Annals of Surgical Oncology, 10(4):416–425
DOI: 10.1245/ASO.2003.05.009
Lymphoscintigraphy and Sentinel Node Biopsy Accurately Stage Melanoma in Patients Presenting After Wide Local Excision Heather L. Evans, MD, David N. Krag, MD, FACS, C. David Teates, MD, James W. Patterson, MD, Sybren Meijer, MD, Seth P. Harlow, MD, Kenneth K. Tanabe, MD, Brian W. Loggie, MD, FACS, Patrick W. Whitworth, MD, FACS, Roberto E. Kusminsky, MD, Ned Z. Carp, MD, FACS, Michelle A. Gadd, MD, and Craig L. Slingluff, Jr, MD, FACS
Background: Patients have traditionally been considered candidates for sentinel node biopsy (SNBx) only at the time of wide local excision (WLE). We hypothesized that patients with prior WLE may also be staged accurately with SNBx. Methods: Seventy-six patients, including 18 patients from the University of Virginia and 58 from a multicenter study of SNBx led by investigators at the University of Vermont, who had previous WLE for clinically localized melanoma underwent lymphoscintigraphy with SNBx. Median follow-up time was 38 months. Results: Intraoperative identification of at least 1 sentinel node was accomplished in 75 patients (98.6%). The mean number of sentinel nodes removed per patient was 2.0. Eleven patients (15%) had positive sentinel nodes. Among the 64 patients with negative SNBx, 3 (4%) developed nodal recurrences in a sentinel node–negative basin simultaneous with systemic metastasis, and 1 (1%) developed an isolated first recurrence in a lymph node. Conclusions: This multicenter study more than doubles the published experience with SNBx after WLE and provides much-needed outcome data on recurrence after SNBx in these patients. These outcomes compare favorably with the reported literature for patients with SNBx at the time of WLE, suggesting that accurate staging of the regional lymph node bed is possible in patients after WLE. Key Words: Sentinel node biopsy—Lymphoscintigraphy—Wide local excision—Melanoma.
It has been demonstrated that sentinel node biopsy (SNBx) improves the staging of clinically node-negative melanoma at the time of wide local excision (WLE).1,2
Elective lymph node dissection does not confer a demonstrated survival benefit,3– 6 but accurate surgical staging of the regional nodes provides important prognostic information and also identifies patients who may benefit from adjuvant therapy with interferon or adjuvant therapy in experimental treatment trials.7 Studies of SNBx for melanoma have routinely excluded patients who have had a previous WLE for melanoma,8 largely out of concern that surgical disruption of lymphatic channels may render lymphoscintigraphy unreliable. It has been recommended that SNBx not be offered after WLE.2,9 At present, optimal management of regional nodes in this setting has not been defined.10,11 Because accurate staging in these patients is as important as it is in patients who present for SNBx before WLE, it is important to know whether these patients presenting after WLE can be staged accurately with SNBx.
Received May 8, 2002; accepted December 3, 2002. From the Departments of Surgery (HLE, CLS), Radiology (CDT), and Pathology (JWP), University of Virginia Health System, Charlottesville, Virginia; Vermont Cancer Center (DNK, SPH), University of Vermont, Burlington, Vermont; Department of Surgical Oncology (SM), Academisch Ziekenhuis van de Vrije Universiteit, Amsterdam, The Netherlands; Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center (KKT, MAG), Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts; Creighton Cancer Center (BWL), Creighton University Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska; Baptist Hospital (PWW), Nashville, Tennessee; Charleston Area Medical Center (REK), Charleston, West Virginia; and Lankenau Hospital Cancer Center (NZC), Wynnewood, Pennsylvania. Address correspondence and reprint requests to: Heather L. Evans, MD, Surgical Infectious Disease Research Laboratory, Building MR-4, Room 3156, Lane Road, Charlottesville, VA 22908; Fax: 434-2436360; E-mail:
[email protected]. Published by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins © 2003 The Society of Surgical Oncology, Inc.
