Melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes who did not undergo completion lymphadenectomy: a multi-institutional study

Complete lymph node dissection in cutaneous melanoma patients with positive sentinel lymph node: Outcome and predictors in a retrospective cohort study over 16 years

BACKGROUND

In melanoma treatment, complete lymph node dissection (CLND) has been considered the therapeutic gold standard in patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). This long-held approach was revised in 2017, with recent evidence questioning the therapeutic benefit of CLND in malignant melanoma (MM) therapy. In this study, we aimed to fill this knowledge gap by retrospectively analyzing the impact of CLND on MM patients' survival.

METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed the multi-center population-based Clinical Cancer Registry at the Tumor Center Regensburg (TUDOK) database (2004-2020) to identify patients who had been diagnosed with SLN-positive MM and underwent (non)invasive management thereof. Patient cohorts were subdivided according to the treatment received (CLND and waiving CLND). Primary outcomes included overall survival (OS), recurrence-free survival (RFS), and cumulative recurrence rate.

RESULTS

We identified 1143 MM patients, of whom 126 (11.0%) had positive SLN status. CLND was waived in the majority of SLN-positive MM cases (n = 71; 56.3%), with 55 (43.7%) patients undergoing CLND. Univariable and multivariable Cox regression revealed no significant advantage for CLND patients compared to non-CLND patients in OS (HR=0.970, p = 0.915 and HR=1.295, p = 0.479, respectively), RFS (HR=1.050, p = 0.849 and HR=1.220, p = 0.544, respectively), and cumulative recurrence rate (HR=1.234, p = 0.441 and HR=1.220, p = 0.544), respectively).

CONCLUSION

We found that CLND had no significant impact on patient survival and MM recurrence rate, thus corroborating the validity of current clinical guidelines.

Lymphadenectomy After Melanoma-A National Analysis of Recurrence Rates and Risk of Lymphedema

INTRODUCTION

Treatment for melanoma after a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy includes nodal observation or lymphadenectomy. Important considerations for management, however, involve balancing the risk of recurrence and the risk of lymphedema after lymphadenectomy.

METHODS

From the Merative MarketScan Research Databases, adult patients were queried from 2007 to 2021. International Classification of Disease, Ninth (ICD-9) and Tenth (ICD-10) Editions, diagnosis codes and Current Procedural Terminology codes were used to identify patients with melanoma diagnoses who underwent an index melanoma excision with a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Main outcomes were completion lymph node dissection (CLND) utilization after a positive SLNB, developing lymphedema with or without CLND, and nodal basin recurrence 3 months or more after index excision. Subanalyses stratified by index excision year (2007-2017 and 2018-2021) and propensity score matched were additionally conducted. Demographics and comorbidities (measured by Elixhauser index) were recorded.

RESULTS

A total of 153,085,453 patients were identified. Of those, 359,298 had a diagnosis of melanoma, and 202,456 patients underwent an excision procedure. The study cohort comprised 3717 patients with a melanoma diagnosis who underwent an excision procedure and had a positive SLNB. The mean age of the study cohort was 49 years, 57% were male, 41% were geographically located in the South, and 24% had an Elixhauser index of 4+. Among the 350 patients who did not undergo CLND, 10% experienced recurrence and 22% developed lymphedema. A total of 3367 patients underwent CLND, of which 8% experienced recurrence and 20% developed lymphedema. Completion lymph node dissection did not significantly affect risk of recurrence [odds ratio (OR), 1.370, P = 0.090] or lymphedema (OR, 1.114, P = 0.438). After stratification and propensity score matching, odds of experiencing lymphedema (OR, 1.604, P = 0.058) and recurrence (OR, 1.825, P = 0.058) after CLND were not significantly affected. Rates of CLND had significantly decreased (P < 0.001) overtime, without change in recurrence rate (P = 0.063).

CONCLUSIONS

Electing for nodal observation does not increase the risk of recurrence or reduce risk of lymphedema. Just as CLND does not confer survival benefit, its decreased utilization has not increased recurrence rate.

Practice patterns for positive sentinel lymph node in head and neck melanoma

BACKGROUND

An international survey was conducted to investigate the preferences for completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in head and neck melanomas.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent through the American Society of Head & Neck Surgery (AHNS) and Canadian Society of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery (CSO).

RESULTS

Hundred and forty-nine surgeons completed the survey. Response rate was 6.3% and 9.7% from AHNS and CSO members, respectively. When presented the scenario of a 47-year-old male with a clinical T3bN0 cheek melanoma, with 1/1 positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) with nodal deposit <2 mm, 72 of respondents (48.3%) would perform a CLND. Reasons for CLND included multiples positive SLN (64.1%), size of nodal deposits (54.2%), and perceived lack of compliance to follow-up (54.2%). Surgeons with access to immunotherapy treatment were less likely to recommend CLND (p = 0.025).

CONCLUSIONS

Following SLN biopsy, nearly half of the surveyed head and neck surgeons would recommend CLND, which contrasts with the current melanoma practice patterns in other anatomic locations. However, compared with an earlier study in the literature it does seem that there has been a shift away from completion neck dissection. Further investigation into understanding practice variations is warranted.

Unmeasured factors are associated with the use of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in melanoma

BACKGROUND

Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) was the standard treatment for patients with melanoma with positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLN) until 2017 when data from the DeCOG-SLT and MLST-2 randomized trials challenged the survival benefit of this procedure. We assessed the contribution of patient, tumor and facility factors on the use of CLND in patients with surgically resected Stage III melanoma.

METHODS

Using the National Cancer Database, patients who underwent surgical excision and were found to have a positive SLN from 2012 to 2017 were included. A multivariable mixed-effects logistic regression model with a random intercept for the facility was used to determine the effect of patient, tumor, and facility variables on the risk of CLND. Reference effect measures (REMs) were used to compare the contribution of contextual effects (unknown facility variables) versus measured variables on the variation in CLND use.

