Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Influence of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy on Survival for Intermediate-Thickness Melanoma

  • Melanomas
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

The Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial-1 (MSLT-1) failed to demonstrate a survival advantage for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) in melanoma. This may have been secondary to inadequate statistical power. This study was designed to determine the impact of SNB on melanoma-specific survival (MSS) in a larger patient cohort.

Methods

From 2003–2008, patients with tumors 1–4 mm in thickness and clinically negative nodes were identified within the SEER registry. Propensity score was used to create two matched cohorts: those who underwent a wide excision with SNB or wide excision alone.

Result

A total of 15,274 met inclusion criteria and 7,910 comprised the match cohort. Average age was 67.4 years. The majority were male (62.3 %) and white (97.2 %). Primary tumors were most frequently nonulcerated (77.1 %), located on the extremity (42.3 %), and T2 (64.1 %). There were 3,955 patients in both the SNB and observation groups. There was no significant difference in gender, ethnicity, ulceration status, primary site, or T-classification between the groups. Improved 5-year MSS was associated with SNB (85.7 vs. 84.0 %), female gender (88.3 vs. 82.7 %), absence of ulceration (87.5 vs. 75.7 %), extremity location (87.4 %), T2 disease (88.6 vs. 77.9 %), and a negative SNB (88.9 vs. 64.8 %). The relationships between observation [hazard ratio (HR) 1.18], male gender (HR 1.33), ulceration (HR 1.77), head-and-neck location (HR 1.34), and T3 disease (HR 1.82) persisted on multivariate analysis.

Conclusions

Status of the sentinel node is the strongest predictor of survival in patients with intermediate thickness melanoma. SNB compared with observation was associated with a modest survival advantage.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Sim FH, Taylor WF, Ivins JC, Pritchard DJ, Soule EH. A prospective randomized study of the efficacy of routine elective lymphadenectomy in management of malignant melanoma. Preliminary results. Cancer. 1978;41(3):948–56.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Veronesi U, Adamus J, Bandiera DC, et al. Delayed regional lymph node dissection in stage I melanoma of the skin of the lower extremities. Cancer. 1982;49(11):2420–30.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Balch CM, Soong S, Ross MI, et al. Long-term results of a multi-institutional randomized trial comparing prognostic factors and surgical results for intermediate thickness melanomas (1.0 to 4.0 mm). Intergroup Melanoma Surgical Trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2000;7(2):87–97.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Balch CM, Soong SJ, Bartolucci AA, et al. Efficacy of an elective regional lymph node dissection of 1 to 4 mm thick melanomas for patients 60 years of age and younger. Ann Surg. 1996;224(3):255–63; discussion 263–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Cascinelli N, Morabito A, Santinami M, MacKie RM, Belli F. Immediate or delayed dissection of regional nodes in patients with melanoma of the trunk: a randomised trial. WHO Melanoma Programme. Lancet. 1998;351(9105):793–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Wong JH, Cagle LA, Morton DL. Lymphatic drainage of skin to a sentinel lymph node in a feline model. Ann Surg. 1991;214(5):637–41.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  7. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy or nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(13):1307–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Program SEaERS. SEER Research Data (1973–2009). SEER*Stat 2011; http://seer.cancer.gov/about/overview.html.

  9. Wright BE, Scheri RP, Ye X, et al. Importance of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with thin melanoma. Arch Surg. 2008;143(9):892–9; discussion 899–900.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  10. Edge SB, Byrd DR, Compton CC, Fritz AG, Green FL, Trotti A. AJCC cancer staging manual, 7th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott-Raven; 2010.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Rosenbaum PR. Observational studies, 2nd ed. New York: Springer-Verlag; 2002.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  12. Perraillon MC. Matching with propensity scores to reduce bias in observational studies. NESUG. 2006:1–10.

