Sentinel node biopsy for thin melanomas: Which patients should be considered?

Cancer Control

Volumn 12, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 230-235

  Puleo, Christopher A ^a   Messina, Jane L ^b   Riker, Adam I ^a,b   Glass, L Frank ^b   Nelson, Christopher ^b   Cruse, C Wayne ^b   Johnson, Timothy M ^c   Sondak, Vernon K ^a,b  

^a H LEE MOFFITT CANCER CENTER AND RESEARCH INSTITUTE   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CANCER DIAGNOSIS; CANCER INCIDENCE; CANCER STAGING; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; DISEASE ACTIVITY; DISEASE COURSE; DISEASE SEVERITY; FEMALE; HISTOPATHOLOGY; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPH NODE METASTASIS; LYMPHOSCINTIGRAPHY; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MELANOMA; PREOPERATIVE EVALUATION; PROGNOSIS; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; TUMOR VOLUME;

EID: 27644561781     PISSN: 10732748     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/107327480501200404     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. Balch CM, Soong SJ, Gershenwald JE, et al. Prognostic factors analysis of 17,600 melanoma patients: validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3622-3634.
2. Balch CM, Buzaid AC, Atkins MB, et al. A new American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma. Cancer. 2000;88: 1484-1491.
3. Cormier JN, Xing, Y, Ding M, et al. Population-based assessment of surgical treatment trends for patients with melanoma in the era of sentinel lymph node biopsy. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:6054-6062.
4. Halpern AC, Marghoob AA. Thin melanoma: still "excellent prognosis" disease? J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3651-3653. Epub 2004 Aug 9.
5. Jacobs IA, Chang CK, DasGupta TK, et al. Role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with thin (<1 mm) primary melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2003; 10:558-561.
6. Roaten JB, Pearlman N, Gonzalez R, et al. Identifying risk factors for complications following sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma. Arch Surg. 2005;140:85-89.
7. Zapas JL, Coley HC, Beam SL, et al. The risk of regional lymph node metastases in patients with melanoma less than 1.0 mm thick: recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy. J Am Coll Surg. 2003;197:403-407.
8. Stitzenberg K, Groben P, Stern S, et al. Indications for lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy in patients with thin melanoma. Breslow thickness
9. Kesmodel SB, Karakousis GC, Botbyl JD, et al. Mitotic rate as a predictor of sentinel lymph node positivity in patients with thin melanomas. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:449-458. Epub 2005 Apr 19.
10. Bleicher RJ, Essner R, Foshag LJ, et al. Role of sentinel lymphadenectomy in thin invasive cutaneous melanomas. J Clin Oncol. 2003;21:1326-1331.
11. Agnese DM, Abdessalam SF, Burak WE Jr, et al. Cost-effectiveness of sentinel lymph node biopsy in thin melanomas. Surgery. 2003;134:542-558.
12. Dyson SW, Bass J, Pomeranz J, et al. Impact of thorough block sampling in the histologic evaluation of melanomas. Arch Dermatol. 2005;141:734-736.
13. Sondak V. New approaches to the treatment of advanced melanoma. Presented at the 40th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology; June 5-8, 2004; New Orleans, La.
14. Sondak VK, Taylor JM, Sabel MS, et al. Mitotic rate and younger age are predictors of sentinel lymph node positivity: lessons learned from the generation of a probabilistic model. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:247-258.
15. Chao C, Martin RC 2nd, Ross MI, et al. Correlation between prognostic factor and increasing age in melanoma. Anal Surg Oncol. 2004;11:259-264.
16. Leiter U, Buettner PG, Eigentler TK, et al. Prognostic factors of thin cutaneous melanoma: an analysis of the central malignant melanoma registry of the german dermatological society. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3660-3667. Epub 2004 Aug 9.
17. Thompson JF, Shaw HM. Should tumor mitotic rate and patient age, as well as tumor thickness, be used to select melanoma patients for sentinel node biopsy? Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:233-235.
18. Azzola MF, Shaw HM, Thompson JF, et al. Tumor mitotic rate is a more powerful prognostic indicator than ulceration in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma: an analysis of 3661 patients from a single center. Cancer. 2003; 97:1488-1498.
19. Gimotty PA, Guerry D, Ming ME, et al. Thin primary cutaneous malignant melanoma: a prognostic tree for 10-year metastasis is more accurate than American Joint Committee on Cancer staging. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3668-3676. Epub 2004 Aug 9.
20. Erratum in: J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:656.
21. Busam KJ. The prognostic importance of tumor mitotic rate for patients with primary cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:360-361. Epub 2004 Mar 15.
22. Francken AB, Shaw HM, Thompson JF, et al. The prognostic importance of tumor mitotic rate confirmed in 1317 patients with primary cutaneous melanoma and long follow-up. Ann Surg Oncol. 2004;11:426-433. Epub 2004 Mar 15.
23. Clark WH Jr, Elder DE, Guerry D 4th, et al. Model predicting survival in stage I melanoma based on tumor progression. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1989;81: 1893-1904.
24. Clemente CG, Mihm MC Jr, Bufalino R, et al. Prognostic value of tumor infiltrating lymphocytes in the vertical growth phase of primary cutaneous melanoma. Cancer. 1996;77:1303-1310.
25. Tuthill R, Unger J, Liu P, et al. Risk assessment in localized primary cutaneous melanoma: Southwest Oncology Group study evaluating nine factors and a test of the Clark logistic regression prediction model. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002;118:504-511.
26. Kruper L, Botbyl J, Czemiecki B, et al. Predicting sentinel lymph node status in stage I/II melanoma. Proc Annu Meet Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2005;23 (16S):7501. Abstract. http://meeting.jco.org/cgi/content/abstract/23/16_suppl/ 75031.