND specimens. A meta-analysis was performed to identify the clinicopathological variables most predictive of non-sentinel node (NSN) metastases when the sentinel node is positive in patients with melanoma.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted using MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, Current Contents Connect, Cochrane library, Google scholar, Science Direct, and Web of Science. The search identified 54 relevant articles reporting the frequency of NSN metastases in melanoma. Original data was abstracted from each study and used to calculate a pooled odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (95% CI).

FINDINGS

The pooled estimates that were found to be significantly associated with the high likelihood of NSN metastases were: ulceration (OR: 1.88, 95% CI: 1.53-2.31), satellitosis (OR: 3.25, 95% CI: 1.86-5.66), neurotropism (OR: 2.51, 95% CI: 1.39-4.53), >1 positive SLN (OR: 1.77, 95% CI: 1.2-2.62), Starz 3 (old) (OR: 1.83, 95% CI: 0.89-3.76), Angiolymphatic invasion (OR: 2.46, 95% CI: 1.34-4.54), extensive location (OR: 2.22, 95% CI: 1.74-2.81), macrometastases >2 mm (OR: 1.95, 95% CI: 1.61-2.35), extranodal extension (OR: 3.38, 95% CI: 1.79-6.40) and capsular involvement (OR: 3.16, 95% CI: 1.37-7.27). There were 3 characteristics not associated with NSN metastases: subcapsular location (OR: 0.51, 95% CI: 0.38-0.67), Rotterdam Criteria <0.1 mm (OR: 0.29, 95% CI: 0.17-0.50) and Starz I (new) (OR: 0.44, 95% CI: 0.22-0.91). Other variables including gender, Breslow thickness 2-4 mm and extremity as primary site were found to be equivocal.

INTERPRETATION

This meta-analysis provides evidence that patients with low SLN tumor burden could probably be spared the morbidity associated with CLND. We identified 9 factors predictive of non-SLN metastases that should be recorded and evaluated routinely in SLN databases. However, further studies are needed to confirm the standard criteria for not performing CLND.

Prognosis in patients with sentinel node-positive melanoma without immediate completion lymph node dissection

Background

The therapeutic value of immediate completion lymph node dissection (CLND) for sentinel node (SN)-positive melanoma is unknown. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of immediate CLND on the outcome of patients with SN-positive melanoma.

Methods

Patients with SN metastases treated between 1993 and 2008 at ten cancer centres from the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Melanoma Group were included in this retrospective study. Maximum tumour size, intranodal location and penetrative depth of SN metastases were measured. Outcome in those who had CLND was compared with that in patients who did not undergo completion lymphadenectomy.

Results

Of 1174 patients with SN-positive melanoma, 1113 (94·8 per cent) underwent CLND and 61 (5·2 per cent) did not. Median follow-up for the two groups was 34 and 48 months respectively. In univariable survival analysis, CLND did not significantly influence disease-specific survival (hazard ratio (HR) 0·89, 95 per cent confidence interval 0·58 to 1·37; P = 0·600). However, patients who did not undergo CLND had more favourable prognostic factors. Matched-pair analysis, with matching for age, Breslow thickness, tumour ulceration and SN tumour burden, showed that CLND had no influence on survival (HR 0·86, 0·46 to 1·61; P = 0·640). After adjusting for prognostic factors in multivariable survival analyses, no difference in survival was found.

Conclusion

In these two cohorts of patients with SN-positive melanoma and prognostic heterogeneity, outcome was not influenced by CLND.

Surgeons' opinions on lymphadenectomy in melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes: a worldwide web-based survey

PURPOSE

A worldwide web-based survey was conducted among melanoma surgeons to investigate opinions about completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in patients with positive sentinel nodes (SN).

METHODS

A questionnaire was designed following input from a group of melanoma surgeons. Cognitive interviews and pilot testing were performed. Surgeons identified through a systematic-review of the SN and CLND literature were invited by email.

