The Implications of a Dermatopathologist's Report on Melanoma Diagnosis and Treatment

An accurate and comprehensive histopathology report is essential for cutaneous melanoma management, providing critical information for accurate staging and risk estimation and determining the optimal surgical approach. In many institutions, a review of melanoma biopsy specimens by expert dermatopathologists is considered a necessary step. This study examined these reviews to determine the critical primary histopathology Breslow score in which a histopathology review would be most beneficial. Histopathology reports of patients referred to our institute between January 2011 and September 2019 were compared with our in-house review conducted by an expert dermatopathologist. The review focused on assessing fundamental histologic and clinical prognostic features. A total of 177 specimens underwent histopathology review. Significant changes in the Breslow index were identified in 103 cases (58.2%). Notably, in many of these cases (73.2%), the revised Breslow was higher than the initially reported score. Consequently, the T-stage was modified in 51 lesions (28.8%). Substantial discordance rates were observed in Tis (57%), T1b (59%), T3a (67%) and T4a (50%) classifications. The revised histopathology reports resulted in alterations to the surgical plan in 15.3% of the cases. These findings emphasize the importance of having all routine pathologies of pigmented lesions referred to a dedicated cancer center and reviewed by an experienced dermatopathologist. This recommendation is particularly crucial in instances where the histopathology review can potentially alter the diagnosis and treatment plan, such as in melanoma in situ and thinner melanomas measuring 0.6-2.2 mm in thickness. Our study highlights the significant impact of histopathology reviews in cutaneous melanoma cases. The observed changes in Breslow scores and subsequent modifications in T-stage classification underline the need for thorough evaluation by an expert dermatopathologist, especially in cases of melanoma in situ and thin melanomas. Incorporating such reviews into routine practice within dedicated cancer centers can improve diagnostic accuracy and guide appropriate treatment decisions, ultimately leading to better patient outcomes.

Systemic adjuvant therapy for adult patients at high risk for recurrent melanoma: A systematic review

Cutaneous melanoma is typically treated with wide local excision and, when appropriate, a sentinel node biopsy. Many patients are cured with this approach but for patients who have cancers with high risk features there is a significant risk of local and distant relapse and death. Interferon-based adjuvant therapy was recommended in the past but had modest results with significant toxicity. Recently, new therapies (immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapies) have been found to be effective in the treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma and many of these therapies have been evaluated and found to be effective in the adjuvant treatment of high risk patients with melanoma. This systematic review of adjuvant therapies for cutaneous and mucosal melanoma was conducted for Ontario Health (Cancer Care Ontario) as the basis of a clinical practice guideline to address the question of whether patients with completely resected melanoma should be considered for adjuvant systemic therapy and which adjuvant therapy should be used.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Part 2: Treatment - Update 2019

A unique collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Dermatology Forum, the European Association of Dermato-Oncology and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed to make recommendations on cutaneous melanoma diagnosis and treatment, based on systematic literature reviews and the experts' experience. Cutaneous melanomas are excised with 1- to 2-cm safety margins. Sentinel lymph node dissection shall be performed as a staging procedure in patients with tumour thickness ≥1.0 mm or ≥0.8 mm with additional histological risk factors, although there is as yet no clear survival benefit for this approach. Therapeutic decisions in stage III/IV patients should be primarily made by an interdisciplinary oncology team ("Tumor Board"). Adjuvant therapies in stage III/IV patients are primarily anti-PD-1, independent of mutational status, or dabrafenib plus trametinib for BRAF-mutant patients. In distant metastasis, either resected or not, systemic treatment is indicated. For first-line treatment, particularly in BRAF wild-type patients, immunotherapy with PD-1 antibodies alone or in combination with CTLA-4 antibodies shall be considered. In particular scenarios for patients with stage IV melanoma and a BRAF-V600 E/K mutation, first-line therapy with BRAF/MEK inhibitors can be offered as an alternative to immunotherapy. In patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy and harbouring a BRAF-V600 E/K mutation, this therapy shall be offered in second-line. Systemic therapy in stage III/IV melanoma is a rapidly changing landscape, and it is likely that these recommendations may change in the near future.