RESULTS

From 2012 to 2017, the overall use of CLND decreased from 59.9% to 26.5% (p < 0.0001). Overall, older patients and patients with government-based insurance were less likely to undergo CLND. Tumor factors associated with a decreased rate of CLND included primary tumor location on the lower limb, decreasing depth, and mitotic rate <1. However, the contribution of contextual effects to the variation in CLND use exceeded that of the measured facility, tumor, time, and patient variables.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a decrease in CLND use during the study period. However, there is still high variability in CLND use, mainly driven by unmeasured contextual effects.

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.

Higher rates of regional disease but improved outcomes in pediatric versus adult melanoma

BACKGROUND

Malignant melanoma is rare in the pediatric population and management is largely extrapolated from adult guidelines. Adult data have shown that immediate completion lymph node dissection (CLND) does not improve overall survival in selected patients with clinically node negative, sentinel lymph node-positive disease. Current nodal management in children is unknown.

METHODS

The National Cancer Database (NCDB) was queried for patients with melanoma from 2012-2017 and patients categorized as pediatric (≤18 years, n=962) or adult (n=327,987). Factors associated with CLND in children with positive SLNB were evaluated in multivariable analysis. Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was performed.

RESULTS

Compared to adults, children present with thicker primary tumors (T3 or T4 26.5% vs 15.5%, p<0.001), resulting in higher rates of nodal assessment with SLN biopsy or LND (60.2% vs 36.6%, p<0.001) and higher rates of regional nodal disease (35.1% vs 23.4%, p<0.001). Children underwent higher rates of CLND after SLN biopsy (10.4% vs 4.1%) and upfront lymph node dissection (15.2% vs 8.7%). A decreased rate of CLND was noted in 2017 compared to 2012 (odds ratio (OR) 0.16 (p=0.005). CLND was performed more often on multivariable analysis for older pediatric age (>12 years, OR=1.6, p=0.037) and lower extremity primary (OR=0.29, p<0.001). Children with regional nodal disease have improved 3-year overall survival compared to adults (96.5% vs 71.0%, p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Children with melanoma have higher rates of nodal disease but better survival than adults. As in adults, there has been a recent increase in close nodal observation rather than CLND for patients with positive SLN. Further study of nodal surveillance for pediatric patients is warranted.

Does It Really Pay-Off? Comparison of Lymphadenectomy versus Observational Approach in Skin Melanoma with Positive Sentinel Node Biopsy: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

The aim of this meta-analysis was to answer the question as to whether performing CLND (complete lymph node dissection) is necessary in every case of the melanoma patient after the positive SNB (sentinel node biopsy). To resolve doubts the authors reanalyzed previous articles and systematized the knowledge about the concerning medical problem. The databases such as PubMed, Scopus and Web of Science were screened to find articles that will be helpful to answer the controversial question if performing lymphadenectomy is crucial. The inclusion criteria consisted of randomized clinical trials, comparison of lymphadenectomy versus observation and positive sentinel node biopsy. After which, seven articles were examined. Authors analyzed parameters such as: recurrence, 3-year survival and 5-year survival. There was no relationship between the performance of CLND and melanoma recurrence (OR 1.04; 95% CI: 0.82–1.31; p = 0.75). However, no CLND group had higher 3-year survival (OR 1.22; 95% CI: 1.03–1.44; p = 0.02) and 5-year survival (OR 1.30; 95% CI: 1.19–1.85; p = 0.008). In conclusion, the observational approach to the melanoma patients with positive sentinel node biopsy is associated with comparable or slightly improved 3- and 5-year survival, then in case of routine lymphadenectomy. Although, in each melanoma patient a decision to perform or withhold lymphadenectomy should always be considered individually. Patients with low perioperative risk could be considered for surgical approach. The study was registered in PROSPERO and was assigned with the unique identifying number “CRD42021241272”.

The "Great Debate" at Melanoma Bridge 2021, December 2nd-4th, 2021

The Great Debate session at the 2021 Melanoma Bridge virtual congress (December 2-4) featured counterpoint views from experts on seven important issues in melanoma. The debates considered the use of adoptive cell therapy versus use of bispecific antibodies, mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) inhibitors versus immunotherapy in the adjuvant setting, whether the use of corticosteroids for the management of side effects have an impact on outcomes, the choice of programmed death (PD)-1 combination therapy with cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen (CTLA)-4 or lymphocyte-activation gene (LAG)-3, whether radiation is needed for brain metastases, when lymphadenectomy should be integrated into the treatment plan and then the last debate, telemedicine versus face-to-face. As with previous Bridge congresses, the debates were assigned by meeting Chairs and positions taken by experts during the debates may not have necessarily reflected their respective personal view. Audiences voted both before and after each debate.

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.

Evidence and implementation gaps in management of sentinel node-positive melanoma in the United States

BACKGROUND

Melanoma clinical trials demonstrated that completion lymph node dissection is low value for most sentinel lymph node-positive patients. Contemporaneous trials of adjuvant systemic immunotherapy and BRAF/MEK targeted therapy showed improved recurrence-free survival in high-risk sentinel lymph node-positive patients. To better understand how oncologic evidence is incorporated into practice (implementation), we evaluated factors associated with discontinuation of completion lymph node dissection and adoption of systemic treatment at United States Commission on Cancer-accredited centers.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort study of adults with sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma treated from 2012 to 2017 using the National Cancer Database, we evaluated use of completion lymph node dissection and adjuvant systemic treatment using mixed-effects logistic regression, reporting results as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Among 10,240 sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma patients, performance of completion lymph node dissection declined from 60% to 27%. Adjuvant systemic treatment increased from 29% to 43% (37% in stage IIIA patients, 46% in IIIB-C). Completion lymph node dissection was less common with lower extremity tumors (odds ratio = 0.53, 95% confidence interval = 0.44-0.64) and more common with multiple positive sentinel lymph nodes (odds ratio = 2.36, 95% confidence interval = 2.08-2.67), treatment at a high- or moderate-volume center (odds ratio_high = 1.49, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-2.12; odds ratio_moderate = 1.32, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-1.64), and receipt of systemic therapy (odds ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval = 1.27-1.63). The increased likelihood of completion lymph node dissection in patients receiving adjuvant systemic treatment persisted in the most recent study years and in patients with a single positive sentinel lymph node.

CONCLUSION

At a population level, completion lymph node dissection declined and adjuvant systemic treatment increased, reflecting evidence-responsive care. Variation in persistent use of completion lymph node dissection and in provision of adjuvant treatment for lower risk patients highlights residual gaps in both evidence and implementation.

Waiving Subsequent Complete Lymph Node Dissection in Melanoma Patients with Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Does Not Result in Worse Outcome on 20-Year Analysis

Simple Summary

The aim of the present study was to investigate long-term outcomes of melanoma patients who had micrometastasis on sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy. We focused on the comparison between melanoma patients with and without complete lymph node dissection (CLND) following a positive SLN biopsy result. Patients without CLND did not significantly differ from patients with CLND in regard to age, gender, tumor thickness, tumor ulceration, capsule infiltration of SLN, and invasion level of SLN. On 10-year analysis, we did not observe a significantly increased risk for melanoma relapse or melanoma-specific death in patients who did not undergo CLND after the detection of micrometastases on SLN biopsy. On 20-year analysis, again, the patients without CLND had no significantly increased risk of melanoma relapse and worse melanoma-specific survival. Hence, our 10-year survival data confirm the current notion that waiving CLND in SLN-positive patients does not result in clinical disadvantages with respect to melanoma-specific survival. For the first time, we demonstrate on 20-year survival analysis that relapse rates and melanoma-specific survival does not significantly differ between patients with or without CLND on long-term follow-up.

Abstract

Complete lymph node dissection (CLND) following positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy has been the standard of care for decades. We aimed to study melanoma patients with an emphasis on the outcome of patients with versus without CLND following positive SLN biopsy. SLN-positive patients with or without CLND were compared regarding important prognostic clinical and histological characteristics. Ten-year and 20-year survival curves for melanoma relapse and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were determined by the Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional-hazards regression. We studied 258 patients who had micrometastases in their SLN biopsy. CLND was performed in 209 of 258 patients (81%). Hence, in 49 of 258 patients (19%) with SLN micrometastases, CLND was not performed. These patients did not significantly (p > 0.05) differ from patients with CLND in regard to age, gender, tumor thickness, tumor ulceration, capsule infiltration of SLN, or invasion level of SLN. On 10-year analysis, we did not observe a significantly increased risk for melanoma relapse and worse in MSS in patients who did not undergo CLND (hazard ratio: 1.1 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.7) and 1.1 (95% CI 0.67 to 1.9), respectively). On 20-year survival analysis, we confirmed that the risk of melanoma relapse and impaired MSS does not significantly increase in patients without CLND (hazard ratio: 1.2 (95% CI 0.8 to 1.9) and 1.3 (95% CI 0.8 to 2.3), respectively). On 10-year as well as 20-year multivariable follow-up analysis (including several important prognostic factors), Cox proportional-hazards regression showed that the status of CLND did not remain in the regression model (p > 0.1). Our 10-year data give conclusive support to previous investigations indicating that waiving CLND in patients with SLN micrometastases does not affect MSS. More importantly, our long-term follow-up data confirm for the first time the 10-year survival data of previous investigations.

Management of Regional Nodal Melanoma

Regional nodal melanoma management has changed substantially over the past 2 decades alongside advances in systemic therapy. Significant data from retrospective studies and from 2 randomized controlled trials show no survival benefit to completion lymph node dissection compared with observation in sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma patients. Observation is becoming the standard recommendation in these patients, whereas patients with clinically detected lymph nodes are still recommended to undergo lymph node dissection. Promising early results from a neoadjuvant approach inform the ongoing evolution of melanoma management. Recruiting patients to clinical trials is paramount to attaining evidence-based practice changes in melanoma.

Active surveillance of patients who have sentinel node positive melanoma: An international, multi-institution evaluation of adoption and early outcomes after the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial II (MSLT-2)

BACKGROUND

For patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive cutaneous melanoma, the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial demonstrated equivalent disease-specific survival (DSS) with active surveillance using nodal ultrasound versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Adoption and outcomes of active surveillance in clinical practice and in adjuvant therapy recipients are unknown.

METHODS

In a retrospective cohort of SLN-positive adults treated at 21 institutions in Australia, Europe, and the United States from June 2017 to November 2019, the authors evaluated the impact of active surveillance and adjuvant therapy on all-site recurrence-free survival (RFS), isolated nodal RFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and DSS using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models.

RESULTS

Among 6347 SLN biopsies, 1154 (18%) were positive and had initial negative distant staging. In total, 965 patients (84%) received active surveillance, 189 (16%) underwent CLND. Four hundred thirty-nine patients received adjuvant therapy (surveillance, 38%; CLND, 39%), with the majority (83%) receiving anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. After a median follow-up of 11 months, 220 patients developed recurrent disease (surveillance, 19%; CLND, 22%), and 24 died of melanoma (surveillance, 2%; CLND, 4%). Sixty-eight patients had an isolated nodal recurrence (surveillance, 6%; CLND, 4%). In patients who received adjuvant treatment without undergoing prior CLND, all isolated nodal recurrences were resectable. On risk-adjusted multivariable analyses, CLND was associated with improved isolated nodal RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88), but not all-site RFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.02). Adjuvant therapy improved all-site RFS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.47-0.57). DSS and DMFS did not differ by nodal management or adjuvant treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Active surveillance has been adopted for most SLN-positive patients. At initial assessment, real-world outcomes align with randomized trial findings, including in adjuvant therapy recipients.

LAY SUMMARY

For patients with melanoma of the skin and microscopic spread to lymph nodes, monitoring with ultrasound is an alternative to surgically removing the remaining lymph nodes. The authors studied adoption and real-world outcomes of ultrasound monitoring in over 1000 patients treated at 21 centers worldwide, finding that most patients now have ultrasounds instead of surgery. Although slightly more patients have cancer return in the lymph nodes with this strategy, typically, it can be removed with delayed surgery. Compared with up-front surgery, ultrasound monitoring results in the same overall risk of melanoma coming back at any location or of dying from melanoma.

Regional Lymph Node Metastases in Cutaneous Melanoma: A Single-Center Analysis from Southeast Europe

OBJECTIVE

Sentinel lymph node biopsy is the standard of care for nodal staging in clinically node-negative melanoma patients. Our goal was to present 10-year results of sentinel lymph node biopsy at our institution and to evaluate the clinicopathologic factors as potential predictors of sentinel lymph node and non-sentinel lymph node metastatic involvement in patients with cutaneous melanoma.

METHODS

We have analyzed clinicopathologic and lymphoscintigraphic characteristics in 420 patients with cutaneous melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy between 2010 and 2019. In addition, we have examined the results of group of patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy undergoing complete lymph node dissection.

RESULTS

The overall detection rate of sentinel lymph node biopsies was 97.1%, of which 18.8% was metastatic. Drainage to one regional basin was seen in 345 patients (83.1%) and to multiple drainage regions in 71 patients (17%). In-transit lymph nodes were detected in 20 patients. On univariate logistic regression analysis, male gender, primary tumor thickness with nodular histology, acral location, presence of ulceration, and the number of nodes harvested were significantly associated with sentinel lymph node biopsy status (p < 0.05). On multivariate analysis, the Breslow thickness was the only independent predictor of sentinel lymph node biopsy status. The metastases in non-sentinel lymph node found in 26 patients with positive sentinel lymph node (35.6%) correlated on univariate, as well as on multivariate logistic regression, with tumor subtype and number of sentinel lymph node harvested.

CONCLUSION

In addition to the well-established primary tumor thickness as a predictor of sentinel lymph node biopsy positivity, we observed acral location and nodular melanoma subtype to significantly enhance the risk of metastases in sentinel lymph node(s). Primary tumor histology and number of nodes harvested were the only statistically significant variables predicting the non-sentinel lymph node status on multivariate analysis. Lymphoscintigraphy imaging characteristics were not significantly associated with sentinel lymph node status.

Re-evaluation of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Melanoma

OPINION STATEMENT

The vast majority of patients newly diagnosed with melanoma present with clinically localized disease, and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a standard of care in the management of these patients, particularly in intermediate thickness cases, in order to provide important prognostic data. However, SLNB also has an important role in the management of patients with other subtypes of melanoma such as thick melanomas, certain thin melanomas, and specific histologic variants of melanoma such as desmoplastic melanoma. Furthermore, there have been technical advances in the SLNB technique, such as the development of newer radiotracers and use of SPECT/CT, and there is some data to suggest performing a SLNB may be therapeutic. Finally, the management of patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) has undergone dramatic changes over the past several years based on the results of recent important clinical trials. Treatment options for patients with SLN metastases now include surveillance, completion lymph node dissection, and adjuvant therapy with checkpoint inhibitors and targeted therapy. SLNB continues to play a crucial role in the management of patients with melanoma, allowing for risk stratification, potential regional disease control, and further treatment options for patients with a positive SLN.

Sentinel-Lymph-Node Multicenter Trials

Well executed multicenter clinical trials often provide significant evidence and support for, or against, foundational aspects of clinical procedures perceived to improve clinical management of a medical condition. In this review, discussed are reports of multicenter clinical trials designed to investigate sentinel lymph node biopsy procedures in seven types of cancer: breast, melanoma, head and neck, gastric, colon, uterine, and vulvar-with focus on the most recent reports of the hypotheses, objectives, parameters, data, results, implications, and impacts of the included trials. Such trials generally enroll more subjects, in shorter time periods, than do single-center studies. Such studies generally also have greater diversities among investigator practitioners and investigative environments than do single-center studies. The greater number of subjects provides more power to statistical analyses performed in such studies. The more rapid accrual usually results in data being more consistently acquired. The diversities of practitioners and environments may produce results that are more conservative than might be obtained from more "focused" studies; however, diversities in a study often identify implicitly results that are more robust-that is results applicable by more practitioners and applicable in more environments.

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.

Completion lymph node dissection in patients with sentinel lymph node positive cutaneous head and neck melanoma

BACKGROUND

Relatively few cutaneous head and neck melanoma (CHNM) patients with were included in the multicenter selective lymphadenectomy trial II (MSLT-II). Our objective was to investigate whether immediate completion lymph node dissection completion of lymph node dissection (CLND) was associated with survival benefit for sentinel lymph node (SLN) positive CHNM using the National Cancer Database.

METHODS

SLN positive patients with CHNM from 2012 to 2014 were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into two groups: those who underwent SLN biopsy (SLNB) only versus those who underwent SLNB followed by CLND (SLNB + CLND). The primary outcome was 5-year overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Among 530 SLNB + patients, 342 patients underwent SLNB followed by CLND (SLNB + CLND). The SLNB only group had fewer positive SLN, less advanced pathologic stage, and a lower rate of adjuvant immunotherapy. There was no significant difference in 5-year OS between the two groups (51.0% vs 67%; P = .56). After adjusting for pathologic stage, there remained no difference in 5-year OS among patients with stage IIIA (63.0% vs. 73.6%, P = 0.22) or IIIB/IIIC disease (39.1% vs 57.8%; P = .52). Conclusions Using a large nationwide database, CLND was not shown to be associated with improved OS for patients with SLNB positive CHNM, validating the results of MSLT-II.

