Paul Wong, Michael O'Leary, Kelly Mahuron, Hans F Schoellhammer, Moshe Faynsod, Benjamin Paz, Laleh G Melstrom
{"title":"前哨淋巴结阳性恶性黑色素瘤监测的实践模式:一项国际调查。","authors":"Paul Wong, Michael O'Leary, Kelly Mahuron, Hans F Schoellhammer, Moshe Faynsod, Benjamin Paz, Laleh G Melstrom","doi":"10.1097/COC.0000000000001196","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To understand surveillance practice patterns in melanoma patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was designed, tested for item relevance, readability, and content validity, and subsequently distributed to melanoma surgeons through institutional emails and international societies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Majority of the 59 respondents were <10 years from training (59.3%), in academia (74.1%), or dedicated >25% of their practice to melanoma (50.8%). Nearly all surgeons (98.3%) would not recommend complete lymph node dissection (CLND) for a 2 mm melanoma with nodal metastasis <1 mm. 79.7% of surgeons claim a significant role in determining the surveillance regimen, and most (57.6%) opt for a combination of nodal basin ultrasound and CT or PET/CT, while 39.0% follow with ultrasound only. No difference in surveillance modality was seen when stratifying time since training (≤10 vs. >10 y; P=0.798). However, for those who dedicate >25% of their practice to melanoma, significantly fewer surgeons report use of ultrasound only (>25%: 13.3% vs. ≤25%: 65.5%; P<0.001). Whereas 33.9% of surgeons state their surveillance strategy is agnostic to patient factors, others claim adherence to appointments (30.5%), distance from hospital (18.9%), and insurance (15.8%) shift their management. Breslow depth >4 mm (27.4%), ulceration (22.2%), and mapping to >1 basin (16.2%) are the most common reasons surgeons obtain cross-sectional imaging. Reasons that deter surgeons against ultrasound as the surveillance modality of choice include reproducibility/interpretation of the results (42.6%), patient preference (25.0%), and medical oncology preference (22.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite trials aimed to inform the management of SLN-positive melanoma, surveillance strategies remain largely dependent on provider preference and individual patient factors.</p>","PeriodicalId":50812,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Practice Patterns of Surveillance in Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Malignant Melanoma: An International Survey.\",\"authors\":\"Paul Wong, Michael O'Leary, Kelly Mahuron, Hans F Schoellhammer, Moshe Faynsod, Benjamin Paz, Laleh G Melstrom\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/COC.0000000000001196\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To understand surveillance practice patterns in melanoma patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was designed, tested for item relevance, readability, and content validity, and subsequently distributed to melanoma surgeons through institutional emails and international societies.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Majority of the 59 respondents were <10 years from training (59.3%), in academia (74.1%), or dedicated >25% of their practice to melanoma (50.8%). Nearly all surgeons (98.3%) would not recommend complete lymph node dissection (CLND) for a 2 mm melanoma with nodal metastasis <1 mm. 79.7% of surgeons claim a significant role in determining the surveillance regimen, and most (57.6%) opt for a combination of nodal basin ultrasound and CT or PET/CT, while 39.0% follow with ultrasound only. No difference in surveillance modality was seen when stratifying time since training (≤10 vs. >10 y; P=0.798). However, for those who dedicate >25% of their practice to melanoma, significantly fewer surgeons report use of ultrasound only (>25%: 13.3% vs. ≤25%: 65.5%; P<0.001). Whereas 33.9% of surgeons state their surveillance strategy is agnostic to patient factors, others claim adherence to appointments (30.5%), distance from hospital (18.9%), and insurance (15.8%) shift their management. Breslow depth >4 mm (27.4%), ulceration (22.2%), and mapping to >1 basin (16.2%) are the most common reasons surgeons obtain cross-sectional imaging. Reasons that deter surgeons against ultrasound as the surveillance modality of choice include reproducibility/interpretation of the results (42.6%), patient preference (25.0%), and medical oncology preference (22.1%).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Despite trials aimed to inform the management of SLN-positive melanoma, surveillance strategies remain largely dependent on provider preference and individual patient factors.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50812,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000001196\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ONCOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Clinical Oncology-Cancer Clinical Trials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/COC.0000000000001196","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Practice Patterns of Surveillance in Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Malignant Melanoma: An International Survey.
Objectives: To understand surveillance practice patterns in melanoma patients with a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy.
Methods: A survey was designed, tested for item relevance, readability, and content validity, and subsequently distributed to melanoma surgeons through institutional emails and international societies.
Results: Majority of the 59 respondents were <10 years from training (59.3%), in academia (74.1%), or dedicated >25% of their practice to melanoma (50.8%). Nearly all surgeons (98.3%) would not recommend complete lymph node dissection (CLND) for a 2 mm melanoma with nodal metastasis <1 mm. 79.7% of surgeons claim a significant role in determining the surveillance regimen, and most (57.6%) opt for a combination of nodal basin ultrasound and CT or PET/CT, while 39.0% follow with ultrasound only. No difference in surveillance modality was seen when stratifying time since training (≤10 vs. >10 y; P=0.798). However, for those who dedicate >25% of their practice to melanoma, significantly fewer surgeons report use of ultrasound only (>25%: 13.3% vs. ≤25%: 65.5%; P<0.001). Whereas 33.9% of surgeons state their surveillance strategy is agnostic to patient factors, others claim adherence to appointments (30.5%), distance from hospital (18.9%), and insurance (15.8%) shift their management. Breslow depth >4 mm (27.4%), ulceration (22.2%), and mapping to >1 basin (16.2%) are the most common reasons surgeons obtain cross-sectional imaging. Reasons that deter surgeons against ultrasound as the surveillance modality of choice include reproducibility/interpretation of the results (42.6%), patient preference (25.0%), and medical oncology preference (22.1%).
Conclusions: Despite trials aimed to inform the management of SLN-positive melanoma, surveillance strategies remain largely dependent on provider preference and individual patient factors.
期刊介绍:
American Journal of Clinical Oncology is a multidisciplinary journal for cancer surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, and pediatric oncologists.
The emphasis of AJCO is on combined modality multidisciplinary loco-regional management of cancer. The journal also gives emphasis to translational research, outcome studies, and cost utility analyses, and includes opinion pieces and review articles.
The editorial board includes a large number of distinguished surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, GYN oncologists, pediatric oncologists, and others who are internationally recognized for expertise in their fields.