416
SENTINEL NODE BIOPSY AFTER WLE OF MELANOMA Kelemen et al.12 reported a series of 47 selected patients who underwent SNBx after prior WLE, observing that the incidence of positive sentinel nodes was as high as that seen in SNBx undertaken before WLE. The authors concluded that SNBx after WLE could be used with caution in areas of relatively unambiguous lymphatic drainage. However, no standard has been established for these patients, and rates of regional failure have not been reported. Given the increasing number of patients presenting to tertiary referral centers after WLE for melanoma, further review of the incidence and outcomes of this population is warranted. Through review of multicenter data, we sought to determine whether the practice of SNBx after WLE produces comparable outcomes to SNBx at the time of WLE. Presented in this article are the surgical results and clinical follow-up in 75 patients who underwent SNBx after WLE for primary melanoma in a combined series from 12 medical centers since 1993. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patient Selection This study included two groups of patients: (1) those who were enrolled in the Multicenter Trial of SNBx coordinated from the University of Vermont from 1993 to 1998 and (2) those who were treated at the University of Virginia from 1997 to 2001. The University of Virginia participated in the Vermont study until it was closed to accrual in 1998. After closure of that study, patients were offered SNBx as standard therapy. Patients who had had prior WLE were not excluded from entering the trial, and investigators at the University of Virginia continued to treat such patients after the trial ended. In most cases, these patients presented after previous WLE because SNBx was not offered by the original surgeon who performed the WLE, and the patient subsequently sought treatment at a referral center. All patients had biopsy-proven invasive melanoma, clinically negative regional lymph nodes, and no evidence of distant metastases (clinical stage I or II). Entry criteria were similar at the two centers but will be listed separately. Vermont SNBx Study Patients were offered SNBx as part of this study regardless of the depth of invasion. SNBx was performed at the same time as the WLE or within 45 days of the WLE. Results of the complete series have been reported.13 All WLE margins were ⱕ2 cm, and there were no prior skin grafts. This study was performed in accordance with the University of Vermont Human Subject
417
Protection Committee and the Radiation Safety Committee of the participating institutions, and patients entered the study by giving informed consent. University of Virginia Investigators at the University of Virginia participated in accrual on the University of Vermont study with the approval of the Human Investigation Committee at the University of Virginia. When the study was closed to accrual, patients at the University of Virginia were offered SNBx with the same protocol used in the University of Vermont Study. Patients presenting with a newly diagnosed melanoma with a Breslow thickness of ⱖ1 mm and clinically negative nodes were considered candidates for SNBx if there was no contraindication to adjuvant therapy. Some exceptions were made when patients with thin lesions had adverse prognostic factors (Clark level IV, positive deep margin, or regression) or when patients specifically requested SNBx even when their lesions were somewhat thinner than the stated guidelines. SNBx was offered to patients who had had prior WLEs even when the WLE margins were ⬎5 cm. These patients were accrued from 1997 to 2000, when SNBx had become standard practice in most melanoma centers.14 The surgeon performing these studies had previously abandoned elective node dissection as a routine staging procedure.6 Accordingly, these patients were offered SNBx as the staging procedure of choice. Informed consent was obtained and documented on a standard operative consent form after risks and potential benefits were explained by the surgeon before the procedure. Lymphoscintigraphy Procedure Unfiltered 99mTc-labeled colloid was injected intradermally at multiple sites circumferentially around the melanoma excision scar.15,16 The colloid used was either 99m Tc sulfur colloid (CIS-US Inc., Bedford, MA, or DuPont Pharmaceuticals, North Billerica, MA) or 99mTc human albumin (Solco Nonocoll; Sorin Biomedica, Vercelli, Italy; or Microlite; DuPont). Injections were made within 1 cm of the scar and were placed approximately 1 cm apart along the full length or circumference of the scar.16 In a few cases with long scars, the injections were limited to the mid portion of the scar. The amount of radiocolloid injected was .2 to 1.4 mCi in a volume ranging from .2 to 1 mL. In the latter half of the study entry period at the University of Virginia, eutectic mixture of local anesthetics cream (lidocaine/prilocaine; AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE) was applied to the skin around the excision site for 45 minutes to 1 hour before injection, which decreased the discomfort associated with intradermal injection. Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
418
H. L. EVANS ET AL.
Immediately after the radiocolloid was injected, the patient was placed under a gamma camera, and images were taken to identify the sentinel nodes. In the vast majority of cases, a sentinel node was identified within 15 to 20 minutes of the injection time. In many cases, the node was identified immediately on placement under the gamma camera. In unusual cases, there was a delay of up to 2 hours before identification of the draining sentinel node. Gamma camera pictures were taken at the time of initial imaging and before we sent the patient to the operating room. Correlations were made with counts by using a handheld gamma probe (C-trak; Care Wise Medical Products Corp., Morgan Hill, CA) at that time. The probe was set at a threshold of 130 keV and a window of 40 keV. Injection of Blue Dye Surgeons had the option to inject vital blue dye in addition to the 99mTc colloid. In those cases, 2 to 5 mL of isosulfan blue dye (Lymphazurin 1%; Hirsch Industries Inc., Richmond, VA) or Patent Blue V 2.5% (Laboratorie Guerbert, Aulney-Sous-Bois, France) was injected intradermally by the surgeon circumferentially around the scar. Surgical Procedure The patients were brought to the operating room after lymphoscintigraphy. Usually the radiocolloid was injected the day of surgery, but some patients had injections performed the day before surgery. The patient was placed on the operating table, and the handheld gamma probe was used to confirm the location of the hot spots observed by lymphoscintigraphy. At that time, 10-second counts were taken with