Steve R Martinez, Dhruvil R Shah, Anthony D Yang, Robert J Canter, Emanual Maverakis
{"title":"原发性厚皮肤黑色素瘤患者的前哨淋巴结活检:利用基于人群的模型的使用模式和未充分使用。","authors":"Steve R Martinez, Dhruvil R Shah, Anthony D Yang, Robert J Canter, Emanual Maverakis","doi":"10.1155/2013/315609","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for thick cutaneous melanoma is supported by national guidelines. We report on factors associated with the use and underuse of SLNB for thick primary cutaneous melanoma. Methods. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients who underwent surgery for thick primary cutaneous melanoma from 2004 to 2008. We used multivariate logistic regression models to predict use of SLNB. Results. Among 1,981 patients, 833 (41.8%) did not undergo SLNB. Patients with primary melanomas of the arm (OR 2.07, CI 1.56-2.75; P < 0.001), leg (OR 2.40, CI 1.70-3.40; P < 0.001), and trunk (OR 1.82, CI 1.38-2.40; P < 0.001) had an increased likelihood of receiving a SLNB, as did those with desmoplastic histology (OR 1.47, CI 1.11-1.96; P = 0.008). A decreased likelihood of receiving SLNB was noted for advancing age ≥ 60 years (age 60 to 69: OR 0.58, CI 0.33-0.99, P = 0.047; age 70 to 79: OR 0.32, CI 0.19-0.54, P < 0.001; age 80 or more: OR 0.10, CI 0.06-0.16, P < 0.001) and unknown race/ethnicity (OR 0.21, CI 0.07-0.62; P = 0.005). Conclusions. In particular, elderly patients are less likely to receive SLNB. Further research is needed to assess whether use of SLNB in this population is detrimental or beneficial.</p>","PeriodicalId":14682,"journal":{"name":"ISRN Dermatology","volume":"2013 ","pages":"315609"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/315609","citationCount":"5","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with thick primary cutaneous melanoma: patterns of use and underuse utilizing a population-based model.\",\"authors\":\"Steve R Martinez, Dhruvil R Shah, Anthony D Yang, Robert J Canter, Emanual Maverakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1155/2013/315609\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Background. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for thick cutaneous melanoma is supported by national guidelines. We report on factors associated with the use and underuse of SLNB for thick primary cutaneous melanoma. Methods. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients who underwent surgery for thick primary cutaneous melanoma from 2004 to 2008. We used multivariate logistic regression models to predict use of SLNB. Results. Among 1,981 patients, 833 (41.8%) did not undergo SLNB. Patients with primary melanomas of the arm (OR 2.07, CI 1.56-2.75; P < 0.001), leg (OR 2.40, CI 1.70-3.40; P < 0.001), and trunk (OR 1.82, CI 1.38-2.40; P < 0.001) had an increased likelihood of receiving a SLNB, as did those with desmoplastic histology (OR 1.47, CI 1.11-1.96; P = 0.008). A decreased likelihood of receiving SLNB was noted for advancing age ≥ 60 years (age 60 to 69: OR 0.58, CI 0.33-0.99, P = 0.047; age 70 to 79: OR 0.32, CI 0.19-0.54, P < 0.001; age 80 or more: OR 0.10, CI 0.06-0.16, P < 0.001) and unknown race/ethnicity (OR 0.21, CI 0.07-0.62; P = 0.005). Conclusions. In particular, elderly patients are less likely to receive SLNB. Further research is needed to assess whether use of SLNB in this population is detrimental or beneficial.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14682,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"ISRN Dermatology\",\"volume\":\"2013 \",\"pages\":\"315609\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2013-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1155/2013/315609\",\"citationCount\":\"5\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"ISRN Dermatology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/315609\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2013/1/10 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ISRN Dermatology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/315609","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2013/1/10 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
摘要
背景。前哨淋巴结活检(SLNB)厚皮肤黑色素瘤是支持国家指南。我们报道与SLNB治疗原发性厚皮肤黑色素瘤的使用和未充分使用相关的因素。方法。对2004年至2008年接受过原发性厚皮肤黑色素瘤手术的患者的监测、流行病学和最终结果数据库进行了查询。我们使用多元逻辑回归模型来预测SLNB的使用。结果。1981例患者中,833例(41.8%)未行SLNB。手臂原发性黑色素瘤患者(OR 2.07, CI 1.56-2.75;P < 0.001),组(OR 2.40, CI 1.70-3.40;P < 0.001),主干(OR 1.82, CI 1.38-2.40;P < 0.001)的患者接受SLNB的可能性增加,有结缔组织增生组织学的患者也是如此(OR 1.47, CI 1.11-1.96;P = 0.008)。年龄≥60岁的患者接受SLNB的可能性降低(60 - 69岁:OR 0.58, CI 0.33-0.99, P = 0.047;70 ~ 79岁:OR 0.32, CI 0.19 ~ 0.54, P < 0.001;80岁或以上:or 0.10, CI 0.06-0.16, P < 0.001)和未知种族/民族(or 0.21, CI 0.07-0.62;P = 0.005)。结论。特别是老年患者接受SLNB的可能性较小。需要进一步的研究来评估在这一人群中使用SLNB是有害还是有益。
Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with thick primary cutaneous melanoma: patterns of use and underuse utilizing a population-based model.
Background. Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for thick cutaneous melanoma is supported by national guidelines. We report on factors associated with the use and underuse of SLNB for thick primary cutaneous melanoma. Methods. The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database was queried for patients who underwent surgery for thick primary cutaneous melanoma from 2004 to 2008. We used multivariate logistic regression models to predict use of SLNB. Results. Among 1,981 patients, 833 (41.8%) did not undergo SLNB. Patients with primary melanomas of the arm (OR 2.07, CI 1.56-2.75; P < 0.001), leg (OR 2.40, CI 1.70-3.40; P < 0.001), and trunk (OR 1.82, CI 1.38-2.40; P < 0.001) had an increased likelihood of receiving a SLNB, as did those with desmoplastic histology (OR 1.47, CI 1.11-1.96; P = 0.008). A decreased likelihood of receiving SLNB was noted for advancing age ≥ 60 years (age 60 to 69: OR 0.58, CI 0.33-0.99, P = 0.047; age 70 to 79: OR 0.32, CI 0.19-0.54, P < 0.001; age 80 or more: OR 0.10, CI 0.06-0.16, P < 0.001) and unknown race/ethnicity (OR 0.21, CI 0.07-0.62; P = 0.005). Conclusions. In particular, elderly patients are less likely to receive SLNB. Further research is needed to assess whether use of SLNB in this population is detrimental or beneficial.