Comparison of Outcomes between Surveillance Ultrasound and Completion Lymph Node Dissection in Children and Adolescents with Sentinel Lymph Node Positive Cutaneous Melanoma.


Journal

Annals of surgery
ISSN: 1528-1140
Titre abrégé: Ann Surg
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0372354

Informations de publication

Date de publication:
24 Jul 2023
Historique:
medline: 24 7 2023
pubmed: 24 7 2023
entrez: 24 7 2023
Statut: aheadofprint

Résumé

To determine the impact of nodal basin ultrasound surveillance (US) versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in children and adolescents with sentinel lymph node (SLN) positive melanoma. Treatment for children and adolescents with melanoma are extrapolated from adult trials. However, there is increasing evidence that important clinical and biological differences exist between pediatric and adult melanoma. Patients ≤18 years diagnosed with cutaneous melanoma between 2010-2020 from 14 pediatric hospitals were included. Data extracted included demographics, histopathology, nodal basin strategies, surveillance intervals, and survival information. Of 252 patients, 90.1% (n=227) underwent SLN biopsy (SLNB), 50.9% (n=115) had at least 1 positive node. 67 total patients underwent CLND with 97.0% (n=65/67) performed after a positive SLNB. In contrast, 46 total patients underwent US observation of nodal basins with 78.3% (n=36/46) of these occurring after positive SLNB. Younger patients were more likely to undergo US surveillance (median age 8.5 years) than CLND (median age 11.3 years; P=0.0103). Overall, 8.9% (n=21/235) experienced disease recurrence: 6 primary, 6 nodal, and 9 distant. There was no difference in recurrence (11.1% vs 18.8%; P=0.28) or death from disease (2.2% vs 9.7%; P=0.36) for those who underwent US vs CLND, respectively. Children and adolescents with cutaneous melanoma frequently have nodal metastases identified by SLN. Recurrence was more common among patients with thicker primary lesions and positive SLN. No significant differences in oncologic outcomes were observed with US surveillance and CLND following the identification of a positive SLN.

Sections du résumé

OBJECTIVE OBJECTIVE
To determine the impact of nodal basin ultrasound surveillance (US) versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in children and adolescents with sentinel lymph node (SLN) positive melanoma.
SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA BACKGROUND
Treatment for children and adolescents with melanoma are extrapolated from adult trials. However, there is increasing evidence that important clinical and biological differences exist between pediatric and adult melanoma.
METHODS METHODS
Patients ≤18 years diagnosed with cutaneous melanoma between 2010-2020 from 14 pediatric hospitals were included. Data extracted included demographics, histopathology, nodal basin strategies, surveillance intervals, and survival information.
RESULTS RESULTS
Of 252 patients, 90.1% (n=227) underwent SLN biopsy (SLNB), 50.9% (n=115) had at least 1 positive node. 67 total patients underwent CLND with 97.0% (n=65/67) performed after a positive SLNB. In contrast, 46 total patients underwent US observation of nodal basins with 78.3% (n=36/46) of these occurring after positive SLNB. Younger patients were more likely to undergo US surveillance (median age 8.5 years) than CLND (median age 11.3 years; P=0.0103). Overall, 8.9% (n=21/235) experienced disease recurrence: 6 primary, 6 nodal, and 9 distant. There was no difference in recurrence (11.1% vs 18.8%; P=0.28) or death from disease (2.2% vs 9.7%; P=0.36) for those who underwent US vs CLND, respectively.
CONCLUSIONS CONCLUSIONS
Children and adolescents with cutaneous melanoma frequently have nodal metastases identified by SLN. Recurrence was more common among patients with thicker primary lesions and positive SLN. No significant differences in oncologic outcomes were observed with US surveillance and CLND following the identification of a positive SLN.

Identifiants

pubmed: 37487006
doi: 10.1097/SLA.0000000000006022
pii: 00000658-990000000-00596
doi:

Types de publication

Journal Article

Langues

eng

Sous-ensembles de citation

IM

Informations de copyright

Copyright © 2023 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.

Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Auteurs

Steven D Scoville (SD)

The Ohio State University, Department of Surgery, Columbus Ohio, USA.

Joseph R Stanek (JR)

Nationwide Children's Hospital, Biostatistics, Columbus Ohio, USA.

Hannah Rinehardt (H)

University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, USA.

Pattamon Sutthatarn (P)

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Surgery, Memphis Tennessee, USA.

Abdelhafeez H Abdelhafeez (AH)

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Surgery, Memphis Tennessee, USA.

Lindsay J Talbot (LJ)

St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Department of Surgery, Memphis Tennessee, USA.

Marcus Malek (M)

University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, USA.

Harold J Leraas (HJ)

University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Department of Surgery, Pittsburgh Pennsylvania, USA.

Elisabeth T Tracy (ET)

Duke University Medical Center, Department of Surgery, Durham North Carolina, USA.

Stephanie Y Chen (SY)

Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Los Angeles California, USA.

Eugene S Kim (ES)

Children's Hospital Los Angeles, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Los Angeles California, USA.

Dimitra M Lotakis (DM)

University of Michigan, Section of Pediatric Surgery, Ann Arbor Michigan, USA.

Peter F Ehrlich (PF)

University of Michigan, Section of Pediatric Surgery, Ann Arbor Michigan, USA.

Juan G Favela (JG)

University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Surgery, Madison Wisconsin, USA.

Hau D Le (HD)

American Family Children's Hospital, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Surgery, Madison Wisconsin, USA.

Jacob Davidson (J)

Children's Hospital at London Health Sciences Centre, Division of Pediatric Surgery, London Ontario, CA.

Claire A Wilson (CA)

Children's Hospital at London Health Sciences Centre, Division of Pediatric Surgery, London Ontario, CA.

Natashia M Seemann (NM)

Children's Hospital at London Health Sciences Centre, Division of Pediatric Surgery, London Ontario, CA.

Yasmin Osman (Y)

University of Montreal, Faculty of Medicine, Montreal Quebec, CA.

Nelson Piche (N)

Centre Hospitalier Universitaire Sainte-Justine, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Montreal, Quebec, CA.

Victoria Hoang (V)

University of Florida, College of Medicine, Gainesville Florida, USA.

Robin T Petroze (RT)

University of Florida, Department of Surgery, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Gainesville Florida, USA.

Stephanie F Polites (SF)

Mayo Clinic, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Rochester Minnesota, USA.

Katlyn G McKay (KG)

Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Section of Surgical Sciences, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.

Hernan Correa (H)

Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Division of Pediatric Pathology, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.

Harold N Lovvorn (HN)

Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.

Yu M Lee (YM)

Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Division of Pediatric General and Thoracic Surgery, Cincinnati Ohio, USA.

Akshitha Balagani (A)

Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Division of Pediatric General and Thoracic Surgery, Cincinnati Ohio, USA.

Roshni Dasgupta (R)

Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Division of Pediatric General and Thoracic Surgery, Cincinnati Ohio, USA.

Jennifer H Aldrink (JH)

The Ohio State University, Department of Surgery, Columbus Ohio, USA.
Nationwide Children's Hospital, Division of Pediatric Surgery, Columbus Ohio, USA.

Classifications MeSH