1
|
Chang S, Lourdault K, Grunkemeier GL, Hanes DA, Chiu S, Stern S, Essner R. Individualized Prediction for Risk of Recurrence in Stage I/II Melanoma Patients With Negative Sentinel Lymph Node. Cancer Med 2024; 13:e70441. [PMID: 39611693 PMCID: PMC11605731 DOI: 10.1002/cam4.70441] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/02/2024] [Revised: 10/13/2024] [Accepted: 11/10/2024] [Indexed: 11/30/2024] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Despite the favorable prognosis of AJCC stage I/II melanoma patients, up to 20%-30% will develop metastases. Our objective is to predict long-term risk (probability) of recurrence in early-stage melanoma patients. METHODS A Risk Score to predict long-term recurrence was developed using Cox regression based on 2668 patients. Five clinicopathological risk factors were included. The association of the Risk Score with the risk of recurrence was evaluated using parametric models (exponential, Weibull, and Gompertz models) and compared to the Cox model using the Akaike information criterion. The discrimination of the model was measured by time-dependent ROC analyses. A calibration curve was used to evaluate the agreement between predicted and observed recurrence probabilities. RESULTS The bootstrap adjusted C-index was 0.76 (95% CI, 0.74-0.79) overall and 0.87 (0.83-0.90) and 0.82 (0.78-0.85) at one and two years, respectively, and then remained above 0.70 up to 20 years. The Gompertz model for prediction of survival from the Risk Score showed the best performance and displayed good agreement with the Kaplan-Meier curves. The calibration curve of the Gompertz model showed a good agreement between predicted and observed 2-, 5-, and 10-year risk of recurrence. Population-level analysis demonstrated a significant association of Risk Score with risk of recurrence, with 10-year risks of recurrence of 4.5%, 13.0%, and 33.7% in the first, second, and third tertiles, respectively. CONCLUSION We developed a Risk Score to predict long-term risk of recurrence for early-stage melanoma patients. A Gompertz survival model fit to the Risk Score allows for individualized prediction of time-dependent recurrence risk.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | | | | | - Stacey Stern
- Providence Saint John's Cancer InstituteSanta MonicaCaliforniaUSA
| | - Richard Essner
- Providence Saint John's Cancer InstituteSanta MonicaCaliforniaUSA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Meyer S, Buser L, Haferkamp S, Berneburg M, Maisch T, Klinkhammer-Schalke M, Pauer A, Vogt T, Garbe C. Identification of high-risk patients with a seven-biomarker prognostic signature for adjuvant treatment trial recruitment in American Joint Committee on Cancer v8 stage I-IIA cutaneous melanoma. Eur J Cancer 2023; 182:77-86. [PMID: 36753835 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.01.002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/23/2022] [Revised: 12/23/2022] [Accepted: 01/03/2023] [Indexed: 01/09/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE Many patients with resected American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) early-stage cutaneous melanoma nonetheless die of melanoma; additional risk stratification approaches are needed. PATIENTS AND METHODS Using prospectively-collected whole-tissue sections, we assessed in consecutive stage I-IIA patients (N = 439), a previously-validated, immunohistochemistry-based, 7-biomarker signature to prognosticate disease-free survival (DFS), melanoma-specific survival (MSS; primary end-point) and overall survival (OS), independent of AJCC classification. RESULTS Seven-marker signature testing designated 25.1% of patients (110/439) as high-risk (stage IA, 13.3% [43/323], IB, 53.2% [42/79], and IIA, 67.6% [25/37]). A Kaplan-Meier analysis demonstrated high-risk patients to have significantly worse DFS, MSS and OS versus low-risk counterparts (P < 0.001). In multivariable Cox regression modelling also including key clinicopathological/demographic factors, 7-marker signature data independently prognosticated the studied end-points. Models with the 7-marker signature risk category plus clinicopathological/demographic covariates substantially outperformed models with clinicopathological/demographic variables alone in predicting all studied outcomes (areas under the receiver operator characteristic curve 74.1% versus 68.4% for DFS, 81.5% versus 71.2% for MSS, 80.9% versus 73.0% for OS; absolute differences 5.7%, 10.3% and 7.9%, respectively, favouring 7-marker signature risk category-containing models). CONCLUSION In patients with AJCC early-stage disease, the 7-marker signature reliably prognosticates melanoma-related outcomes, independent of AJCC classification, and provides a valuable complement to clinicopathological/demographic factors.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefanie Meyer
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauss-Allee 11, 93053 Regensburg, Germany.