the probe to measure the preincision radioactivity of each hot spot, as well as the maximal counts at the injection site and background counts at the liver. All regional node basins and in-transit areas were scanned manually with the handheld probe to rule out additional sentinel nodes not identified on the lymphoscintigram. The incision, usually 2 to 3 cm long, was made through the skin with a scalpel. With the handheld probe as a guide, dissection was carried straight down to the first hot spot by using sharp dissection and spreading with a tonsil clamp. Once the hot spot was identified, the vessels leading to the sentinel node were clamped and ligated either with a hemoclip or with silk ligatures. The node was then excised sharply. Ten-second counts on the excised node were measured with the handheld probe (ex vivo counts), and residual counts were measured in the node basin. If additional hot nodes were identified or if there are additional hot spots, these were excised in a Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
similar fashion. Once the maximal residual counts in the surgical bed were ⬍10% of the maximal ex vivo counts obtained from the first hot spot node, it was determined that all sentinel nodes had been removed. In any case in which the gamma camera scan identified more sentinel nodes than had been excised, additional dissection occurred until the discrepancy was clarified. Data Review A total of 76 patients who presented for SNBx after previous WLE for primary melanoma were identified from the databases of the Vermont Cancer Center and the University of Virginia Health System. Fifty-eight patients included in the series were enrolled in a nonrandomized prospective trial of SNBx for melanoma, sponsored by Dr. David Krag at the University of Vermont. Data entry forms from the trial were reviewed, and patients who had undergone SNBx after WLE for melanoma were identified. Similar patients from the University of Virginia melanoma database, whose data are tracked with Paradox 8.0 software (Corel Corporation, Ottowa, Ontario, Canada), were identified, and data were then stored with Microsoft Excel 2000 software (Microsoft Corp., Redmond, WA). The patient charts were reviewed to obtain additional details. Wherever possible, particulars such as the length of the WLE scar, presence of a rotational flap or skin graft, or length of time between WLE and SNBx were noted. Clinical follow-up data were evaluated and reviewed from the same databases. Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. Histological Evaluation In the Vermont multicenter trial, nodes were evaluated by one or more sections stained with hematoxylin and eosin (H&E). Routine immunohistochemistry was not performed, but rather was used to confirm areas of suspicion first observed with H&E staining. The standard protocol adopted at the University of Virginia for evaluation of sentinel nodes in melanoma patients includes H&E section evaluation of three levels of each sentinel node plus immunohistochemical evaluation with S100, HMB45, and tyrosinase antibodies. Evaluation of S100 staining takes into account that all normal lymph nodes contain S100-positive dendritic cells in the paracortical region that can be differentiated morphologically from metastatic melanoma cells, which usually appear in the subcapsular sinus. Thus, a positive finding on S100 staining requires the finding of cells histologically consistent with melanoma that stain with S100. In cases in which differentiation is difficult, staining with CD1a antibodies as a positive marker for den-
SENTINEL NODE BIOPSY AFTER WLE OF MELANOMA dritic cells may be used. Positive staining of melanoma with HMB45 or tyrosinase antibodies requires that the cells be morphologically consistent with melanoma cells and that they cannot be explained as any benign cell. Occasionally, plasma cells staining positively with HMB45 antibody have been noted, but they are readily differentiated from melanoma cells, and nodes with these findings are defined as histologically negative for melanoma.17 Clinical Management After SNBx Patients with negative SNBx were observed without additional surgery. Patients with positive SNBx underwent completion lymphadenectomy of all involved nodal basins, except in one case, in which further surgical intervention was refused by the patient. Most patients with positive sentinel nodes in this study underwent surgery before interferon was approved for use by the Food and Drug Administration. Thus, most patients had no additional adjuvant therapy. However, adjuvant therapy options were discussed and offered when appropriate. Of the four University of Virginia patients with positive sentinel nodes, two were treated with high-dose interferon, and one was entered onto an experimental melanoma vaccine trial. Another patient with a thick primary melanoma and negative SNBx was also entered onto an experimental melanoma vaccine trial. RESULTS From 1993 to 1999, at the University of Virginia Health System and institutions affiliated with the Vermont Cancer Center, 76 patients underwent lymphatic mapping with the intent of performing SNBx subsequent to previous WLE of a primary melanoma lesion. In one patient enrolled in the Vermont study, despite identification of a hot spot on gamma camera lymphoscintigraphy, localization of the sentinel node was not performed. SNBx was not attempted, and elective lymphadenectomy at the site of the hot spot was undertaken instead. This patient was accordingly excluded from subsequent analyses of SNBx outcomes. Furthermore, because the reason for failure to localize the sentinel node was not specified, this event was considered a failure of lymphatic mapping. Characteristics of the patients and a comparison of the two centers’ populations are listed in Table 1. Thirty-eight women (52%) and 37 men (48%) averaging 49 years of age underwent SNBx after WLE of lesions found mostly in the trunk and extremities. Breslow thickness ranged from .39 to 8 mm (mean, 1.93 ⫾ 1.22 mm), and most lesions were judged to be Clark level III or IV. The median interval between WLE of the
419
TABLE 1. Patient demographicsa
Variable Patients Male Female Total Mean age Primary tumor location Trunk Leg Arm Head/neck Breslow thickness, mm (mean) ⬍1 mm 1–2 mm 2–4 mm ⬎4 mm Clark level I II III IV V Unknown Ulceration
University of Virginia (UVA)
Vermont
Total
12 6 18 54
26 31 57 48
38 (51%) 37 (49%) 75 49
10 6 2 0 2.74
35 12 7 3 1.68
45 (60%) 18 (24%) 9 (12%) 3 (4%) 1.93 ⫾ 1.22
15 26 15 1
16 (21%) 34 (45%) 22 (29%) 3 (4%)
1 8 7 2 0 0 7 10 1 0 6
0 4 18 33 1 1 Data unavailable
0 4 (6%) 25 (33%) 43 (57%) 2 (3%) 1 6 (33% at UVA)
a
Excludes one patient with negative lymphoscintigraphy who did not undergo sentinel node biopsy.