  13. D’Agostino RH. Propensity score methods for bias reduction in the comparison of a treatment of a non-randomized control group. Stat Med. 1998;17:2265–81.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 1992;127(4):392–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Cascinelli N. WHO declares lymphatic mapping to be standard of care for melanoma. Oncology. 1999;13:288.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Ross MI, Gershenwald JE. How should we view the results of the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial-1 (MSLT-1)? Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(3):670–3.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. 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(7):599–609.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Iwashyna TJL, Lamont EB. Effectiveness of adjuvant fluorouracil in clinical practice: a population-based cohort study of elderly patients with stage III colon cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20:3992–8.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Sun M, Trinh QD, Bianchi M, et al. A non-cancer-related survival benefit is associated with partial nephrectomy. Eur Urol. 2012;61:725–731.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Abdollah F, Sun M, Schmitges J, et al. Cancer-specific and other-cause mortality after radical prostatectomy versus observation in patients with prostate cancer: competing-risks analysis of a large North American population-based cohort. Eur Urol. 2011;60:920–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Reeve BB, Smith AW, Arora NK, Hays RD. Reducing bias in cancer research: application of propensity score matching. Health Care Financ Rev. 2008;29(4):69–80.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Rubin DB. Estimating causal effects from large data sets using propensity scores. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127(8 Pt 2):757–63.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Nowecki ZI, Rutkowski P, Michej W. The survival benefit to patients with positive sentinel node melanoma after completion lymph node dissection may be limited to the subgroup with a primary lesion Breslow thickness greater than 1.0 and less than or equal to 4 mm (pT2–pT3). Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(8):2223–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Faries M. Survival and the sentinel lymph node in melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2010;17:18–20.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Gershenwald JE, Thompson W, Mansfield PF, et al. Multi-institutional melanoma lymphatic mapping experience: the prognostic value of sentinel lymph node status in 612 stage I or II melanoma patients. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(3):976–83.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Nowecki ZI, Rutkowski P, Nasierowska-Guttmejer A, Ruka W. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma patients with clinically negative regional lymph nodes—one institution’s experience. Melanoma Res. 2003;13(1):35–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Fadaki N, Li R, Parrett B, et al. Is head and neck melanoma different from trunk and extremity melanomas with respect to sentinel lymph node status and clinical outcome? Ann Surg Oncol. 2013;20(9):3089–97.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Chao C, Wong SL, Edwards MJ, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for head and neck melanomas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003;10(1):21–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gimotty PA, Yoon F, Hammond R, Rosenbaum P, Guerry D. Therapeutic effect of sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma remains an open question. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(26):4236–8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Grob JJ, Dreno B, Salmoniere P, et al. Randomised trial of interferon alfa-2a as adjuvant therapy in resected primary melanoma thicker than 1.5 mm without clinically detectable node metastasis. Lancet. 1998;351:1905–10.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. Kirkwood JM, Strawderman MH, Ernstoff MS, Smith TJ, Borden EC, Blum RH. Interferon alfa-2b adjuvant therapy of high-risk resected cutaneous melanoma: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial EST 1684. J Clin Oncol. 1996;14(1):7–17.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Homsi J, Kashani-Sabet M, Messina JL, Daud A. Cutaneous melanoma: prognostic factors. Cancer Control. 2005;12(4):223–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Winkelmayer WC, Kurth T. Propensity scores: help or hype? Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2004;19(7):1671–73.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kachare SD, Agle SC, Englert ZP, et al. Malignant blue nevus: clinicopathologically similar to melanoma. Am Surg. 2013;79(7):651–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Kachare SD, Wong JH, Vohra NA, Zervos EE, Fitzgerald TL. Sentinel lymph node biopsy is associated with improved survival in Merkel cell carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21(5):1624–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Mojica P, Smith D, Ellenhorn JD. Adjuvant radiation therapy is associated with improved survival in Merkel cell carcinoma of the skin. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25(9):1043–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Torjesen I. Sentinel node biopsy for melanoma: unnecessary treatment? BMJ. 2013;8:1.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Institute JWC. Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial II (MSLT-II). http://clinicaltrials.gov/show/NCT00297895, 2014.

Download references

Acknowledgment

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Surgical Oncology, Brody School of Medicine, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA

    Swapnil D. Kachare MD, Jan H. Wong MD, Nasreen A. Vohra MD, Emmanuel E. Zervos MD & Timothy L. Fitzgerald MD

  2. Department of Biostatistics, College of Allied Health Sciences, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, USA

    Jason Brinkley PhD

  3. Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of North Carolina Chapel Hill, Greenville, NC, USA

    Jan H. Wong MD, Emmanuel E. Zervos MD & Timothy L. Fitzgerald MD

Authors
  1. Swapnil D. Kachare MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jason Brinkley PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jan H. Wong MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Nasreen A. Vohra MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Emmanuel E. Zervos MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Timothy L. Fitzgerald MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy L. Fitzgerald MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kachare, S.D., Brinkley, J., Wong, J.H. et al. The Influence of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy on Survival for Intermediate-Thickness Melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 21, 3377–3385 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3954-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-014-3954-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation