National Practice Patterns in the Management of the Regional Lymph Node Basin After Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Cutaneous Melanoma

Interdisciplinary Implementation of a Synoptic Reporting Template for Melanoma Nodal Surveillance Ultrasound

BACKGROUND

With nodal surveillance increasingly used for sentinel lymph node-positive (SLN+) melanoma following the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-II), high-quality nodal ultrasonography (U/S) has become a critical need. Previous work has demonstrated low utilization of MSLT-II U/S criteria to define abnormal lymph nodes requiring intervention or biopsy. To address this gap, an evidence-based synoptic template was designed and implemented in this single-center study.

METHODS

Sentinel lymph node-positive patients undergoing nodal surveillance at a tertiary cancer center from July 2017 to June 2023 were identified retrospectively. Ultrasound reporting language was analyzed for MSLT-II criteria reported and clinically actionable recommendations (e.g., normal, abnormal with recommendation for biopsy). Following a multidisciplinary design process, the synoptic template was implemented in January 2023. Postimplementation outcomes were evaluated by using U/S reports and provider surveys.

RESULTS

A total of 337 U/S studies were performed on 94 SLN+ patients, with a median of 3 U/S per patient (range 1-12). Among 42 synoptic-eligible U/S performed postimplementation, 32 U/S (76.0%) were reported synoptically. Significant increases were seen in the number of MSLT-II criteria reported (Pre 0.5 ± 0.8 vs. Post 2.5 ± 1.0, p < 0.001), and clinically actionable recommendations for abnormal findings (Pre 64.0% vs. Post 93.0%, p = 0.04). Nearly all surgeon and radiologist survey respondents were "very" or "completely" satisfied with the clinical utility of the synoptic template (90.0%).

CONCLUSIONS

Following implementation of a synoptic template, U/S reports were significantly more likely to document MSLT-II criteria and provide an actionable recommendation, increasing usefulness to providers. Efforts to disseminate this synoptic template to other centers are ongoing.

Multicenter analysis of the surgical management and adjuvant therapy of patients with melanoma and a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy

INTRODUCTION

Complete lymph node dissection (CLND) was the standard practice for patients with melanoma and a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) until the results of 2 clinical trials published in 2016 and 2017 demonstrated that it did not improve melanoma-specific survival (MSS). However, it continues to be performed in some scenarios. No studies have ever been published on lymph node management after a positive SLNB in the routine clinical practice in our setting.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the evolution of the indication for CLND in patients with a positive SLNB, as well as the characteristics associated with its performance.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We conducted a multicenter retrospective observational study with patients with skin melanoma and positive sentinel lymph nodes diagnosed from 2017 through 2022 at 8 Spanish centers and 1 Italian center.

RESULTS

A total of 430 patients were included, 54% men, with 358 (75.1%) aged between 45 and 80 years. A total of 133 cases (31%) exhibited Breslow thickness > 4mm, 206 cases (49.1%) were ulcerated, and in 213 cases (55.7%), lymph node metastasis was > 1mm. Isolated lymphadenectomy or followed by adjuvant therapy was performed in 146 patients (34.1%). After multivariate logistic regression, the factors associated with the performance of CLND were the acral lentiginous melanoma histological subtype, lymph node metastasis size > 1mm, extracapsular spread, and the participant hospital. Age > 80 years was inversely associated.

CONCLUSION

While the frequency of CLND in patients with melanoma and positive SLNB has decreased, the indication for systemic adjuvant therapy in these patients has increased. However, CLND is still indicated in patients with high-risk characteristics.

Robot-Assisted Pelvic Dissection for Enlarged Lymph Nodes in Melanoma Improves Recovery with Equivalent Oncological Outcomes to Open Pelvic Dissection

BACKGROUND

Robot-assisted pelvic lymph node dissection (rPLND) has been reported in heterogenous groups of patients with melanoma, including macroscopic or at-high-risk-for microscopic metastasis. With changing indications for surgery in melanoma, and availability of effective systemic therapies, pelvic dissection is now performed for clinically detected bulky lymph node metastasis followed by adjuvant drug therapy. rPLND has not been compared with open pelvic lymph node dissection (oPLND) for modern practice.

METHODS

All patients undergoing pelvic node dissection for macroscopic melanoma at a single institution were reviewed as a cohort, observational study.

RESULTS

Twenty-two pelvic lymph node dissections were identified (8 oPLND; 14 rPLND). The number of pelvic lymph nodes removed was similar (median oPLND 6.5 (interquartile range [IQR] 6.0-12.5] versus rPLND 6.0 [3.75-9.0]), with frequent matted nodes (11/22, 50.0%). Operative time (median oPLND 130 min [IQR 95.5-182] versus rPLND 126 min [IQR 97.8-160]) and complications (Clavien-Dindo scale) were similar. Length of hospital stay (median 5.34 days (IQR 3.77-6.94) versus 1.98 days (IQR 1.39-3.50) and time to postoperative adjuvant therapy (median 11.6 weeks [IQR 10.6-18.5] versus 7.71 weeks [IQR 6.29-10.4]) were shorter in the rPLND group. No differences in pelvic lymph node recurrence (p = 0.984), distant metastatic recurrence (p = 0.678), or melanoma-specific survival (p = 0.655) were seen (median follow-up 21.1 months [rPLND] and 25.7 months [oPLND]).

CONCLUSIONS

rPLND is an effective way to remove bulky pelvic lymph nodes in melanoma, with a shorter recovery and reduced interval to initiating adjuvant therapy compared with oPLND. This group of patients may especially benefit from neoadjuvant systemic approaches to management.

The Current Treatment Trends and Survival Patterns in Melanoma Patients with Positive Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNB): A Multicenter Nationwide Study

BACKGROUND

In melanoma treatment, an approach following positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been recently deescalated from completion lymph node dissection (CLND) to active surveillance based on phase III trials data. In this study, we aim to evaluate treatment strategies in SLNB-positive melanoma patients in real-world practice.

METHODS

Five-hundred-fifty-seven melanoma SLNB-positive patients from seven comprehensive cancer centers treated between 2017 and 2021 were included. Kaplan-Meier methods and the Cox Proportional-Hazards Model were used for analysis.

RESULTS

The median follow-up was 25 months. Between 2017 and 2021, the percentage of patients undergoing CLND decreased (88-41%), while the use of adjuvant treatment increased (11-51%). The 3-year OS and RFS rates were 77.9% and 59.6%, respectively. Adjuvant therapy prolonged RFS (HR:0.69, p = 0.036)), but CLND did not (HR:1.22, p = 0.272). There were no statistically significant differences in OS for either adjuvant systemic treatment or CLND. Lower progression risk was also found, and time-dependent hazard ratios estimation in patients treated with systemic adjuvant therapy was confirmed (HR:0.20, p = 0.002 for BRAF inhibitors and HR:0.50, p = 0.015 for anti-PD-1 inhibitors).

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment of SLNB-positive melanoma patients is constantly evolving, and the role of surgery is currently rather limited. Whether CLND has been performed or not, in a group of SLNB-positive patients, adjuvant systemic treatment should be offered to all eligible patients.