A brief synopsis on scalp melanoma

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Malignant Melanoma of the Head and Neck: A Single Center Experience

Purpose: This study evaluated the characteristics of patients with head and neck (H&N) melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNLB) and assessed the clinical course of patients categorizing subjects according to SLNB status and melanoma location (scalp area vs. non-scalp areas). Methods: Patients undergoing SLNB for melanoma of H&N from 2015 to 2021 were prospectively characterized according to sentinel lymph node (SLN) status. SPECT/CT had been previously performed. Patients were followed until the first adverse event to evaluate progression-free survival. Results: 93 patients were enrolled. SLNB was negative in 75 patients. The median Breslow index was higher for patients with positive SLNB compared with patients with negative SLNB. In addition, the Breslow index was higher for melanoma of the scalp compared with non-scalp melanoma. The median follow-up was 24.8 months. Progression occurred at the systemic level in the 62.5% of cases. There was a significant association between positive SLNB and progression (p-value < 0.01) of disease, with lower progression-free survival for patients with melanoma of the scalp compared with those with melanoma at other anatomic sites (p-value: 0.15). Conclusions: Scalp melanomas are more aggressive than other types of H&N melanomas. Sentinel lymph node status is the strongest prognostic criterion for recurrence.

Melanoma of the Scalp and Neck: A Population-Based Analysis of Survival and Treatment Patterns

Introduction: Melanoma is an aggressive skin cancer. Large demographic and clinic-pathologic studies are required to identify variations of tumour behavior. The aim of our study was to offer updated epidemiologic data on the scalp and neck melanoma with an overall survival analysis. Method: The SEER database was searched for all scalp and neck melanoma in adult patients between 2000 and 2019. Demographic and clinic-pathologic variables were described. Their impact on overall survival was assessed with the log-rank test after Kaplan−Meier model. A multivariable cox-regression was conducted to identify predictors of decreased survival. A p-value of <0.005 was considered statistically significant. Results: 20,728 Melanomas of the scalp and neck were identified. Mean age was 62.5 years. Gender ratio was 76.3% males. 79% of the tumours were localized at diagnosis. Increasing age, male gender, tumour ulceration, high mitotic rate or nodular subtype were independent prognostic factors of decreased overall survival. Surgery with less than 1 cm margin is associated with the best overall survival in this cohort. No significant difference in OS was seen between less than 1 cm and 1 to 2 cm margins. Conclusion: Knowledge of negative prognostic factors might help identify subgroups at risk and adapt their oncologic treatment.

Do Oncologic Outcomes From Head and Neck Versus Truncal and Extremity Melanoma Differ? A Single-Institution Single-Subspecialty Experience

BACKGROUND

Outcomes are thought to be worse in head and neck (H&N) melanoma patients. However, definitive evidence of inferior outcomes in H&N melanoma in the modern era is lacking. We sought to ascertain whether H&N melanomas carry a worse prognosis than melanomas of other sites.

METHODS

All patients who underwent excision for primary melanoma by fellowship-trained surgical oncologists at a single institution from 2014 to 2020 were queried from the electronic medical record. Patients who had AJCC eighth edition stage I-III disease were included.

RESULTS

Of 1127 patients, 28.7% had primary H&N melanoma. H&N patients were more likely to be male, older, and present with more advanced AJCC stage. Median follow-up was 20.0 months (IQR 26.4). On multivariable analyses controlling for other variables, H&N melanoma was associated with worse RFS. Notably, H&N melanoma was not associated with worse MSS, DMFS, or OS on univariate or multivariable analyses. Among patients who recurred, H&N patients were significantly more likely to recur locally compared to non-H&N patients. On subgroup analysis, scalp melanoma was also associated with worse RFS compared to patients with melanoma in locations other than the scalp. When patients with scalp melanoma were excluded from analysis, non-scalp H&N RFS was not significantly different from the non-H&N group on univariate or multivariable analyses.

DISCUSSION

In this series from a high-volume tertiary referral center, the differences in rates and sites of recurrence between H&N and non-H&N melanoma do not impact melanoma-specific or overall survival, suggesting that H&N melanoma patients should be treated similarly with respect to regional and systemic therapies.

Diagnosis and Management of Melanoma of the Scalp: A Review of the Literature

Cutaneous melanoma is a public health issue and the head and neck region is of particular interest, despite accounting for only 9.0% of the total body surface, it harbours 20% of melanoma cases. Data from the literature show that scalp melanomas (SM) carry high mortality rates, with a 10-year survival rate of 60% which lead them to be named as the “invisible killer”. Moreover, SMs are more common in the elderly than in young population, and they occur six times more frequently in men than in women. This is probably related to the higher incidence of androgenetic alopecia and a higher cumulative and intermittent ultraviolet damage on the scalp. Histologically, SM is a heterogenous group, including lentiginous melanoma (LM), desmoplastic melanoma, superficial spreading and nodular melanoma. Thin melanomas tend to display an atypical network or pseudo-network and regression in dermoscopy. Blue-white veil, irregular pigmented blotches and an unspecific pattern are most commonly detected in thick lesions. On reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM), the most frequent pattern is irregular meshwork, but also ringed and disarranged pattern have been described. Differential diagnosis includes benign solar lentigo, actinic keratoses, lichen planus like keratosis, melanocytic nevi and blue nevi. All suspicious lesions should be biopsied; therefore, an excisional biopsy with 2 mm margins is usually the best option. The management of SM is the same as for melanoma on other body sites. However, sentinel node biopsy tends to be more challenging, as well as achieving adequate excision margins of the primary tumor. In this review, we summarize clinical, pathologic, dermoscopic and RCM features of SM, and focus on its epidemiology, risk factors and best management options.

Comparing the characteristics and predicting the survival of patients with head and neck melanoma versus body melanoma: a population-based study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies reported cutaneous melanoma in head and neck (HNM) differed from those in other regions (body melanoma, BM). Individualized tools to predict the survival of patients with HNM or BM remain insufficient. We aimed at comparing the characteristics of HNM and BM, developing and validating nomograms for predicting the survival of patients with HNM or BM.

METHODS

The information of patients with HNM or BM from 2004 to 2015 was obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. The HNM group and BM group were randomly divided into training and validation cohorts. We used the Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox models to identify independent prognostic factors. Nomograms were developed via the rms and dynnom packages, and were measured by the concordance index (C-index), the area under the curve (AUC) of the receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve and calibration plots.

RESULTS

Of 70,605 patients acquired, 21% had HNM and 79% had BM. The HNM group contained more older patients, male sex and lentigo maligna melanoma, and more frequently had thicker tumors and metastases than the BM group. The 5-year cancer-specific survival (CSS) and overall survival (OS) rates were 88.1 ± 0.3% and 74.4 ± 0.4% in the HNM group and 92.5 ± 0.1% and 85.8 ± 0.2% in the BM group, respectively. Eight variables (age, sex, histology, thickness, ulceration, stage, metastases, and surgery) were identified to construct nomograms of CSS and OS for patients with HNM or BM. Additionally, four dynamic nomograms were available on web. The internal and external validation of each nomogram showed high C-index values (0.785-0.896) and AUC values (0.81-0.925), and the calibration plots showed great consistency.

CONCLUSIONS

The characteristics of HNM and BM are heterogeneous. We constructed and validated four nomograms for predicting the 3-, 5- and 10-year CSS and OS probabilities of patients with HNM or BM. These nomograms can serve as practical clinical tools for survival prediction and individual health management.