Compounding Benefits of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy for Perineal Melanoma: A Population-Based Retrospective Cohort Analysis.


Journal

Annals of plastic surgery
ISSN: 1536-3708
Titre abrégé: Ann Plast Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7805336

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
05 2020
Historique:
entrez: 14 4 2020
pubmed: 14 4 2020
medline: 15 5 2021
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) in the treatment of melanoma is known to provide valuable prognostic information. However, there is no literature describing an overall or disease-specific survival (DDS) benefit of SLNB. In the perineum, melanoma is often more advanced at presentation with current treatment guidelines translated from nonanatomic specific melanoma. As a result, there is little understanding surrounding the role of SLNB in melanoma of the perineum. Our objective is to better understand the therapeutic benefits of SLNB in perineal melanoma. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results program is a large population-based cancer registry including survival data from millions of patients in the United States. The registry was used to generate patient data for analysis from 2004 to 2016. Inclusion criteria included melanoma of the perineum; Breslow depth of 0.80 mm or greater and less than 0.80 mm with ulceration; SLNB or no intervention; clinically negative nodal disease; and available overall survival data. For 879 patients from 2004 to 2016 with perineal melanoma, significant predictors of reduced survival include older than 75 years, Clark level IV-V, Breslow depth of greater than 4.00 mm, positive ulceration status, regional and distant nodal micrometastases, and clinically positive nodes on presentation. Aggregates for overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) were improved with implementation of SLNB. The 5-year survival rates with SLNB versus no SLNB were 54.0% and 43.0% for OS (P = 0.001) and 57.8% and 53.1% for DSS (P = 0.044). Stratification by Breslow depth yielded significant OS and DSS advantage for greater than 1.00 to 2.00 mm (21.3% benefit, P =0.021, and 16.8% benefit, P = 0.044) and greater than 4.00 mm (30.3% benefit, P = 0.005, and 21.0% benefit, P = 0.007) Breslow depths. Sentinel lymph node biopsy may provide therapeutic benefits in addition to prognostic information for melanoma of the perineum through an increase in 5-year OS.

Identifiants

pubmed: 32282396
doi: 10.1097/SAP.0000000000002388
pii: 00000637-202005004-00004
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

S257-S263

Références

American Cancer Society. Cancer facts and figures 2018. Am Cancer Soc. 2018;1–71.
Joyce KM, McInerney NM, Joyce CW, et al. A review of sentinel lymph node biopsy for thin melanoma. Ir J Med Sci. 2015;184:119–123.
McMasters KM, Egger ME, Edwards MJ, et al. Final results of the sunbelt melanoma trial: a multi-institutional prospective randomized phase III study evaluating the role of adjuvant high-dose interferon alfa-2b and completion lymph node dissection for patients staged by sentinel lymph node biopsy. J Clin Oncol. 2016;34:1079–1086.
Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. Final trial report of sentinel-node biopsy versus nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2014;370:599–609.
Bergman W, Gruis NA. Management of melanoma families. Cancers (Basel). 2010;2:549–566.
Maverakis E, Cornelius LA, Bowen GM, et al. Metastatic melanoma – a review of current and future treatment options. Acta Derm Venereol. 2015;95:516–524.
Freeman SR, Gibbs BB, Brodland DG, et al. Prognostic value of sentinel lymph node biopsy compared with that of breslow thickness: implications for informed consent in patients with invasive melanoma. Dermatol Surg. 2013;39:1800–1812.
Doepker MP, Zager JS. Sentinel lymph node mapping in melanoma in the twenty-first century. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2015;24:249–260.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clincal Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines): Cutaneous Melanoma. 2019.
Iacoponi S, Rubio P, Garcia E, et al. Prognostic factors of recurrence and survival in vulvar melanoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2016;26:1307–1312.
Phan GQ, Messina JL, Sondak VK, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: indications and rationale. Cancer Control. 2009;16:234–239. Available at: http://eutils.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/eutils/elink.fcgi?dbfrom=pubmed&id=19556963&retmode=ref&cmd=prlinks%5Cnfile:///Files/2d/2d75b89e-e37e-4c2a-af76-77f87e57b308.pdf.
Kyrgidis A, Tzellos T, Mocellin S, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy followed by lymph node dissection for localised primary cutaneous melanoma (Review). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;1–38. Available at: pub2 www.cochranelibrary.com.
Hueman MT, Lange JR. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma. Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2008;9:243–250. Available at: http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?eid=2-s2.0-70249106786&partnerID=40&md5=052cb8025b6e3ae34fe11d849ded84c4.
Sladden M, Zagarella S, Popescu C, et al. No survival benefit for patients with melanoma undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy: critical appraisal of the multicenter selective lymphadenectomy trial-I final report. Br J Dermatol. 2015;172:566–571.
Sanchez A, Rodríguez D, Allard CB, et al. Primary genitourinary melanoma: epidemiology and disease-specific survival in a large population-based cohort. Urol Oncol. 2015;34:1–8.
Bittar JM, Bittar PG, Wan MT, et al. Systematic review of surgical treatment and outcomes after local surgery of primary cutaneous melanomas of the penis and scrotum. Dermatol Surg. 2018;44:1159–1169.
Vyas R, Thompson CL, Zargar H, et al. Epidemiology of genitourinary melanoma in the United States: 1992 through 2012. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016;75:144–150.
Fairbairn NG, Orfaniotis G, Butterworth M. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in thick malignant melanoma: a 10-year single unit experience. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2012;65:1396–1402.

Auteurs

Ronak A Patel (RA)

From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.

Priyanka D Patel (PD)

Division of Dermatology, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.

Kurt Ashack (K)

Division of Dermatology, University of Illinois Hospital and Health Sciences System, University of Illinois at Chicago, Chicago, IL.

Mimi R Borrelli (MR)

From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.

Amber Trickey (A)

Health Services Research Unit, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.

Derrick C Wan (DC)

From the Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford University, Palo Alto, CA.

Articles similaires

[Redispensing of expensive oral anticancer medicines: a practical application].

Lisanne N van Merendonk, Kübra Akgöl, Bastiaan Nuijen
1.00
Humans Antineoplastic Agents Administration, Oral Drug Costs Counterfeit Drugs

Smoking Cessation and Incident Cardiovascular Disease.

Jun Hwan Cho, Seung Yong Shin, Hoseob Kim et al.
1.00
Humans Male Smoking Cessation Cardiovascular Diseases Female
Humans United States Aged Cross-Sectional Studies Medicare Part C
1.00
Humans Yoga Low Back Pain Female Male

Classifications MeSH