melanoma primary tumor and SNBx was 58 days at the University of Virginia (Table 2); all intervals were ⬍45 days in the Vermont group. WLE surgical margins ranged from 1 to 5 cm. All Vermont study patients had ⱕ2-cm margins; 29 (50%) of 58 Vermont patients had lesions of ⱖ1.5 mm, presumably with margins of 2 cm (data unavailable). Fourteen (78%) of 18 UVA patients had margins ⱖ2 cm. Data regarding the scars from prior WLEs, ranging from 4.0 to 15.5 cm, were available for 21 patients. Among the UVA patients,18 the median scar length was 9.4 cm, split-thickness skin grafts were used in five patients, advancement flaps were undertaken in three patients, and a rotational flap was performed in one patient. Preoperative lymphoscintigraphy was used on all patients. The 99mTc sulfur colloid used for lymphatic mapping was injected along the full length of the previous melanoma excision scars or was injected around the periphery of skin grafts. In rare cases with long scars, the radiocolloid was injected on both sides of the mid portion of the scar rather than along its entire length, but in every case, the length of the radioactive tracer field was at least half the length of the scar. The length of the skin area containing 99mTc sulfur colloid from the lymAnn Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
420
H. L. EVANS ET AL. TABLE 2. Characteristics of lymphoscintigraphy at the University of Virginia Interval from WLE to SNBx (d)
Depth of invasion (mm)
1 2 3 4 5
48 204 76 75 40
1.45 1.3 1.7 4.05 3.1
6 7 8
204 54 47
8 3.1 1.7
9
61
2.1
Patient No.
10 11 12 13
77 15 26 252
3.3 1.5 1.9 3.8
14 15 16 17 18
23 86 90 37 26
2.7 1.4 NAb 3.2 2.3
80 days 58 days
2.7 2.3 1.3–8
Mean Median Range
Site of primary tumor R forearm R shoulder R calf Back R posterior leg Abdomen Sole R foot R anterior chest L chest wall
Amount of 99m Tc (mCi)
WLE margin (from operative note) (cm)
Length of scar: maximal dimension (cm)
1 2 2 2 2.5
5a 13.5 10.5 10a 7
PC PC PC/STSG PC STSG
8 NA NA 12 10
1.05 .8 1 1 .9
2–3 2 NA
14 5.6 15.5
PC STSG PC
6 6 8
.75 .9 .73
2–3
15
PC
13–16
1.3
a
STSG or PC No. Injections
Size of 99mTc injection (cm) NA NA 7.3 ⫻ 5.5 NA 11.1 ⫻ 7.4 (circumference) NA 7.4 ⫻ 5.6 NA
L back L thigh Back Upper mid back L thigh R leg R upper back L forearm L shoulder
2 1.5 2–2.5 2
8 7.6 6a 15.2
PC PC PC PC
11 6 6 7
.85 .5 .99 1
7.4 ⫻ 4.7 (at central scar) NA 9.2 ⫻ 6.8 11.2 ⫻ 2.5 11.2 ⫻ 7.1
2 NA 4a 5 2
8.8 6 14 10.5 8.2a
PC STSG PC STSG PC
6 NA 12 NA 10
.6 1.05 .85 .9 .8
7.4 ⫻ 4.7 NA 14 ⫻ 12.5 8.1 ⫻ 4.3 NA
– – 8 extremity, 10 trunk
2.3 2 1.5–5
10 9.4 5–15
– – 5 STSG, 13 PC
8.75 8 6–16
.9 Ci .9 Ci .5–1.3 Ci
9.4 ⫻ 6.1 NA 4.3 ⫻ 8.1 to 12.5 ⫻ 14
WLE, wide local excision; SNBx, sentinel lymph node biopsy; STSG, split-thickness skin graft; PC, primary closure; NA, not available; R, right; L, left. a Estimated from pathology report on gross measurements of excision specimen; all other values were measured directly. b Patient 16 had a local recurrence of melanoma that was ⬎1 cm thick, for which WLE and SNBx were performed. Exact thickness was not recorded.
phoscintigram films was measured in most patients at the University of Virginia series and corresponded well with the measured lengths of the incisions (Table 2). On average, the ratio between the length of the injection and the length of the scar was 1 to 1.1. The injectate covered areas ranging from 4.3 ⫻ 8.1 cm to 12.5 ⫻ 14 cm (mean, 6.1 ⫻ 9.4 cm; n ⫽ 10). Despite the large areas injected, the lymphoscintigram permitted identification of a single sentinel node in most cases (Fig. 1). Blue dye was used as an adjunct to radioactive lymphatic mapping in 29 patients (38%). Radiocolloid was used in all patients (100%). At least 1 sentinel node was identified in 75 (99%) of 76 patients. Of 153 sentinel nodes excised, 16 (10.5%) were positive for malignancy (Table 3). Five patients had two positive sentinel nodes each. Metastatic disease was present in ⱖ1 (15%) sentinel nodes of 11 patients. Among 75 patients with successful lymphoscintigraphy, 63 (84%) had sentinel nodes confined to 1 nodal basin, whereas sentinel nodes were identified in 2 distinct nodal basins in 10 (13%) patients and in 3 distinct nodal basins in 2 patients (3%). These results are similar Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
to published data, in which 87% drained to one basin and 13% to two basins.18 In many cases, the sentinel nodes were negative, but in two patients, metastatic disease was
FIG. 1. Lymphoscintigraphic image revealing a large central injection site, a solitary axillary node hot spot (an), and the suprasternal notch labeled for orientation (ssn).