RESULTS

Of 337 surgeons, 193 (57.2 %) from 25 countries responded (January-July 2011). Most respondents work in melanoma (30.1 %) and surgical oncology (44.6 %) units. In patients with a positive SN, 169 (91.8 %) recommend CLND; the strength of the recommendation is mostly influenced by patient comorbidities (64.7 %) and SN tumor burden (59.2 %). Seventy-one responders enroll patients in the second Multicenter Selective-Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-2), and 64 of them (76 %) suggest entering the trial to majority of patients. In cases requiring neck CLND, level 1-5 dissection is recommended by 35 % of responders, whereas 62 % base the extent of dissection on primary site and lymphatic mapping patterns. Only inguinal dissection or ilioinguinal dissection is performed by 36 and 30 % of surgeons, respectively. The remaining 34 % select either procedure according to number of positive SNs, node of Cloquet status, and lymphatic drainage patterns. Most surgeons (81 %) perform full axillary dissections in positive SN cases.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of melanoma surgeons recommend CLND in SN-positive patients. Surgeons participating in the MSLT-2 suggest entering the trial to the majority of patients. More evidence is needed to standardize the extent of neck and groin CLND surgeries.

Lymphatic drainage patterns from melanomas on the shoulder or upper trunk to cervical lymph nodes and implications for the extent of neck dissection

Purpose

To determine the incidence and pattern of cervical lymphatic drainage in patients with melanomas located on the upper limb or trunk, and to evaluate our current neck dissection protocol for those patients with a N+ neck.

Methods

Of 1192 melanoma patients who underwent sentinel node biopsy, 631 were selected with a primary tumor on the upper limb or trunk. All lymphoscintigrams, SPECT/CT images and operative reports were reviewed to determine the exact locations of sentinel nodes visualized preoperatively and dissected during operation.

Results

Thirty-nine (6.2 %) of 631 patients with a melanoma on the upper limb or trunk showing cervical lymph node drainage were identified. In 34 (87 %) of 39 patients, sentinel nodes were excised from level IV or Vb, and in 30 of those 39 patients simultaneous from the axilla. In the remaining five patients (13 %), sentinel nodes were collected from level IIb, level III or the suboccipital region. All collected sentinel nodes were located in the intended dissection area for N+ patients. Thirteen patients (33 %) had a total of 22 tumor-positive sentinel nodes in either the axilla (n = 10), level IV (n = 2), Vb (n = 9) or suboccipital (n = 1).

Conclusions

Only a minority of the patients with upper limb or trunk melanomas demonstrated lymphatic drainage to cervical lymph node basins, with preferential drainage to levels IV and Vb. Our current dissection protocol of levels II–V, with or without extension to the suboccipital region, in those patients with involved cervical sentinel nodes seems sufficient.

Analysis of predictive factors for the outcome of complete lymph node dissection in melanoma patients with metastatic sentinel lymph nodes

BACKGROUND

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a widely accepted procedure to accurately stage patients with melanoma. However, there is no consensus concerning the practical consequences of a positive SLN, since a survival benefit of a complete lymph node dissection (CLND) has not yet been demonstrated.

OBJECTIVE

We wondered whether we could identify a subgroup of patients with metastatic involvement of the SLN who could be excluded from the recommendation to undergo CLND.

METHODS

At the Department of Dermatology at the University of Munich, a total of 213 patients with metastatic SLNs (24.9%) were identified among 854 patients who had undergone SLNB between 1996 and 2007. All SLN-positive patients had been advised to have CLND. Survival analyses were performed by using the Kaplan-Meier approach.

RESULTS

A total of 176 (82.6%) of 213 SLN-positive patients underwent CLND. In this group, 26 patients (14.8%) showed metastatic disease in non-sentinel lymph nodes (NSLN). The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 26.1% in NSLN-positive patients and 74% in NSLN-negative patients. SLN-positive patients who refused CLND had a better prognosis than patients with CLND. Breslow tumor thickness was significantly associated with positive CLND status with higher median values in CLND-positive than CLND-negative patients (3.03 vs 2.22 mm).

LIMITATIONS

The subgroup of patients with metastatic disease in CLND may have been too small to reach statistical significance for other tumor- or patient-related parameters. Mitotic indices of the primary melanomas had not been determined in this retrospective study; thus a possible correlation with lymph node status could not be tested.

CONCLUSION

Among SLN-positive patients, the presence of metastatic NSLN is a highly significant poor prognostic factor. Tumor thickness is a significant prognostic parameter for positive CLND status and might be considered in the decision to perform CLND in case of metastatic SLN.

