Oncologic Outcomes of Multi-Institutional Minimally Invasive Inguinal Lymph Node Dissection for Melanoma Compared with Open Inguinal Dissection in the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-II).


Journal

Annals of surgical oncology
ISSN: 1534-4681
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg Oncol
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 9420840

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
Sep 2022
Historique:
received: 20 01 2022
accepted: 28 03 2022
pubmed: 3 5 2022
medline: 11 8 2022
entrez: 2 5 2022
Statut: ppublish

Résumé

Minimally invasive inguinal lymphadenectomy (MILND) is safe and feasible, but limited data exist regarding oncologic outcomes. This study performed a multi-institutional retrospective cohort analysis of consecutive MILND performed for melanoma between January 2009 and June 2016. The open ILND (OILND) comparative cohort comprised patients enrolled in the second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-II) between December 2004 and March 2014.The pre-defined primary end point was the same-basin regional nodal recurrence, calculated using properties of binomial distribution. Time to events was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The secondary end points were overall survival, progression-free survival, melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS). For all the patients undergoing MILND, the same-basin regional recurrence rate was 4.4 % (10/228; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 2.1-7.9 %): 8.2 % (4/49) for clinical nodal disease and 3.4 % (6/179) for patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) as the indication. For the 288 patients enrolled in MSLT-II who underwent OILND for a positive SLN, 17 (5.9 %) had regional node recurrence as their first event. After controlling for ulceration, positive LN count and positive non-SLNs at the time of lymphadenectomy, no difference in OS, PFS, MSS or DMFS was observed for patients with a positive SLN who underwent MILND versus OILND. This large multi-institutional experience supports the oncologic safety of MILND for melanoma. The outcomes in this large multi-institutional experience of MILND compared favorably with those for an OILND population during similar periods, supporting the oncologic safety of MILND for melanoma.

Sections du résumé

BACKGROUND BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive inguinal lymphadenectomy (MILND) is safe and feasible, but limited data exist regarding oncologic outcomes.
METHODS METHODS
This study performed a multi-institutional retrospective cohort analysis of consecutive MILND performed for melanoma between January 2009 and June 2016. The open ILND (OILND) comparative cohort comprised patients enrolled in the second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-II) between December 2004 and March 2014.The pre-defined primary end point was the same-basin regional nodal recurrence, calculated using properties of binomial distribution. Time to events was calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method. The secondary end points were overall survival, progression-free survival, melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS).
RESULTS RESULTS
For all the patients undergoing MILND, the same-basin regional recurrence rate was 4.4 % (10/228; 95 % confidence interval [CI], 2.1-7.9 %): 8.2 % (4/49) for clinical nodal disease and 3.4 % (6/179) for patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) as the indication. For the 288 patients enrolled in MSLT-II who underwent OILND for a positive SLN, 17 (5.9 %) had regional node recurrence as their first event. After controlling for ulceration, positive LN count and positive non-SLNs at the time of lymphadenectomy, no difference in OS, PFS, MSS or DMFS was observed for patients with a positive SLN who underwent MILND versus OILND.
CONCLUSION CONCLUSIONS
This large multi-institutional experience supports the oncologic safety of MILND for melanoma. The outcomes in this large multi-institutional experience of MILND compared favorably with those for an OILND population during similar periods, supporting the oncologic safety of MILND for melanoma.

Identifiants

pubmed: 35499783
doi: 10.1245/s10434-022-11758-z
pii: 10.1245/s10434-022-11758-z
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article Multicenter Study

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Pagination

5910-5920

Commentaires et corrections

Type : CommentIn

Informations de copyright

© 2022. Society of Surgical Oncology.