SENTINEL NODE BIOPSY AFTER WLE OF MELANOMA
421
TABLE 3. Sentinel node characteristics Variable
University of Virginia
No. Patients with successful SNBx No. of SNs excised Mean number of SNs per patient Range of SNs per patient % With 1 SN % With 1–3 SNs No. of positive SNs No. of patients with positive SNs (%) ⬍1 mm 1–2 mm 2–4 mm ⬎4 mm All patients
Vermont
18 40 2.2 1–6 44% 83% 5 0 2 2 0 4 (22%)
Combined series
57 113 2.0 1–6 37% 88% 11
75 153 2.0 1–6 39% 87% 16
1 2 3 1 7 (12.3%)
1 (8%) 4 (12%) 5 (23%) 1 (33%) 11 (15%)
SN, sentinel node; SNBx, sentinel node biopsy.
identified in two regionally distinct lymph node beds; a single positive sentinel node was located in three of the four regional lymph node beds in these two patients, with the fourth bed containing both positive and negative sentinel nodes. Outcomes During Patient Follow-Up Melanoma recurrences were observed in 11 patients overall (14.6%), 8 of whom had negative SNBx (12.5% of negative SNBx). A third of patients in the University of Virginia group have been followed up for at least 2 years. In the Vermont Cancer Center group, after a
median follow-up of 3.3 years (mean, 3.1 years), melanoma recurred in 11 patients (19%). The group of patients at the University of Virginia has been without recurrence to date, with a median follow-up interval of 8 months (mean, 1.3 years). Recurrences include tumor found at local, nodal, in-transit, and systemic locations (Table 4). All tumor recurrences appeared in patients with Clarks IV melanoma of at least 1.73-mm thickness at initial presentation, and 6 of 11 tumors recurred in the axilla. Three of 11 patients with positive SNBx had recurrence; 2 with in-transit recurrences died 4 and 5 years
TABLE 4. Melanoma recurrences Patient No.
Clark level
First sites of recurrence
Status
0
R axilla
4
Alive
0
L axilla and systemic
2
Dead
0 0
R axilla and systemic Regional and systemic
2 4
Dead Dead
Isolated nodal recurrence in basin without prior SNBx, n ⫽ 1 (1%) V036 M 44 L lateral abdominal 2.00 4 L axilla Simultaneous nodal and systemic recurrence, n ⫽ 3 (4%) V027 M 73 L hypochondrial 2.10 4
WLE site
Thickness (mm)
Length of follow-up (y)
No. of positive nodes at SNBx
Sex
Age (y)
SNBx site
Isolated nodal recurrence in basin with prior negative SNBx, n ⫽ 0 (0%) None
1.88 3.00
4 4
L axilla (⫻2)/L inguinal L axilla L axilla
Local recurrence only, n ⫽ 1 (1%) V033 F 44 R postcrural
2.00
4
R inguinal
0
WLE site
3
Alive
In-transit recurrence only, n ⫽ 2 (3%) V005 M 30 L anterior femoral V026 F 61 R anterior crural
2.40 5.50
4 4
L inguinal R inguinal
2 1
In-transit In-transit
5 4
Dead Dead
2.00 1.85 1.73 3.50
4 4 4 4
R axilla/L axilla R inguinal R axilla L level 3
2 0 0 0
Systemic Systemic Systemic Systemic
4 4 3 2
Alive Dead Dead Dead
V010 M V047 F
Systemic V039 V002 V025 V059
59 32
L pectoral L pectoral
recurrence only, n ⫽ 4 (5%) F 33 R scapular F 37 R popliteal fossa F 32 R pectoral M 59 L temporal
WLE, wide local excision; SNBx, sentinel node biopsy; L, left; R, right.
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
422
H. L. EVANS ET AL.
after diagnosis, and 1 with systemic recurrence without local or in-transit evidence of metastasis survived 4 years until loss to follow-up. Of the 64 patients whose sentinel node was negative for malignancy, 4 developed recurrence in a nodal basin. Of the four patients with lymph node recurrences, two recurrences were in the sentinel nodal basin, and two were in another nodal basin. Three of these four patients presented with systemic disease at the time of their recurrence; only one had an isolated first recurrence in a regional node, but it was in a node basin contralateral to the basin identified by lymphoscintigraphy (and contralateral to the primary lesion). Thus, there were no patients who developed isolated nodal recurrences in lymph node basins that were negative by SNBx. However, isolated recurrence in a contralateral node could be explained by a failure of lymphatic mapping. There were 11 patients with positive sentinel nodes; therefore, this one nodal recurrence after a negative SNBx would represent an 8% (1 of 12) false-negative rate. The other three patients with nodal recurrences had simultaneous systemic disease. If they are considered false negatives of the SNBx staging (the “true nodal basin failure rate,” as described by Kelley et al.10), then a 27% false-negative rate (4 of 15) may be suggested. However, recurrence after systemic dissemination is difficult to interpret as regional failure, especially when the regional recurrence is contralateral. The broadest interpretation of clinical failure possibly attributable to lymphatic mapping would be to include three patients (patients V036, V027, and V047; Table 4). Even when considering these three regional recurrences, the negative predictive value of SNBx in this population is still 95%. Completion lymphadenectomy was performed in 10 patients (1 patient declined axillary lymphadenectomy because of concern for lymphedema), with a mean of 13 lymph nodes harvested per basin. Two patients had positive nodes harvested in addition to the positive sentinel node; one of these patients had systemic recurrence. Two in-transit recurrences were observed among the patients with positive SNBx and subsequent negative completion lymphadenectomy.
