Routine positron emission tomography and positron emission tomography/computed tomography in melanoma staging with positive sentinel node biopsy is of limited benefit

Melanoma Research

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 56-60

  Constantinidou, Anastasia ^a,b   Hofman, Michael ^a   O'Doherty, Michael ^a   Acland, Katharine M ^a   Healy, Ciaran ^a   Harries, Mark ^a  

^a GUY'S AND ST THOMAS' NHS FOUNDATION TRUST   (United Kingdom)

^b NONE   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Fluorodeoxyglucose; Melanoma; Melanoma staging; Positive sentinel node biopsy; Positron emission tomography

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ASPIRATION BIOPSY; CANCER STAGING; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER ASSISTED TOMOGRAPHY; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE FREE INTERVAL; FEMALE; FOLLOW UP; HUMAN; HUMAN TISSUE; LYMPH NODE DISSECTION; MALE; MELANOMA; NEUROENDOCRINE TUMOR; PHYSICAL EXAMINATION; POSITRON EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; THORAX WALL; THYROID TUMOR; ADOLESCENT; AGED; COMPARATIVE STUDY; METHODOLOGY; MIDDLE AGED; PATHOLOGY; RADIOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDY; SCINTISCANNING; SKIN TUMOR; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; FOLLOW-UP STUDIES; HUMANS; MALE; MELANOMA; MIDDLE AGED; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; NEOPLASM STAGING; NEUROENDOCRINE TUMORS; POSITRON-EMISSION TOMOGRAPHY; RETROSPECTIVE STUDIES; SENTINEL LYMPH NODE BIOPSY; SKIN NEOPLASMS; THORACIC WALL; THYROID NEOPLASMS; TOMOGRAPHY, X-RAY COMPUTED;

EID: 42449144847     PISSN: 09608931     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1097/CMR.0b013e3282f62404     Document Type: Article

References (21)

1. Leiter U, Meier F, Schittek B, Garbe C. The natural course of cutaneous melanoma. J Surg Oncol 2004; 86:172-178.
2. Thompson JF, Scolyer RA, Kefford RF. Cutaneous melanoma. Lancet 2005; 365:687-701.
3. Gershenwald JE, Thompson W, Mansfield PF, Lee JE, Colome MI, Tseng C, 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; 17:976-983.
4. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Essner R, Elashoff R, Stern SL, Nieweg OE, et al. and the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial Group. Validation of the accuracy of intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for early-stage melanoma: a multicenter trial. Ann Surg 1999; 230:453-463.
5. 18FDG PET imaging versus sentinel node detection. Oncologist 2002; 7:271-278.
6. Acland KM, O'Doherty MJ, Russell-Jones R. The value of positron emission tomography scanning in the detection of subclinical metastatic melanoma. J Am Acad Dermatol 2000; 42:606-611.
7. Acland KM, Healy C, Calonje E, O'Doherty M, Nunan T, Page C, et al. Comparison of positron emission tomography scanning and sentinel node biopsy in the detection of micrometastases of primary cutaneous malignant melanoma. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19:2674-2678.
8. Longo MI, Lazaro P, Bueno C, Carreras JL, Montz R. Fluorodeoxyglucose- positron emission tomography imaging versus sentinel node biopsy in the primary staging of melanoma patients. Dermatol Surg 2003; 29:245-248.
9. Prichard RS, Hill AD, Skehan SJ, O'Higgins NJ. Positron emission tomography for staging and management of malignant melanoma. Br J Surg 2002; 89:389-396.
10. 18F-FDG PET in melanoma patients. Cancer 2001; 91:1530-1542.
11. Friedman KP, Wahl RL. Clinical use of positron emission tomography in the management of cutaneous melanoma. Semin Nucl Med 2004; 34:242-253.
12. Gulec SA, Faries MB, Lee CC, Kirgan D, Glass C, Morton DL, et al. The role of fluorine-18 deoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the management of patients with metastatic melanoma: impact on surgical decision making. Clin Nucl Med 2003; 28:961-965.
13. Swetter SM, Carroll LA, Johnson DL, Segall GM. Positron emission tomography is superior to computed tomography for metastatic detection in melanoma patients. Ann Surg Oncol 2002; 9:646-653.
14. Schoder H, Larson SM, Yeung HWD. PET/CT in oncology: integration into clinical management of lymphoma, melanoma, and gastrointestinal malignancies. J Nucl Med 2004; 45 (Suppl):S72-S81.
15. Lens MB, Dawes M, Goodacre T, Newton-Bishop JA. Elective lymph node dissection in patients with melanoma-systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Arch Surg 2002; 137:458-461.
16. Miranda EP, Gertner M, Wall J, Grace E, Kashani-Sabet M, Allen R, et al. Routine imaging of asymptomatic melanoma patients with metastasis to sentinel lymph nodes rarely identifies systemic disease. Arch Surg 2004; 139:831-837.
17. Mijnhout GS, Hoekstra OS, van Lingen A, van Diest PJ, Ader HJ, Lammertsma AA, et al. How morphometric analysis of metastatic load predicts the (un)usefulness of PET scanning: the case of lymph node staging in melanoma. J Clin Pathol 2003; 56:283-286.
18. Aloia TA, Gershenwald JE, Andtbacka RH, Johnson MM, Schacherer C, Ng CS, et al. Utility of computed tomography and magnetic resonance staging in patients with Stage III melanoma diagnosed by sentinel lymphadenectomy. J Clin Oncol 2006; 24:2858-2865.
19. Wagner JD, Schauwecker D, Davidson D, Logan T, Coleman JJ, Hutchins G, et al. Inefficacy of F-18 fluorodeoxy-D-glucose-positron emission tomography scans for initial evaluation in early-stage cutaneous melanoma. Cancer 2005; 104:570-579.
20. Brady M, Akhurst T, Spanknebel K, Hilton S, Gonen M, Patel A, et al. Utility of preoperative [(18)]F fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scanning in high-risk melanoma patients. Annals of Surgical Oncology 2006; 13:525-532.
21. Horn J, Lock-Andersen J, Sjostrand H, Loft A. Routine use of FDG-PET scans in melanoma patients with positive sentinel node biopsy. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging 2004; 33:887-892.