| | - Lorenz Buser
- Department of Pathology and Molecular Pathology, University Hospital of Zürich, University of Zürich, Schmelzbergstrasse 12, 8091 Zürich, Switzerland.
| | - Sebastian Haferkamp
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauss-Allee 11, 93053 Regensburg, Germany.
| | - Mark Berneburg
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauss-Allee 11, 93053 Regensburg, Germany.
| | - Tim Maisch
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital of Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Strauss-Allee 11, 93053 Regensburg, Germany.
| | - Monika Klinkhammer-Schalke
- Tumour Center Regensburg, Institute for Quality Assurance and Healthcare Research, University of Regensburg, Am BioPark 9, 93053 Regensburg, Germany.
| | - Armin Pauer
- Tumour Center Regensburg, Institute for Quality Assurance and Healthcare Research, University of Regensburg, Am BioPark 9, 93053 Regensburg, Germany.
| | - Thomas Vogt
- Department of Dermatology, Venerology, Allergology, University Hospital Saarland, Kirrbergerstraße, 66424 Homburg, Germany.
| | - Claus Garbe
- Center for Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Tuebingen, Liebermeisterstr. 25, 72076, Tuebingen, Germany.
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Berger DMS, van den Berg NS, van der Noort V, van der Hiel B, Valdés Olmos RA, Buckle TA, KleinJan GH, Brouwer OR, Vermeeren L, Karakullukçu B, van den Brekel MWM, van de Wiel BA, Nieweg OE, Balm AJM, van Leeuwen FWB, Klop WMC. Technologic (R)Evolution Leads to Detection of More Sentinel Nodes in Patients with Melanoma in the Head and Neck Region. J Nucl Med 2021; 62:1357-1362. [PMID: 33637591 PMCID: PMC8724899 DOI: 10.2967/jnumed.120.246819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/21/2020] [Accepted: 01/28/2021] [Indexed: 11/16/2022] Open
Abstract
Sentinel lymph node (SN) biopsy (SNB) has proven to be a valuable tool for staging melanoma patients. Since its introduction in the early 1990s, this procedure has undergone several technologic refinements, including the introduction of SPECT/CT, as well as radioguidance and fluorescence guidance. The purpose of the current study was to evaluate the effect of this technologic evolution on SNB in the head and neck region. The primary endpoint was the false-negative (FN) rate. Secondary endpoints were number of harvested SNs, overall operation time, operation time per harvested SN, and postoperative complications. Methods: A retrospective database was queried for cutaneous head and neck melanoma patients who underwent SNB at The Netherlands Cancer Institute between 1993 and 2016. The implementation of new detection techniques was divided into 4 groups: 1993-2005, with preoperative lymphoscintigraphy and intraoperative use of both a γ-ray detection probe and patent blue (n = 30); 2006-2007, with addition of preoperative road maps based on SPECT/CT (n = 15); 2008-2009, with intraoperative use of a portable γ-camera (n = 40); and 2010-2016, with addition of near-infrared fluorescence guidance (n = 192). Results: In total, 277 patients were included. At least 1 SN was identified in all patients. A tumor-positive SN was found in 59 patients (21.3%): 10 in group 1 (33.3%), 3 in group 2 (20.0%), 6 in group 3 (15.0%), and 40 in group 4 (20.8%). Regional recurrences in patients with tumor-negative SNs resulted in an overall FN rate of 11.9% (group 1, 16.7%; group 2, 0%; group 3, 14.3%; group 4, 11.1%). The number of harvested nodes increased with advancing technologies (P = 0.003), whereas Breslow thickness and operation time per harvested SN decreased (P = 0.003 and P = 0.017, respectively). There was no significant difference in percentage of tumor-positive SNs, overall operation time, and complication rate between the different groups. Conclusion: The use of advanced detection technologies led to a higher number of identified SNs without an increase in overall operation time, possibly indicating an improved surgical efficiency. Operation time per harvested SN decreased; the average FN rate remained 11.9% and was unchanged over 23 y. There was no significant change in postoperative complication rate.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Danique M S Berger
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands;
| | - Nynke S van den Berg
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California
| | - Vincent van der Noort
- Department of Biometrics, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bernies van der Hiel
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Renato A Valdés Olmos
- Department of Nuclear Medicine, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Tessa A Buckle
- Interventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Gijs H KleinJan
- Department of Urology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Oscar R Brouwer
- Department of Urology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Lenka Vermeeren
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology, Onze Lieve Vrouwe Gasthuis, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Baris Karakullukçu
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Michiel W M van den Brekel
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Bart A van de Wiel
- Department of Pathology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; and
| | - Omgo E Nieweg
- Melanoma Institute Australia and Central Medical School, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
| | - Alfons J M Balm
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Fijs W B van Leeuwen
- Interventional Molecular Imaging Laboratory, Department of Radiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - W Martin C Klop
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery and Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Reschke R, Gussek P, Ziemer M. Identifying High-Risk Tumors within AJCC Stage IB-III Melanomas Using a Seven-Marker Immunohistochemical Signature. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13122902. [PMID: 34200680 PMCID: PMC8229951 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13122902] [Citation(s) in RCA: 13] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/19/2021] [Revised: 06/05/2021] [Accepted: 06/07/2021] [Indexed: 11/17/2022] Open
Abstract