Références

Jakub JW, Terando AM, Sarnaik A, et al. Safety and feasibility of minimally invasive inguinal lymph node dissection in patients with melanoma (SAFE-MILND): report of a prospective multi-institutional trial. Ann Surg. 2017;265:192–6.
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000001670
Postlewait LM, Farley CR, Diller ML, et al. A minimally invasive approach for inguinal lymphadenectomy in melanoma and genitourinary malignancy: long-term outcomes in an attempted randomized control trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2017;24:3237–44.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-017-5971-7
Sommariva A, Pasquali S, Rossi CR. Video endoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for lymph node metastasis from solid tumors. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2015;41:274–81.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2014.10.064
Abbott AM, Grotz TE, Rueth NM, Hernandez Irizarry RC, Tuttle TM, Jakub JW. Minimally invasive inguinal lymph node dissection (MILND) for melanoma: experience from two academic centers. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20:340–5.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2545-6
Jakub JW, Terando AM, Sarnaik A, et al. Training high-volume melanoma surgeons to perform a novel minimally invasive inguinal lymphadenectomy: report of a prospective multi-institutional trial. J Am Coll Surg. 2016;222:253–60.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2015.11.010
Zendejas B, Jakub JW, Terando AM, et al. Laparoscopic skill assessment of practicing surgeons prior to enrollment in a surgical trial of a new laparoscopic procedure. Surg Endosc. 2017;31:3313–9.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-016-5364-1
Martin BM, Etra JW, Russell MC, et al. Oncologic outcomes of patients undergoing videoscopic inguinal lymphadenectomy for metastatic melanoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2014;218:620–6.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2013.12.016
Sommariva A, Cona C, Tonello M, Pilati P, Riccardo Rossi C. Oncological outcome of videoscopic groin dissection for lymph node metastasis from melanoma. Surg Endosc. 2021;35:2576–82.
doi: 10.1007/s00464-020-07675-5
Fleshman J, Sargent DJ, Green E, et al. Laparoscopic colectomy for cancer is not inferior to open surgery based on 5-year data from the COST Study Group Trial. Ann Surg. 2007;246:655–62 (discussion 662–4).
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0b013e318155a762
Onaitis MW, Petersen RP, Balderson SS, et al. Thoracoscopic lobectomy is a safe and versatile procedure: experience with 500 consecutive patients. Ann Surg. 2006;244:420–5.
doi: 10.1097/01.sla.0000234892.79056.63
Ramirez PT, Frumovitz M, Pareja R, et al. Minimally invasive versus abdominal radical hysterectomy for cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1895–904.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1806395
Melamed A, Margul DJ, Chen L, et al. Survival after minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer. N Engl J Med. 2018;379:1905–14.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1804923
Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. completion dissection or observation for sentinel-node metastasis in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376:2211–22.
doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1613210
Altstein LL, Li G, Elashoff RM. A method to estimate treatment efficacy among latent subgroups of a randomized clinical trial. Stat Med. 2011;30:709–17.
doi: 10.1002/sim.4131
Read RL, Haydu L, Saw RP, et al. In-transit melanoma metastases: incidence, prognosis, and the role of lymphadenectomy. Ann Surg Oncol. 2015;22:475–81.
doi: 10.1245/s10434-014-4100-0
Kang JC, Wanek LA, Essner R, Faries MB, Foshag LJ, Morton DL. Sentinel lymphadenectomy does not increase the incidence of in-transit metastases in primary melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:4764–70.
doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.20.537
Thomas JM, Clark MA. Selective lymphadenectomy in sentinel node-positive patients may increase the risk of local/in-transit recurrence in malignant melanoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2004;30:686–91.
doi: 10.1016/j.ejso.2004.04.004

Auteurs

James W Jakub (JW)

Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Jacksonville, FL, USA. jakub.james@mayo.edu.

Michael Lowe (M)

Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.

J Harrison Howard (JH)

Department of Surgery, University of South Alabama Health, Mobile, AL, USA.

Jeffrey M Farma (JM)

Department of Surgery, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA.

Amod Sarnaik (A)

Department of Surgery, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.

Todd Tuttle (T)

Department of Surgery, University of Minnesota Medical Center, Minneapolis, MN, USA.

Heather B Neuman (HB)

Division of General Surgery, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Madison, WI, USA.

Charlotte E Ariyan (CE)

Department of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, NY, USA.

Abhineet Uppal (A)

Department of Surgery, MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA.

Steve Trocha (S)

Department of Surgery, Greenville Health System, Greenville, SC, USA.

Georgia M Beasley (GM)

Department of Surgery, Duke University School of Medicine, Durham, NC, USA.

Nabil Wasif (N)

Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, USA.

Karl Y Bilimoria (KY)

Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.

Alan A Thomay (AA)

Department of Surgery, West Virginia University Health Sciences Center, Morgantown, WV, USA.

Jacob B Allred (JB)

Department of Clinical Trials and Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA.

Lucia Chen (L)

Department of Medicine Statistics Core, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Alicia M Terando (AM)

Department of Surgery, Keck School of Medicine of USC, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Jeffrey D Wayne (JD)

Department of Surgery, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA.

John F Thompson (JF)

Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.

Alistair J Cochran (AJ)

Department of Anatomic Pathology, Ronald Reagan UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Myung-Shin Sim (MS)

Department of Medicine Statistics Core, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

David E Elashoff (DE)

Department of Medicine Statistics Core, UCLA Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

Keith A Delman (KA)

Department of Surgery, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USA.

Mark B Faries (MB)

Department of Surgery, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA, USA.

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