Nodal and systemic recurrence following observation of a positive sentinel lymph node in melanoma

BACKGROUND

Two RCTs found no survival benefit for completion lymphadenectomy after positive sentinel lymph node biopsy compared with observation with ultrasound in patients with melanoma. Recurrence patterns and regional control are not well described for patients undergoing observation alone.

METHODS

All patients with a positive sentinel node biopsy who did not have immediate completion lymphadenectomy were identified from a single-institution database (1995-2018). First recurrences were classified as node only, local and in-transit (LCIT) only, LCIT and nodal, or systemic. Regional control and factors associated with recurrence survival were analysed.

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 33 months. Of 370 patients, 158 (42·7 per cent) had a recurrence. The sites of first recurrence were node only (13·2 per cent), LCIT only (11·9 per cent), LCIT and nodal (3·5 per cent), and systemic (13·8 per cent). The 3-year postrecurrence melanoma-specific survival rate was 73 (95 per cent c.i. 54 to 86) per cent for patients with node-only first recurrence, and 51 (31 to 68) per cent for those with initial systemic recurrence. In multivariable analysis, ulceration in the primary lesion (hazard ratio (HR) 2·53, 95 per cent c.i. 1·27 to 5·04), disease-free interval 12 months or less (HR 2·38, 1·28 to 4·35), and systemic (HR 2·57, 1·16 to 5·65) or LCIT and nodal (HR 2·94, 1·11 to 7·79) first recurrence were associated significantly with decreased postrecurrence survival. Maintenance of regional control required therapeutic lymphadenectomy in 13·0 per cent of patients during follow-up.

CONCLUSION

Observation after a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy is associated with good regional control, permits assessment of the time to and pattern of recurrence, and spares lymphadenectomy-related morbidity in patients with melanoma.

Adjuvant Therapy Failure Patterns in the Modern Era of Melanoma Management

BACKGROUND

The management of patients with resected stage 3 melanoma has changed significantly due to adoption of the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT)-2 guidelines and to the survival benefit of adjuvant anti-PD-1 immunotherapy and BRAF/MEK-inhibitor (BRAF/MEKi) therapy. Data are scarce regarding recurrence patterns, adjuvant therapy responses, and therapy-associated adverse events (AEs) in the modern era.

METHODS

This single-institution, retrospective study analyzed surgically resected stage 3 and oligometastatic stage 4 patients who received anti-PD-1, BRAF/MEKi, or surgery with active surveillance only. The primary end point of the study was recurrence-free survival (RFS). The secondary end points were the location and clinical characteristics of recurrence and therapy-associated AEs.

RESULTS

From a cohort of 137 patients, the study enrolled 102 patients treated with adjuvant anti-PD-1 (n = 46), adjuvant BRAF/MEKi (n = 3), or surgery alone (n = 26). During a mean follow-up period of 17 months, 20% of the ani-PD-1 patients, 13% of the BRAF/MEKi patients, and 42% of the surgery-only patients experienced recurrence. Log-rank testing showed a significantly longer RFS for the patients treated with anti-PD-1 [15.3 months; interquartile range (IQR), 8.2-23.2 months; p = 0.04] or BRAF/MEKi (17.9 months; IQR, 12.5-23 months; p = 0.01) than for those treated with surgery alone (11.9 months; IQR, 7.0-17.6 months). In the anti-PD-1 group, AEs occurred less frequently than in the BRAF/MEKi group (54% vs 80%; p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant anti-PD-1 and BRAF/MEKi were associated with significantly improved RFS for the patients with resected stage 3 or 4 melanoma. The BRAF/MEKi group had significantly more AEs than the anti-PD-1 group. This is the first study to characterize real-world recurrence in the modern era of adjuvant therapy for 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.

[Stage III melanoma: Sentinel node biopsy, completion lymph node dissection and prospects of adjuvant therapy. A French national survey on current and envisaged practices]

BACKGROUND

The recent publication of randomized trials investigating the efficacy of adjuvant therapy and completion lymph node dissection at microscopic stage III melanoma calls for a reappraisal of melanoma management from different angles: indications for sentinel lymph node biopsy, indications for completion lymph node dissection in microscopic-stage disease, and adjuvant therapies. Our objective was to evaluate current practices and to question French onco-dermatologists about any changes they envisaged in their practices in the light of recent publications.

METHODS

We conducted a national survey among members of the Cutaneous Oncology Group of the French Society of Dermatology in October 2017.

RESULTS

Forty French health centers were included, and 53 individual responses were collected. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma was performed at 75 % of the centers. Before the summer of 2017 and the publication of MSLT-II (proving the absence of any therapeutic benefits for complete lymph node dissection in microscopic stage III melanoma), when a positive sentinel lymph node was diagnosed, immediate completion lymph node dissection was performed at 90 % of the centers. After the publication of MSLT-II, 45 % of the respondents considered stopping this practice. The risk-benefit ratio prompted prescription of nivolumab and of combined dabrafenib+trametinib as adjuvant therapy by respectively 96 % and 79 % of respondents, while the corresponding rates for interferon and ipilimumab were only 21 % and 15 %.

CONCLUSION

Early melanoma management stands on the verge of major changes thanks to the arrival of efficient adjuvant therapies and a decrease in immediate completion lymph node dissections for patients with microscopic stage III is also anticipated.

Surgical Management of Lymph Nodes in Melanoma

This article provides a comprehensive evaluation of surgical management of the lymph node basin in melanoma, with historical, anatomic, and evidence-based recommendations for practice.

Nonsurgical Management of Lymph Node Basins in Melanoma

In this article we provide a critical review of the evidence available for surgical management of the nodal basin in melanoma, with an aim to ensure an understanding of risks and benefits for all lymph node surgery offered to patients, and alternatives to surgical management where appropriate.