Simple Summary Immunotherapy and targeted therapy are widely accepted for stage III and IV melanoma patients. Clinical investigation of adjuvant therapy in stage II melanoma has already started. Therefore, methods for relapse prediction in lower stage melanoma patients apart from sentinel node biopsies are much needed to guide (neo)adjuvant therapies. Gene scores such as the “DecisionDx-Melanoma” and the “MelaGenix” score can help assist therapy decisions. However, a seven-marker immunohistochemical signature could add valuable feasibility to the biomarker toolbox. Abstract Background: We aim to validate a seven-marker immunohistochemical signature, consisting of Bax, Bcl-X, PTEN, COX-2, (loss of) ß-Catenin, (loss of) MTAP and (presence of) CD20, in an independent patient cohort and test clinical feasibility. Methods: We performed staining of the mentioned antibodies in tissue of 88 primary melanomas and calculated a risk score for each patient. Data were correlated with clinical parameters and outcome (recurrence-free, distant metastasis-free and melanoma-specific survival). Results: The seven-marker signature was able to identify high-risk patients within stages IB-III melanoma patients that have a significantly higher risk of disease recurrence, metastasis, and death. In particular, the high sensitivity of relapse prediction (>94%) in sentinel negative patients (stages IB–IIC) was striking (negative predictive value of 100% for melanoma-specific survival and distant metastasis-free survival, and 97.5% for relapse-free survival). For stage III patients (positive nodal status), the negative predictive value was 100% with the seven-marker signature. Conclusions: The seven-marker signature can help to further select high-risk patients in stages IIB-C but also in earlier stages IB–IIA and be a useful tool for therapy decisions in the adjuvant and future neo-adjuvant settings. Stage III patients with measurable lymph node disease classified as high-risk with the seven-marker signature are potential candidates for neoadjuvant immunotherapy.
Collapse
|
5
|
Straker RJ, Carr MJ, Sinnamon AJ, Shannon AB, Sun J, Landa K, Baecher KM, Wood C, Lynch K, Bartels HG, Panchaud R, Lowe MC, Slingluff CL, Jameson MJ, Tsai K, Faries MB, Beasley GM, Sondak V, Karakousis GC, Zager JS, Miura JT. Predictors of False Negative Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Clinically Localized Merkel Cell Carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2021; 28:6995-7003. [PMID: 33890195 DOI: 10.1245/s10434-021-10031-z] [Citation(s) in RCA: 3] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.8] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/30/2020] [Accepted: 04/02/2021] [Indexed: 12/20/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is routinely recommended for clinically localized Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC); however, predictors of false negative (FN) SLNB are undefined. METHODS Patients from six centers undergoing wide excision and SLNB for stage I/II MCC (2005-2020) were identified and were classified as having either a true positive (TP), true negative (TN) or FN SLNB. Predictors of FN SLNB were identified and survival outcomes were estimated. RESULTS Of 525 patients, 28 (5.4%), 329 (62.7%), and 168 (32%) were classified as FN, TN, and TP, respectively, giving an FN rate of 14.3% and negative predictive value of 92.2% for SLNB. Median follow-up for SLNB-negative patients was 27 months, and median time to nodal recurrence for FN patients was 7 months. Male sex (hazard ratio [HR] 3.15, p = 0.034) and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) (HR 2.22, p = 0.048) significantly correlated with FN, and increasing age trended toward significance (HR 1.04, p = 0.067). The 3-year regional nodal recurrence-free survival for males >75 years with LVI was 78.5% versus 97.4% for females ≤75 years without LVI (p = 0.009). Five-year disease-specific survival (90.9% TN vs. 51.3% FN, p < 0.001) and overall survival (69.9% TN vs. 48.1% FN, p = 0.035) were significantly worse for FN patients. CONCLUSION Failure to detect regional nodal microscopic disease by SLNB is associated with worse survival in clinically localized MCC. Males, patients >75 years, and those with LVI may be at increased risk for FN SLNB. Consideration of increased nodal surveillance following negative SLNB in these high-risk patients may aid in early identification of regional nodal recurrences.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Richard J Straker
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Michael J Carr
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Andrew J Sinnamon
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Adrienne B Shannon
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - James Sun
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Karenia Landa
- Department of Surgery, Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
| | | | - Christian Wood
- Department of Surgery, University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Kevin Lynch
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Harrison G Bartels
- Division of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Robyn Panchaud
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Michael C Lowe
- Department of Surgery, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
| | - Craig L Slingluff
- Division of Surgical Oncology, Department of Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Mark J Jameson
- Division of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology, Department of Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA
| | - Kenneth Tsai
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Mark B Faries
- Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, The Angeles Clinic and Research Institute, Los Angeles, CA, USA
| | | | - Vernon Sondak
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - Giorgos C Karakousis
- Division of Endocrine and Oncologic Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Jonathan S Zager
- Department of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center and Research Institute, Tampa, FL, USA.,Department of Oncological Sciences at the University of South Florida, Morsani College of Medicine, Tampa, FL, USA
| | - John T Miura
- Division of Endocrine and Oncologic Surgery, Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, PA, USA.