Prognosis in patients with sentinel node-positive melanoma is accurately defined by the combined Rotterdam tumor load and Dewar topography criteria

PURPOSE

Prognosis in patients with sentinel node (SN)-positive melanoma correlates with several characteristics of the metastases in the SN such as size and site. These factors reflect biologic behavior and may separate out patients who may or may not need additional locoregional and/or systemic therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Between 1993 and 2008, 1,080 patients (509 women and 571 men) were diagnosed with tumor burden in the SN in nine European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) melanoma group centers. In total, 1,009 patients (93%) underwent completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Median Breslow thickness was 3.00 mm. The median follow-up time was 37 months. Tumor load and tumor site were reclassified in all nodes by the Rotterdam criteria for size and in 88% by the Dewar criteria for topography.

RESULTS

Patients with submicrometastases (< 0.1 mm in diameter) were shown to have an estimated 5-year overall survival rate of 91% and a low nonsentinel node (NSN) positivity rate of 9%. This is comparable to the rate in SN-negative patients. The strongest predictive parameter for NSN positivity and prognostic parameter for survival was the Rotterdam-Dewar Combined (RDC) criteria. Patients with submicrometastases that were present in the subcapsular area only, had an NSN positivity rate of 2% and an estimated 5- and 10-year melanoma-specific survival (MSS) of 95%.

CONCLUSION

Patients with metastases < 0.1 mm, especially when present in the subcapsular area only, may be overtreated by a routine CLND and have an MSS that is indistinguishable from that of SN-negative patients. Thus the RDC criteria provide a rational basis for decision making in the absence of conclusions provided by randomized controlled trials.

Validation of the S classification of sentinel lymph node and microanatomic location of sentinel lymph node metastases to predict additional lymph node involvement and overall survival in breast cancer patients

BACKGROUND

Most patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SN) have no further metastases in the axillary lymph nodes and may therefore not benefit from axillary lymph node dissection. In patients with melanoma, evaluation of the centripetal depth of tumor invasion in the SN, also known as the S classification of SN, and microanatomic localization of SN metastases were shown to predict non-SN involvement. This phenomenon has been less extensively studied in breast cancer. We sought to validate the S classification and microanatomic location of SN metastases in breast cancer patients with regard to their predictive value for non-SN involvement and overall survival (OS).

METHODS

A total of 236 patients with positive SN followed by axillary lymph node dissection were reevaluated according to the S classification and the microanatomic location of SN (subcapsular, parenchymal, combined subcapsular and parenchymal, multifocal, extensive) metastases to predict the likelihood of non-SN metastases and OS.

RESULTS

S classification and the microanatomic location of SN metastases were significantly correlated with non-SN status (P < 0.001). Especially patients with a maximum depth of invasion ≤0.3 mm (stage I according to the S classification) and those with SN metastases only in subcapsular location had a low probability of further non-SN metastases (7.8 and 6.1%) and a good prognosis for OS.

CONCLUSIONS

S classification and microanatomic location of SN metastases predicts the likelihood of non-SN involvement. Especially patients with subcapsular or S stage I metastases have a low probability of non-SN metastases and a good prognosis for OS.

Prognostic factors associated with sentinel lymph node positivity and effect of sentinel status on survival: an analysis of 1049 patients with cutaneous melanoma

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a widely accepted staging procedure in patients with melanoma. However, it is unclear which factors predict the occurrence of micrometastasis and overall prognosis and whether SLNB should also be performed in patients with thin primary tumors. At our Department of Dermatology, University of Munich (Germany), 1049 consecutive melanoma patients were identified for SLNB between 1996 and 2007, and were followed-up to assess disease-free and overall survival. Of those, a total of 854 patients were analyzed prospectively. Patients with positive SLN were subjected to selective lymphadenectomy. The association of patient characteristics with SLN was assessed by multivariate logistic regression. Survival curves were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox proportional hazard regression with different adjustments was used to estimate the effect of SLN on survival. The detection rate of SLN was 97.24%, of which 24.9% were metastatic. Significant parameters upon SLN positivity were tumor thickness and nodular type of melanoma. The 5-year overall survival was 90.1 and 58.1% in SLN-negative and SLN-positive patients, respectively. Upon multivariate analysis tumor thickness and SLN status were significant factors influencing both disease-free survival and overall survival. In conclusion, our data confirm that SLNB is relevant as a diagnostic and staging procedure and that tumor thickness is of predictive importance. SLN status should be taken into account when designing clinical trials and informing patients about the probable course of their disease. Our data suggest that in case of a nodular melanoma subtype SLNB should also be considered at a tumor thickness below 1 mm.