nodes biopsied in the two groups was 1.7 and 2.0, respectively. The percentage of patients with positive sentinel nodes was 17% when SNBx was performed at the time of WLE and was 21% (despite a lower mean tumor thickness) in patients with delayed SNBx. In follow-up, 32 (2.8%) of 1124 patients with negative SNBx at the time of WLE had an isolated first recurrence in a lymph node basin that was previously biopsied, and only 2 (2%) of 117 patients with negative delayed SNBx had a first recurrence in that basin. The median follow-up periods for the first group of studies ranged from 15 to 36 months, but the median follow-up periods for the studies of delayed SNBx (including this study) were 36 to 38 months. With longer follow-up, increased rates of regional failure would be expected in both groups, but for the sake of this comparison, the patients with delayed SNBx have a longer follow-up period. If false-negative rate is defined as the number of patients with a first recurrence in a node basin that was sentinel node negative, divided by the total number of patients with positive nodes, then the calculated false-negative rate is 9.6% for patients with SNBx at the time of WLE and is only 6% for patients with SNBx performed in patients with a prior WLE. If a more inclusive false-negative rate is calculated to include patients with lymph node recurrences plus simultaneous recurrences elsewhere, then the calculated false-negative rates from these series both increase to 15% to 16%. Even with the additional months of followup, patients undergoing delayed SNBx have the same, or even a lower, rate of recurrence. It should be noted that patients in the Vermont multicenter study had sentinel nodes analyzed with H&E staining alone, without immunohistochemical review, raising the possibility that the false negatives identified may actually represent pathologic misdiagnosis. Pathologic review of original nodal samples was not available. Nonetheless, the results in this study and in the summarized literature on SNBx after WLE are comparable to, or even slightly better than, those reported for patients undergoing SNBx at the time of WLE.
Review of Literature Several series report the incidence of recurrence after SNBx for melanoma. Seven studies of SNBx at the time of WLE are reviewed, along with this study and two smaller studies of SNBx subsequent to prior WLE (Table 5).12,13,18 –23 This summary permits comparison of published data for two groups of patients: patients with SNBx simultaneous with WLE and patients with SNBx subsequent to prior WLE. The mean number of sentinel
This report details the clinical experience with SNBx subsequent to a prior WLE in 76 patients with clinically localized melanoma (American Joint Committee on Cancer stages I–II). In some centers, a prior WLE of melanoma excludes patients from candidacy for SNBx. The ongoing Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial excludes patients with WLE margins ⬎1.5 cm.1 Two other reports of SNBx after WLE have been published from single-institution studies,12,18 but the clinical utility
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
DISCUSSION
SENTINEL NODE BIOPSY AFTER WLE OF MELANOMA
423
TABLE 5. Literature review: rates of positive sentinel nodes and recurrence
Investigators Morton19
Mean Success Mean No. Breslow rate of SNs thickness SNBx excised (mm)
194/237 (82%)a Gershenwald20 322/344 (93.6%) Jansen21 199/200 (99.5%) Leong22 160/163 (98.2%) Gadd23c 89/89 (100%) d 13 Harlow 271/277 (97.8%) Karakousis18be 122/130 (94%) SUMMARY 1357/ 1440 (94%) This study 75/76 (98.7%) Kelemen12 47/47 (100%) be 18 Karakousis 26/26 (100%) Summary after 148/149 WLE (99.3%)
SN-positive patients (%)
First recurrence to SN-negative-basin alone (SNCalculated falsenegative pts) negative rate
Recurrence to SNnegative basin with or without simult dz elsewhere (SN-negative pts)
Median length of Any recurrence follow-up (SN-negative pts) (mo)
1.34
NA
47/194 (24)b
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
NA
2.28
52 (16.1)
7/243 (2.9%)
10/243 (4.1%) 10/52 ⫹ 10 (16%) NA
27/243 (11%)
35
15/151 (9.9%)
29
3/133 (2.3%) 3/30 ⫹ 3 (9%) 8/89 (9%)
5/130 (3.8%)
15
11/89 (12%)
23
11/240 (4.6%) 11/42 (26%) NA
20/240 (8.3%)
35.8
NA
NA
2.2
2.7
48 (24)
6/151 (4%)
7/52 ⫹ 7 (11.9%) 6/48 ⫹ 6 (11%)
1.6
2.45
30 (18.4)
1/133 (0.7%)
1/30 ⫹ 1 (3.2%)
NA
1.80
0
7/89 (7.9%)
NA
1.96
NA
31 (11.4)
8/240 (3.3%)
8/39 (20.5%)
1.15
NA
28 (22)
3/94 (3.2%)b
3/31 (10%)
1.7
2.3
236 (17.4)
32/1124 (2.8%)
25/270 (9.6%)
30/705 (4.3%) 22/136 (16%)
78/853 (9.1%)
15–36
2.0
1.93
11 (15)
0 (0%)
0 (0%)
8/64 (13%)
38
2.4
1.8
11 (23)
2/36 (5.5%)
2/11 ⫹ 2 (15.4%)
3/64 (4.7%) 3/14 (21.4%) 1/36 (2.7%) 1/11 ⫹ 1 (8.3%) NA
3/36 (8.3%)
36
NA
NA
2/33 (6%)
4/100 (4%) 4/26 (15.4%)
11/100 (11%)
36–38
1.2
NA
9 (35)
0/17 (0%)
2.0
1.87
31 (21)
2/117 (2%)
SN, sentinel node; SNBx, sentinel node biopsy; NA, not available; WLE, wide local excision. a Distinction was not made between nodal recurrences to the previously mapped basin versus other basins. The calculation thus may be an overestimate. b Study reported the number of lymph node basins, not patients. c Study may have included some patients from the University of Vermont, but these could not be culled out. d This study included patients with SNBx after WLE, which we have excluded from the data reported in this table, except that the report did not include adequate information to calculate mean thickness of the primary melanomas for the larger subset. e Study was divided here to reflect two cohorts studied: simultaneous WLE and SNBx, and SNBx after WLE.
