Dermatology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2017
Multiple Lymph Node Basin Drainage in Trunk Melanoma Is Not Associated with Survival of Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Patients.
СтатьяМногоцентровое исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ribero Simone, Osella Abate Simona, Pasquali Sadro, Rossi Carlo Riccardo, Borgognoni Lorenzo, Piazzalunga Dario, Solari Nicola, Schiavon Mauro, Brandani Paola, Ansaloni Luca, Ponte Erica, Silan Francesco, Sommariva Antonio, Bellucci Francesco, Macripò Giuseppe, Quaglino Pietro, Italian Melanoma Intergroup (IMI)
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: This study was aimed at investigating the prognostic role of multiple lymph node basin drainage (MLBD) in patients with positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy.
BACKGROUND: MLBD is frequently observed in patients with trunk melanoma undergoing SLN. The prognostic value of MLBD in SLN-positive patients is still debated.
METHODS: Retrospective data from 312 trunk melanoma patients with positive SLN biopsy (1991-2012) at 6 Italian referral centres were gathered in a multicentre database. MLBD was defined at preoperative lymphoscintigraphy. Clinical and pathological data were analysed for their association with disease-free interval (DFI) and disease-specific (DSS) survival.
RESULTS: MLBD was identified in 34.6% of patients (108/312) and was significantly associated with >1 positive SLN (37 vs. 15.2%; p < 0.001) and with >1 positive lymph node (LN) after complete lymph node dissection (CLND) (50.9 vs. 34.8%; p = 0.033). No differences were observed according to drainage pattern in patients who had negative and positive non-SLN at CLND. MLBD was not associated with either DFI or DSS. Multivariate analyses showed that tumour thickness, ulceration, and number of metastatic LNs were associated with worse DFI and DSS, while regression confirmed its protective role in survival.
CONCLUSION: In positive SLN patients, MLBD has no association with survival, which is mainly related to American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) prognostic factors. Since the overall number of positive LNs drives the prognosis, the importance of a CLND in all the positive basins is confirmed.
BACKGROUND: MLBD is frequently observed in patients with trunk melanoma undergoing SLN. The prognostic value of MLBD in SLN-positive patients is still debated.
METHODS: Retrospective data from 312 trunk melanoma patients with positive SLN biopsy (1991-2012) at 6 Italian referral centres were gathered in a multicentre database. MLBD was defined at preoperative lymphoscintigraphy. Clinical and pathological data were analysed for their association with disease-free interval (DFI) and disease-specific (DSS) survival.
RESULTS: MLBD was identified in 34.6% of patients (108/312) and was significantly associated with >1 positive SLN (37 vs. 15.2%; p < 0.001) and with >1 positive lymph node (LN) after complete lymph node dissection (CLND) (50.9 vs. 34.8%; p = 0.033). No differences were observed according to drainage pattern in patients who had negative and positive non-SLN at CLND. MLBD was not associated with either DFI or DSS. Multivariate analyses showed that tumour thickness, ulceration, and number of metastatic LNs were associated with worse DFI and DSS, while regression confirmed its protective role in survival.
CONCLUSION: In positive SLN patients, MLBD has no association with survival, which is mainly related to American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) prognostic factors. Since the overall number of positive LNs drives the prognosis, the importance of a CLND in all the positive basins is confirmed.