Non-Sentinel Node Risk Score (N-SNORE): a scoring system for accurately stratifying risk of non-sentinel node positivity in patients with cutaneous melanoma with positive sentinel lymph nodes

PURPOSE

Sentinel node (SN) biopsy allows identification of patients with melanoma at risk of further metastatic disease in regional non-sentinel nodes (NSN). We investigated clinicopathologic factors that predict NSN positivity in an attempt to identify patients who may be safely spared completion lymph node dissection (CLND).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Clinicopathologic factors previously shown to be predictive of NSN positivity were analyzed in 409 patients with SN-positive disease (309 of whom underwent CLND) managed at a single melanoma center. A weighted score Non-Sentinel Node Risk Score [N-SNORE] incorporating predictive factors was derived, and the efficacy of N-SNORE at stratifying risk of NSN involvement was studied.

RESULTS

Factors independently predictive of NSN positivity included primary tumor regression, proportion of harvested SNs involved by melanoma (%PosSN), sex (trend), and SN tumor burden indices (maximum size of largest deposit [MaxSize], % cross-sectional area of SN occupied by tumor, tumor penetrative depth, intranodal location of tumor) and perinodal lymphatic invasion (PLI). Of SN tumor burden criteria, MaxSize was the strongest predictor. N-SNORE was the sum of scores for five parameters: sex (female = 0, male = 1), regression (absent = 0, present = 2), %PosSN (absent = 0, present = 2), MaxSize (≤ 0.5 mm = 0, 0.51 to 2.00 mm = 1, 2.01 to 10.00 mm = 2, > 10.00 mm = 3), and PLI (absent = 0, present = 3). N-SNOREs of 0, 1 to 3, 4 to 5, 6 to 7, and ≥ 8 were associated with very low (0%), low (5% to 10%), intermediate (15% to 20%), high (40% to 50%), and very high (70% to 80%) risks of NSN involvement.

CONCLUSION

A weighted score (N-SNORE) based on clinicopathologic characteristics accurately stratifies risk of NSN involvement in patients with melanoma. If validated in future studies, N-SNORE will better predict prognosis, aid in management decisions, and stratify patient groups for entry into clinical trials.

Interobserver reproducibility of histologic parameters of melanoma deposits in sentinel lymph nodes: implications for management of patients with melanoma

BACKGROUND

: Histologic parameters of melanoma deposits in sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) have been shown to be predictive of clinical outcome and the presence or absence of tumor in non-SLNs, but assessment of these parameters is prone to interobserver variation.

METHODS

: Histologic sections of 44 SLNs containing metastatic melanoma were examined by 7 pathologists. Parameters assessed included cross-sectional area of tumor deposits, cross-sectional area of SLNs, percentage of SLN area involved by tumor calculated from the 2 previous parameters, estimated percentage of SLN area involved by tumor, tumor penetrative depth, location of tumor within the SLN, and presence of extracapsular spread. Levels of interobserver agreement were measured by using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC).

RESULTS

: There was good to excellent interobserver agreement on measurement of quantitative parameters: maximal size of largest tumor deposits, calculated area of 3 largest tumor deposits, percentage of the area of SLN involved by tumor, and tumor penetrative depth (ICC, 0.88, 0.73, 0.68, and 0.83, respectively). There was moderate agreement on the evaluation of subcapsular versus nonsubcapsular location of tumor deposits (ICC = 0.50). Agreement on assessment of extracapsular spread was fair (ICC = 0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

: Assessment of some of the quantitative parameters was highly reproducible between pathologists. However, evaluation of the location of tumor deposits within SLNs and assessment of extracapsular spread was less reproducible. Clearer definitions and training can be expected to improve the reproducibility of assessment. These results have important implications for reliability and reproducibility of these parameters in staging, prediction of outcome, and clinical management of melanoma patients. Cancer 2009. (c) 2009 American Cancer Society.