of SNBx in that subset of patients has not been universally accepted. Although the number of patients is modest, the results summarized in this report more than double the published literature on this topic and represent a multicenter experience with substantial follow-up data. The incidence of positive nodes in this group was 15%, which is in the range that would be expected for this group of patients on the basis of prognostic factors regarding the primary lesion. It should be noted that a single investigator performed all of the SNBx at the University of Virginia (n ⫽ 18), whereas multiple surgeons at different institutions with varying degrees of experience in lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel lymphadenectomy performed the procedures from which the Vermont database was built (n ⫽ 58). Thus, this report represents a multicenter experience that can be considered applicable to a broad range of surgeons. This report contains a review of the literature and tabulation of selected studies with substantial numbers of patients, detailed data on outcomes, and/or follow-up data on regional and systemic recurrences. The summary data from those two sets of patients (SNBx at the time of WLE and delayed SNBx) reveal comparable success rates of SNBx (94% vs. 99%), mean number of sentinel
nodes excised (1.7 vs. 2.0), percentage of patients with positive SNBx (17% vs. 21%), rates of nodal recurrence in basins with prior negative SNBx (2.8% vs. 2.0%), and the calculated false-negative rate based on nodal recurrence rates (9.6% vs. 6%) for patients with simultaneous WLE and prior WLE, respectively. Thus, the data in this report, with unselected patients from multiple centers and with long follow-up, suggest that SNBx is as accurate in patients who have had prior WLE as in patients who undergo SNBx at the time of WLE. This study also permits an assessment of success rates with different lymphatic mapping techniques. All patients underwent lymphatic mapping with 99mTc-labeled radiocolloid; however, blue dye was also used in a subset of patients in the Vermont Cancer Center group. In every case in which blue nodes were identified as sentinel nodes, the blue node was also radioactive (data not shown). There were three patients, however, in whom blue dye and radiocolloid were used for localization and in whom tumor metastases were found in radioactive sentinel nodes that were not blue (data not shown). Thus, this experience suggests that the addition of blue dye is not essential for successful mapping, whereas the use of Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
424
H. L. EVANS ET AL.
radiocolloid is critical to accurate identification of the sentinel nodes. The standard approach to calculate false-negative rates in the early SNBx literature was to determine the rate of SN positivity compared with lymph node positivity assessed in a complete elective lymph node dissection (ELND) specimen. However, patients who undergo negative ELND will experience disease recurrence in the negative nodal basin approximately 4% of the time.6 Because ELNDs are positive approximately 15% to 20% of the time, this could be interpreted as a 17% (4 of 24) to 21% (4 of 19) false-negative rate. When phrased this way, that number seems unacceptable, but it is important to realize that this is the result with what has been considered the gold standard for management of the regional nodes. In this article, we have addressed the question of regional nodal failure in several ways and have presented all the available data, in comparison to published comparable data from studies of SNBx at the same time as WLE. There is a risk of lymph node metastases in patients with melanoma, despite negative SNBx, but this does not seem to be increased by delaying lymphatic mapping and SNBx until after the WLE is performed. This risk is comparable to risks of nodal recurrence after complete elective node dissection.6 As such, the occurrence of these nodal metastases should not be interpreted as a justification to abandon SNBx. However, it remains important to monitor regional node basins clinically after a negative SNBx as part of the routine follow-up after a melanoma diagnosis. Although the data in this report justify the application of SNBx staging to patients who have already had a WLE, it is reasonable to evaluate patients for SNBx with an awareness of the risks of disrupted lymphatic channels. Simple transection of lymphatic channels in a scar does not seem to impair the flow in those lymphatics proximal to the scar. Thus, by injecting radiocolloid around the entire scar, all the lymphatic channels that drain the primary lesion should also be included among the lymphatics draining sulfur colloid from this injection. A primary concern had been that injection of sulfur colloid over a larger area might lead to identification of additional nodes as sentinel because they drained the skin at the ends of the incision, but not the site of the primary lesion. However, the number of sentinel nodes identified in this study is comparable to that reported in numerous series of SNBx. One of the patients included in this series had a rotation flap, and three advancement flaps were undertaken, with no recurrence observed in any of the four patients, even though one patient had two positive sentinel nodes. Additionally, split-thickness skin grafts were used in five Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