Meta-analysis of completion lymph node dissection in sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma

BACKGROUND

The role of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma continues to be debated. This systematic review and meta-analysis evaluated survival and recurrence rate in these patients who underwent CLND, compared with observation.

METHODS

A comprehensive MEDLINE and Embase database search was performed for cohort studies and RCTs published between January 2000 and June 2017 that assessed the outcomes of CLND compared with observation in patients with SLN-positive melanoma. The primary outcome was survival and the secondary outcome was recurrence rate. Studies were assessed for quality using the Cochrane risk-of-bias tool for RCTs and Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort studies. Pooled relative risk or hazard ratio with 95 per cent confidence intervals were calculated for each outcome. The extent of heterogeneity between studies was assessed with the I² test. The protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017070152).

RESULTS

Fifteen studies (13 cohort studies with 7868 patients and 2 RCTs with 2228 patients) were identified for qualitative synthesis. Thirteen studies remained for quantitative meta-analysis. Survival was similar in patients who underwent CLND and those who were observed (risk ratio (RR) for death 0·85, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 1·02). The recurrence rate was also similar (RR 0·91, 0·79 to 1·05).

CONCLUSION

Patients with SLN-positive melanoma do not have a significant benefit in survival or recurrence rate if they undergo CLND rather than observation.

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.

Current management of regional lymph nodes in patients with melanoma

The publication of recent randomized trials has prompted a significant shift in both our understanding and the management of patients with melanoma. Here, the current management of the regional lymph nodes in patients with melanoma is discussed. This review focuses on selection for sentinel lymph node biopsy, management of the positive sentinel node, management of the clinically positive node, and the controversy over the therapeutic value of early nodal intervention.

Failure to identify sentinel lymph nodes for malignant melanoma - Outcome after over 10 years median follow up

BACKGROUND

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is routinely performed during surgery for malignant melanoma, using double mapping. Still, in some cases, a sentinel lymph node identified pre-operatively by lymphoscintigraphy is not identified during surgery. We hypothesized that disease specific survival would not be significantly impacted by intra-operative lymph node mapping (IOLM) failure.

METHODS

The patient population study included 1300 malignant melanomas operated on by a single surgical oncologist (H.G.) after sentinel lymph node scintigraphy. Patients were included in the analysis if intra-operative lymph node (IOLM) mapping failed.

RESULTS

Among 1300 patients who underwent surgery for malignant melanoma during the study period and after median follow up of >10 years, 33/36 lymphatic drainage basins with failed sentinel node identification were free of disease. Disease specific survival for the entire group of 33 patients with IOLM failure was 91.0%, which is comparable to previously published disease specific survival for all melanoma patients.

CONCLUSION

We conclude that failure to identify a pre-operatively marked sentinel lymph node by an experienced melanoma surgeon has, generally, no impact on disease specific survival, as demonstrated in this review of a series of surgical melanoma patients.

A model for predicting low probability of nonsentinel lymph node positivity in melanoma patients with a single positive sentinel lymph node

BACKGROUND

Identifying factors associated with nonsentinel lymph node (NSN) metastases in melanoma patients with a single positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) could aid decision making regarding adjuvant therapy. We describe a model for identifying patients with a single positive SLN at low risk for NSN metastasis.

METHODS

Factors associated with NSN metastasis in patients with a primary cutaneous melanoma and a single positive SLN who underwent completion lymph node dissection (CLND) were identified. These factors were used to construct a model for predicting the NSN status. The model was validated using a separate data set from another tertiary referral cancer center.

RESULTS

In the training data set, 111 patients had a single positive SLN. Of these, 27 had positive NSN. SLN tumor deposit diameter ≥0.75 mm (OR, 3.43; P = 0.047), age ≥40 (OR, 12.14; P = 0.024), and multifocal SLN tumor deposit location (OR, 4.16; P = 0.0096) were independently associated with NSN positivity. Patients with 0 to 1 of these risk factors had a low risk of NSN metastasis in both the training (7.5%) and validation (4.6%) data sets.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of patient and SLN tumor burden characteristics can help to identify patients with a single positive SLN who are at a low risk of NSN metastasis.

Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy and Completion Lymph Node Dissection for Melanoma

OPINION STATEMENT

This review critically evaluates recent trials which have challenged the practice of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) for melanoma patients diagnosed with regional metastasis by positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Two trials in the last 2 years, DeCOG-SLT and MSLT-II, found no significant differences in melanoma-specific survival between patients, whether they received immediate CLND or observation after positive SLNB, despite decreases in nodal recurrence achieved by dissection. These trials together disfavor routine CLND in most patients after positive SLNB. However, their conclusions are limited by study populations which overall harbored a lower burden of SLN disease. Special attention needs to be given to patients who do have higher risk disease, with SLN tumor burdens exceeding 1 mm in diameter, for whom CLND may remain both prognostic and therapeutic. Current guidelines thus recommend either CLND or careful observation after positive SLNB after appropriate risk stratification of patients. While a decline in CLND is inevitable, treatment of stage III melanoma is witnessing the concurrent rise of effective adjuvant therapies. PD-1 inhibitors such as nivolumab, or combination BRAF/MEK inhibitors for V600E or K mutant melanoma, which were previously available to only trial patients with completely resected stage III disease, are now approved for use in patients with positive SLNB alone. Providers are better equipped than ever to treat clinically occult, regional metastatic disease with SLNB followed by adjuvant therapy for most patients, but should take steps to avoid undertreatment of high-risk patients who may proceed to disease relapse or progression.

Incidence and outcomes of pediatric extremity melanoma: A propensity score matched SEER study

BACKGROUND

There is a paucity of literature on treatment of melanoma in children with surgical management extrapolated from adult experience. The incidence and clinical outcomes of pediatric extremity melanoma were studied.

METHODS

SEER registry was analyzed between 1973 and 2010 for patients <20years old with extremity melanoma. Multivariate and propensity-score matched analyses were performed to identify independent predictors of survival.

