Adrienne Delaney, Yağmur Seda Yeşiltaş, Emily C Zabor, Arun D Singh
{"title":"Surveillance for Metastasis in Low-Risk Uveal Melanoma Patients: Need for Optimization.","authors":"Adrienne Delaney, Yağmur Seda Yeşiltaş, Emily C Zabor, Arun D Singh","doi":"10.1016/j.ophtha.2025.03.019","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness of surveillance protocols utilizing hepatic ultrasonography (US) at 6-month intervals to detect metastasis and determine its impact on overall survival (OS) in low-risk uveal melanoma (UM) patients.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Retrospective Cohort Study SUBJECTS: 144 consecutive patients with Class 1 (low risk) primary UM were enrolled.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>All patients had negative baseline systemic staging following which they underwent systemic surveillance either with hepatic US at 6-month intervals (standard protocol, SP) or enhanced protocol (EP) utilizing high frequency (US every 3 months) or enhanced modality (EM, hepatic computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging).</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>Largest diameter of largest hepatic metastasis (LDLM), number of hepatic metastatic lesions, time to detection of metastasis (TDM), and OS.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Median follow-up time for those still alive (134, 10 patients died from any cause) was 50.6 months (IQR: 28.6-76.1). Surveillance was done with SP in the majority (101 [70%]) and EP in 43[30%]). A total of 834 US scans were performed (median 5.0 [IQR: 3.0, 8.0])) that led to detection of metastasis in 6 patients by SP in the majority (5/6) and EP in 1/6. The median LDLM at detection was 2.8 cm. Only tumor largest basal diameter was significantly associated with increased hazard of metastasis (HR 1.33 [95% CI, 1.04-1.70]; p= 0.022) whereas age, tumor thickness, and PRAME status were not. All patients were treated for metastasis (liver directed 1 [17%], systemic therapy 5 [83%]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The vast majority of patients with UM predicted to have low risk of metastasis do not develop metastasis by 5 years (96%). Surveillance protocols in such patients have very low yield and their impact on survival cannot be assessed. Our study demonstrates the need for further risk refinement of low-risk UM patients to better identify at-risk individuals. Currently used surveillance protocols need to be optimized.</p>","PeriodicalId":19533,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ophtha.2025.03.019","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: To evaluate the effectiveness of surveillance protocols utilizing hepatic ultrasonography (US) at 6-month intervals to detect metastasis and determine its impact on overall survival (OS) in low-risk uveal melanoma (UM) patients.
Design: Retrospective Cohort Study SUBJECTS: 144 consecutive patients with Class 1 (low risk) primary UM were enrolled.
Methods: All patients had negative baseline systemic staging following which they underwent systemic surveillance either with hepatic US at 6-month intervals (standard protocol, SP) or enhanced protocol (EP) utilizing high frequency (US every 3 months) or enhanced modality (EM, hepatic computed tomography/magnetic resonance imaging).
Main outcome measures: Largest diameter of largest hepatic metastasis (LDLM), number of hepatic metastatic lesions, time to detection of metastasis (TDM), and OS.
Results: Median follow-up time for those still alive (134, 10 patients died from any cause) was 50.6 months (IQR: 28.6-76.1). Surveillance was done with SP in the majority (101 [70%]) and EP in 43[30%]). A total of 834 US scans were performed (median 5.0 [IQR: 3.0, 8.0])) that led to detection of metastasis in 6 patients by SP in the majority (5/6) and EP in 1/6. The median LDLM at detection was 2.8 cm. Only tumor largest basal diameter was significantly associated with increased hazard of metastasis (HR 1.33 [95% CI, 1.04-1.70]; p= 0.022) whereas age, tumor thickness, and PRAME status were not. All patients were treated for metastasis (liver directed 1 [17%], systemic therapy 5 [83%]).
Conclusions: The vast majority of patients with UM predicted to have low risk of metastasis do not develop metastasis by 5 years (96%). Surveillance protocols in such patients have very low yield and their impact on survival cannot be assessed. Our study demonstrates the need for further risk refinement of low-risk UM patients to better identify at-risk individuals. Currently used surveillance protocols need to be optimized.
期刊介绍:
The journal Ophthalmology, from the American Academy of Ophthalmology, contributes to society by publishing research in clinical and basic science related to vision.It upholds excellence through unbiased peer-review, fostering innovation, promoting discovery, and encouraging lifelong learning.