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Schilling C, Stoeckli SJ, Vigili MG, de Bree R, Lai SY, Alvarez J, Christensen A, Cognetti DM, D'Cruz AK, Frerich B, Garrel R, Kohno N, Klop WM, Kerawala C, Lawson G, McMahon J, Sassoon I, Shaw RJ, Tvedskov JF, von Buchwald C, McGurk M. Surgical consensus guidelines on sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in patients with oral cancer. Head Neck 2019; 41:2655-2664. [PMID: 30896058 DOI: 10.1002/hed.25739] [Citation(s) in RCA: 45] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/02/2019] [Accepted: 03/05/2019] [Indexed: 02/06/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The eighth international symposium for sentinel node biopsy (SNB) in head and neck cancer was held in 2018. This consensus conference aimed to deliver current multidisciplinary guidelines. This document focuses on the surgical aspects of SNB for oral cancer. METHOD Invited expert faculty selected topics requiring guidelines. Topics were reviewed and evidence evaluated where available. Data were presented at the consensus meeting, with live debate from panels comprising expert, nonexpert, and patient representatives followed by voting to assess the level of support for proposed recommendations. Evidence review, debate, and voting results were all considered in constructing these guidelines. RESULTS/CONCLUSION A range of topics were considered, from patient selection to surgical technique and follow-up schedule. Consensus was not achieved in all areas, highlighting potential issues that would benefit from prospective studies. Nevertheless these guidelines represent an up-to-date pragmatic recommendation based on current evidence and expert opinion.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Clare Schilling
- Head and Neck Academic Centre, Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University College London Hospital, London, UK
| | - Sando J Stoeckli
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, St. Gallen, Switzerland
| | - Maurizio G Vigili
- Department of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Ospedale San Carlo, Rome, Italy
| | - Remco de Bree
- Department of Head and Neck Surgical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
| | - Stephen Y Lai
- Department Head and Neck Surgery, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas
| | - Julio Alvarez
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Cruces University Hospital, Bilbao, Spain
| | - Anders Christensen
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery and Audiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - David M Cognetti
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
| | - Anil K D'Cruz
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Tata Memorial Hospital, Mumbai, India
| | - Bernhard Frerich
- Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Facial Plastic Surgery, University Medical Centre Rostock, Rostock, Germany
| | - Renaud Garrel
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital, Montpellier, France
| | - Naoyuki Kohno
- Department of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Kyorin University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan
| | - Willem Martin Klop
- Department of Head and Neck Oncology/Surgery, Netherlands Cancer Institute/Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Cyrus Kerawala
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, The Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
| | - Georges Lawson
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Université Catholique de Louvain, CHU UCL Namur, Namur, Belgium
| | - Jeremy McMahon
- Department of Head and Neck Surgery, Southern General Hospital, Glasgow, Scotland
| | - Isabel Sassoon
- Department of Infomatics, Kings College London, London, UK
| | - Richard J Shaw
- Institute of Translational Medicine, University of Liverpool, Cancer Research Centre, Liverpool, UK
| | - Jesper F Tvedskov
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery and Audiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Christian von Buchwald
- Department of Otolaryngology, Head & Neck Surgery and Audiology, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Mark McGurk
- Head and Neck Academic Centre, Department of Head and Neck Surgery, University College London Hospital, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|