Survival of sentinel node biopsy versus observation in intermediate-thickness melanoma: A Dutch population-based study

R M H Roumen, M S Schuurman, M J Aarts, A J G Maaskant-Braat, G Vreugdenhil and W J Louwman

PLOS ONE, 2021, vol. 16, issue 5, 1-13

Abstract: Background: The Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-1) comparing survival after a sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus nodal observation in melanoma patients did not show a significant benefit favoring SLNB. However, in subgroup analyses melanoma-specific survival among patients with nodal metastases seemed better. Aim: To evaluate the association of performing a SLNB with overall survival in intermediate thickness melanoma patients in a Dutch population-based daily clinical setting. Methods: Survival, excess mortality adjusted for age, gender, Breslow-thickness, ulceration, histological subtype, location, co-morbidity and socioeconomic status were calculated in a population of 1,989 patients diagnosed with malignant cutaneous melanoma (1.2–3.5 mm) on the trunk or limb between 2000–2016 in ten hospitals in the South East area, The Netherlands. Results: A SLNB was performed in 51% of the patients (n = 1008). Ten-year overall survival after SLNB was 75% (95%CI, 71%-78%) compared to 61% (95%CI 57%-64%) following observation. After adjustment for risk factors, a lower risk on death (HR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.66–0.96) was found after SLNB compared to observation only. Conclusions: SLNB in patients with intermediate-thickness melanoma on trunk or limb resulted in a 14% absolute and significant 10-year survival difference compared to those without SLNB.

Date: 2021
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252021 (text/html)
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id= ... 52021&type=printable (application/pdf)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:plo:pone00:0252021

DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252021

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in PLOS ONE from Public Library of Science
Bibliographic data for series maintained by plosone ().