RESULTS

Overall, 917 patients were identified with an age-adjusted incidence of 0.2/100,000 persons, annual percent change 0.96. Most had localized disease (77%), histology revealing melanoma-not otherwise specified (52%). Surgical procedures performed included wide local excision (50%), excisional biopsy (32%), lymphadenectomy (LA) (28%), and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) (15%). Overall, 30-year disease specific mortality was 7% with lower survival for extremity melanoma (90%), males (89%), nodular histology (69%), and distant disease (36%) (all P<0.05). Post-treatment multivariate analysis revealed localized disease (HR 9.76; P=0.006) as an independent prognosticator of survival; earlier diagnostic years 1988-1999 (HR 2.606; P=0.017) were a negative prognosticator of survival. Propensity-score matched analysis found no difference in survival between SLNB/LA vs no sampling for regional/distant disease.

CONCLUSIONS

Pediatric extremity melanoma in SEER demonstrate no survival advantage between children undergoing sampling procedures vs no sampling for regional/distant disease.

TYPE OF STUDY

Retrospective, prognostic study.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

III.

Lymph node metastasis in melanoma: a debate on the significance of nodal metastases, conditional survival analysis and clinical trials

While there is no doubt that regional lymph node metastases are an enormously important factor in melanoma staging and treatment, the biology behind this significance and its precise implications for treatment planning have been a leading controversy in melanoma and other solid tumors for over a century. Recent clinical data, including data from prospective randomized clinical trials have refined our understanding of the process of nodal metastases and the advantages and disadvantages of different clinical management strategies. This review presents two points of view in this debate and discusses the results of new data analyses as well as pivotal clinical trials informing the discussion.

The Great Debate at "Melanoma Bridge", Napoli, December 2nd, 2017

As part of the 2017 Melanoma Bridge congress (November 30–December 2, 2017, Napoli, Italy), the great debate session featured counterpoint views from leading experts on three contemporary controversial clinical issues in the care of the melanoma patient. These were: (1) whether complete lymph node dissection should be routinely offered to all melanoma patients with sentinel lymph node-positive disease; (2) whether first-line treatment of BRAF-mutated melanoma should consist of BRAF-targeted therapy or immunotherapy with checkpoint inhibitors; and (3) whether combined or sequential administration of treatments should be the preferred option in the management of patients with advanced melanoma. Discussion of these three important issues and audience responses are reported here.

Lymph Node Dissection in Patients With Melanoma and Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis: An Updated, Evidence-Based Decision Algorithm

Recent publication of the results of clinical trials in which lymph node dissection was not associated with any survival benefit in patients with sentinel node metastasis makes it necessary to reconsider the treatment of patients with melanoma. This article provides an update on the available evidence on the diverse factors (routes of metastatic spread, predictors, adjuvant therapy, etc.) that must be considered when treating patients with sentinel node-positive melanoma. The authors propose a decision-making algorithm for use in this clinical setting. The current evidence no longer supports lymph node dissection in patients with low-risk sentinel node metastasis (sentinel node tumor load ≤1mm).

Completion lymphadenectomy for sentinel node positive cutaneous head & neck melanoma

The application and utility of melanoma sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has evolved significantly since its inception over two decades ago. The current focus has shifted from a staging modality to potentially a therapeutic intervention. Recent research to include large multi-institutional randomized trials have attempted to answer the question: is a completion lymph node dissection (CLND) required following a positive SLNB? This review provides an evidence-based, contemporary review of the utility of CLND for SLNB positive head and neck cutaneous melanoma patients.

Level of Evidence

NA.

Detection of Minimal Residual Disease and Its Clinical Applications in Melanoma and Breast Cancer Patients

Melanoma and breast cancer (BC) patients face a high risk of recurrence and disease progression after curative surgery and/or therapeutic treatment. Monitoring for minimal residual disease (MRD) during a disease-free follow-up period would greatly improve patient outcomes through earlier detection of relapse or treatment resistance. However, MRD monitoring in solid tumors such as melanoma and BC are not well established. Here, we discuss the clinical applications of MRD monitoring in melanoma and BC patients and highlight the current approaches for detecting MRD in these solid tumors.

Serial or Parallel Metastasis of Cutaneous Melanoma? A Study of the German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry

For more than a century the Halstedian hypothesis of contiguous metastasis from the primary tumor through the lymphatics to distant sites shaped lymph node surgery for melanoma. We challenge this dogma of serial metastatic dissemination. A single-center series of 2,299 patients with cutaneous metastatic melanoma was investigated to analyze overall survival and distant metastasis-free survival of stage IV patients with or without primary lymphatic metastasis. Results were then compared with those of 2,134 patients from three independent centers of the German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry. A multivariate binary logistic regression model was used to identify risk factors for the initial metastatic pathway. Distant metastasis-free survival (hazard ratio = 1.02; 95% confidence interval = 0.91-1.14; P = 0.76) and overall survival (HR = 1.09; 95% CI = 0.96-1.23; P = 0.177) did not differ between stage IV patients with primary hematogenous or primary lymphatic metastasis. Melanoma localization was the only significant risk factor for the initial metastatic pathway. These findings indicate that regional and distant metastases originate from the primary tumor itself in a rather parallel than serial fashion and could explain the lack of survival benefit associated with immediate complete lymph node dissection in sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma patients.

Improvement and persistent disparities in completion lymph node dissection: Lessons from the National Cancer Database

BACKGROUND

Completion lymph node dissection (CLND) is recommended for melanoma patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsies (SLNB); however, 50% do not undergo CLND. We sought to determine CLND trends over time, and factors contributing to variability.

METHODS

The NCDB was queried for patients undergoing wide local excision (WLE), with or without SLNB and CLND. Cohorts were created based on demographic/socioeconomic variables and era of treatment (Era 1: 2003-07, Era 2: 2008-12). Univariate and multivariate analyses identified factors associated with performance of or trends in CLND.