patients with no evidence of local, nodal, in-transit, or systemic recurrence. Patients with split-thickness skin grafts or flap closures have been singled out in the literature as unfavorable candidates for SNBx after WLE for fear of inaccurate staging of nodal basins because of altered drainage patterns.1,9 The number of patients with split-thickness skin grafts or flaps in this study was small; further studies in this particular subset of patients would be useful. However, our data support the application of SNBx techniques even after large skin grafts and simple advancement flaps. Likely, undermining subcutaneous tissue itself does not substantially disrupt lymphatic drainage and does not seem to prevent accurate staging by SNBx. Because of concern about lymphatic disruption, clinical circumstances remain in which SNBx should not be recommended. Large rotational flaps are likely to disrupt lymphatics and to make SNBx unreliable. One case report of SNBx after prior WLE with rotation flap provides an example. During SNBx, a blue-stained sentinel node was harvested and found to be negative, but an adjacent, nonstaining node was positive for malignancy.18 Another situation arises when the site of the primary tumor lies directly over the nodal basin to which primary drainage is expected. An example would be a melanoma arising in the preauricular area, in which the draining nodes at risk include parotid nodes. If WLE is performed in that setting, it seems probable that the lymphatic channels to the underlying nodes would be disrupted; we do not recommend SNBx in that setting. In most other body sites, however, the lymphatic channels travel through the dermis and subcutaneous tissue for a distance before entering the nodes, thus permitting lymphatic mapping even after a WLE. Melanomas in the head and neck region are potential exceptions, because drainage patterns in those areas may be more ambiguous and less predictable. One patient out of the three with primary head and neck melanomas included in this study (Table 1) had systemic recurrence (Table 4). Although this experience in only a few patients is hardly conclusive evidence, Kelemen et al.12 have stated that the possibility for errors in mapping makes SNBx after WLE moderately risky in this particular subset of patients. Finally, it should be clarified that although delayed SNBx may be used to stage lymphatic drainage after WLE of melanoma, this approach does not represent the optimal management of patients with melanoma and should be reserved for those patients who present after WLE. In summary, evidence has been presented that WLE for melanoma with margins of 1 to 5 cm, with or without skin grafting, routinely permits subsequent accurate lym-
SENTINEL NODE BIOPSY AFTER WLE OF MELANOMA phatic mapping by lymphoscintigraphy with 99mTc-labeled colloid. Sentinel node biopsy may not be reliable in those patients who have had large rotation flaps. However, in standard WLE with or without skin grafting, where there has been minimal distortion of lymphatic channels and no transection of the subcutaneous tissue proximal to the melanoma site, SNBx is appropriate and can provide reliable staging information.
11.
12.
13.
14.
REFERENCES 1. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Essner R, et al. Validation of the accuracy of intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for early-stage melanoma: a multicenter trial. Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial Group. Ann Surg 1999; 230:453– 63; discussion 463–5. 2. Morton DL. Sentinel lymphadenectomy for patients with clinical stage I melanoma. J Surg Oncol 1997;66:267–9. 3. Sim FH, Taylor WF, Pritchard DJ, Soule EH. Lymphadenectomy in the management of stage I malignant melanoma: a prospective randomized study. Mayo Clin Proc 1986;61:697–705. 4. 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;49:2420 –30. 5. 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;224:255– 63; discussion 263– 6. 6. Slingluff CL Jr, Stidham KR, Ricci WM, et al. Surgical management of regional lymph nodes in patients with melanoma. Experience with 4682 patients. Ann Surg 1994;219:120 –30. 7. Krag DN, Meijer SJ, Weaver DL, et al. Minimal-access surgery for staging of malignant melanoma. Arch Surg 1995;130:654 – 8; discussion 659 – 60. 8. Glass LF, Messina JL, Cruse W, et al. The use of intraoperative radiolymphoscintigraphy for sentinel node biopsy in patients with malignant melanoma. Dermatol Surg 1996;22:715–20. 9. Essner R. The role of lymphoscintigraphy and sentinel node mapping in assessing patient risk in melanoma. Semin Oncol 1997;24(1 Suppl 4):S8 –10. 10. Kelley MC, Ollila DW, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
425
sentinel lymphadenectomy for melanoma. Semin Surg Oncol 1998; 14:283–90. Balch CM, Lange JR. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node lymphadenectomy for cancer: an overview. Ann Surg Oncol 2001; 8(9 Suppl):1S– 4S. Kelemen PR, Essner R, Foshag LJ, Morton DL. Lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy after wide local excision of primary melanoma. J Am Coll Surg 1999;189:247–52. Harlow SP, Krag DN, Ashikaga T, et al. Gamma probe guided biopsy of the sentinel node in malignant melanoma: a multicentre study. Melanoma Res 2001;11:45–55. Reintgen DS, Brobeil A. Lymphatic mapping and selective lymphadenectomy as an alternative to elective lymph node dissection in patients with malignant melanoma. Hematol Oncol Clin North Am 1998;12:807–21, vii. Wanebo HJ, Harpole D, Teates CD. Radionuclide lymphoscintigraphy with technetium 99m antimony sulfide colloid to identify lymphatic drainage of cutaneous melanoma at ambiguous sites in the head and neck and trunk. Cancer 1985;55:1403–13. Krag DN. Minimal access surgery for staging regional lymph nodes: the sentinel-node concept. Curr Probl Surg 1998;35:951– 1016. Friedman HD, Tatum AH. HMB-45-positive malignant lymphoma. A case report with literature review of aberrant HMB-45 reactivity. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1991;115:826 –30. Karakousis CP, Grigoropoulos P. Sentinel node biopsy before and after wide excision of the primary melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 1999;6:785–9. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 1992;127:392–9. Gershenwald JE, Colome MI, Lee JE, et al. Patterns of recurrence following a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy in 243 patients with stage I or II melanoma. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:2253– 60. Jansen L, Nieweg OE, Peterse JL, et al. Reliability of sentinel lymph node biopsy for staging melanoma. Br J Surg 2000;87: 484 –9. Leong SP, Steinmetz I, Habib FA, et al. Optimal selective sentinel lymph node dissection in primary malignant melanoma. Arch Surg 1997;132:666 –72; discussion 673. Gadd MA, Cosimi AB, Yu J, et al. Outcome of patients with melanoma and histologically negative sentinel lymph nodes. Arch Surg 1999;134:381–7.
Ann Surg Oncol, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2003