RESULTS

122 849 underwent WLE with SLNB. Of 24 267 (19.8%) with +SLNB, 13 594 (56.0%) continued to CLND. In multivariate analyses, Medicaid (OR 0.78; P = 0.04) or Medicare (OR 0.79; P < 0.01) in Era 1 and patients without insurance in Era 2 (OR 0.78; P = 0.01) underwent less CLND. In both eras, Blacks (OR 0.45; P < 0.01, OR 0.59; P < 0.01), head/neck lesions (OR 0.72; P < 0.01, OR 0.66; P < 0.01) and lower extremity lesions (OR 0.75; P < 0.01, OR 0.72; P < 0.01) underwent less CLND. However, Blacks experienced greatest increase in CLND usage (+9.2%).

CONCLUSIONS

CLND usage continues to be low and racial/socioeconomic disparities persist. Until the results of MSLT-2 become available, continued focus on understanding poor adherence to, and improving rates of CLND is necessary.

Is the non-sentinel lymph node compartment the next site for melanoma progression from the sentinel lymph node compartment in the regional nodal basin?

Melanoma patients with additional positive lymph nodes in the completion lymph node dissection (CLND) following a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy would have a poorer prognosis than patients with no additional positive lymph nodes. We hypothesize that the progression of disease from the SLN to the non-SLN compartment is orderly and is associated with the worsening of the disease status. Thus, the SLN and non-SLN compartments are biologically different in that cancer cells, in general, arrive in the SLN compartment before spreading to the non-SLN compartment. To validate this concept, we used a large cohort of melanoma patients from our prospective SLN database in an academic tertiary medical center. Adult cutaneous melanoma patients (n = 291) undergoing CLND after a positive SLN biopsy from 1994 to 2009 were analyzed. Comparison of 5-year disease-free survival and 5-year overall survival between positive (n = 66) and negative (n = 225) CLND groups was made. The 5-year disease-free survival rates were 55% (95% CI 49-62%) for patients with no additional LN on CLND versus 14% (95% CI 8-26%) in patients with positive LN on CLND (p < 0.0001, log-rank test). The median disease-free survival time was 7.4 years with negative CLND (95% CI 4.4-15+ years) and 1.2 years with positive CLND (95% CI 1.0-1.8 years). The 5-year overall survival rates were 67% (95% CI 61-74%) for negative CLND versus 38% (95% CI 28-52%) for positive CLND (p < 0.0001, log-rank test). The median overall survival time was 12.1 years for negative CLND (95% CI 9.3-15+ years) and 2.5 years for positive CLND (95% CI 2.2-5.7 years). This study shows that CLND status is a significant prognostic factor for patients with positive SLNs undergoing CLND. Also, it suggests an orderly progression of metastasis from the SLN to the non-SLN compartment. Thus, the SLN in the regional nodal basin draining the primary melanoma may serve as an important gateway for metastasis to the non-SLN compartment and beyond to the systemic sites.

Completion Dissection or Observation for Sentinel-Node Metastasis in Melanoma

BACKGROUND

Sentinel-lymph-node biopsy is associated with increased melanoma-specific survival (i.e., survival until death from melanoma) among patients with node-positive intermediate-thickness melanomas (1.2 to 3.5 mm). The value of completion lymph-node dissection for patients with sentinel-node metastases is not clear.

METHODS

In an international trial, we randomly assigned patients with sentinel-node metastases detected by means of standard pathological assessment or a multimarker molecular assay to immediate completion lymph-node dissection (dissection group) or nodal observation with ultrasonography (observation group). The primary end point was melanoma-specific survival. Secondary end points included disease-free survival and the cumulative rate of nonsentinel-node metastasis.

RESULTS

Immediate completion lymph-node dissection was not associated with increased melanoma-specific survival among 1934 patients with data that could be evaluated in an intention-to-treat analysis or among 1755 patients in the per-protocol analysis. In the per-protocol analysis, the mean (±SE) 3-year rate of melanoma-specific survival was similar in the dissection group and the observation group (86±1.3% and 86±1.2%, respectively; P=0.42 by the log-rank test) at a median follow-up of 43 months. The rate of disease-free survival was slightly higher in the dissection group than in the observation group (68±1.7% and 63±1.7%, respectively; P=0.05 by the log-rank test) at 3 years, based on an increased rate of disease control in the regional nodes at 3 years (92±1.0% vs. 77±1.5%; P<0.001 by the log-rank test); these results must be interpreted with caution. Nonsentinel-node metastases, identified in 11.5% of the patients in the dissection group, were a strong, independent prognostic factor for recurrence (hazard ratio, 1.78; P=0.005). Lymphedema was observed in 24.1% of the patients in the dissection group and in 6.3% of those in the observation group.

CONCLUSIONS

Immediate completion lymph-node dissection increased the rate of regional disease control and provided prognostic information but did not increase melanoma-specific survival among patients with melanoma and sentinel-node metastases. (Funded by the National Cancer Institute and others; MSLT-II ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00297895 .).

Lymph node dissection for melanoma: where do we stand?

The extent and timing of regional lymphadenectomy and its role in patients with clinically localized primary melanoma has been the subject of considerable debate. While therapeutic lymphadenectomy for clinically positive nodes is uniformly accepted, the benefit of regional lymphadenectomy in patients with clinically uninvolved lymph nodes potentially harboring micrometastatic disease is less clear. Efforts to better select patients for complete regional lymphadenectomy after sentinel lymph node biopsy are underway. The future holds the promise of more stringent selection criteria and perhaps the identification of subgroups of patients for which a therapeutic benefit may be realized. Moreover, novel sensitive radiological techniques for detecting in vivo micrometastatic nodal disease may improve surgical precision, further decreasing potential morbidities of lymphadenectomy.