Site Map
Short Report
Examining the Utility of Performing Sentinel Node Biopsies for T1 Melanomas with Breslow Depths between 0.75 and 1.0 mm: A Review of a 20 Year Experience
Kenneth Hughes, William Jewell and Charles S Brown*
Department of Radiology, Geisinger Medical Center, Danville, USA

ABSTRACT
This study evaluated a series of patient data with T1 melanoma to determine, in those cases where Breslow depth is between 0.75 mm and 1 mm, whether Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy (SLNBx) is necessary or beneficial. This study represents a chart-review based retrospective analysis of over 1500 patients of Dr. William Jewell accrued over a period of 20 years (1986-2005) at the University of Kansas Medical Center. Of these 1500 patients, over 300 patients received wide excision and subsequent SLNBx. Thirty of these patients fell within the 0.75 to 1.0 mm Breslow depth and had the necessary SLNBx performed. 6% of those with Breslow depths between 0.75 and 1.0 mm had a positive SLNBx compared to 20% of those melanomas with depths between 1 and 2 mm. Furthermore, Clark’s level of IV or greater suggested a greater likelihood of positivity at the SLN for T1 melanoma.

Introduction
Melanoma accounts for the vast majority of deaths from cutaneous neoplasms. Treatment involves wide surgical excision of individual lesions and removal of regional lymph node metastases. Important prognostic indicators in melanoma patients include tumor thickness, degree of ulceration, and presence of nodal metastases.

Historically, a formal Lymph Node Dissection (LND) was performed after wide local excision of the melanoma to prevent the dissemination of the tumor throughout the body. However, LND can be associated with significant morbidity, including nerve injury, seroma formation, and lymphedema. Sentinel Lymph Node (SLN) biopsy is a procedure that has been developed as a minimally invasive procedure not associated with any significant morbidity. In fact, Wrone et al., reported a less than 2% incidence of lymphedema after 235 procedures [1].

The SLN is defined as the first lymph node or nodes to receive lymphatic drainage from the primary, as such, are the nodes most likely to contain metastatic deposits. The SLN has been demonstrated in multiple studies to reflect the tumor status of the entire nodal basin in that region [2-6]. Typically, the SLN procedure begins with an intradermal injection of a Technetium sulfur colloid at the site of the primary several hours before the excision of the node or nodes is to be performed. A handheld gamma probe used by the surgeon will detect the radioactive tracer as it collects at the node. Additionally, many institutions use Isosulfan blue dye of approximately 1 ml injected subdermally to improve detection of the SLN by adding a visual component to the procedure.

A small incision is made over the radioactive SLN, and all blue-stained and/or radioactive lymph nodes are removed. Approximately 1 to 4 nodes are usually removed, and afterwards the gamma probe is used to determine that bed counts are less than 10% of the counts of the least radioactive SLN. This ensures that all radioactive SLNs have been removed.

Several studies have documented 95% success rate of this method in patients undergoing SLN mapping when both radiocolloid and blue dye localization are employed [7-9]. Additionally, the false negative rate of this procedure has been reported at less than 1% [7].

At present, there is a consensus view that sentinel lymph node biopsy should be performed on melanomas with a Breslow depth greater than 1.0 mm [10-14]. Balch et al., demonstrated a statistically significant survival advantage to SLN biopsy in over 5000 patients with melanomas >1 mm (68.5% reduction in mortality compared with patients staged to be N0 by clinical exam and ELND). The survival advantage of SLN biopsy was statistically significant for each T-stage category (T2, T3 and T4). There was no advantage to SLN biopsy in patients with melanomas <1 mm [14].

However, sentinel lymph node biopsy for T1 melanomas (those tumors of Breslow depths less than or equal to 1 mm) and, particularly, biopsy for those between 0.75 mm and 1.0 mm is controversial [4,15-18]. Arguments against SLNB include a low risk for regional metastases, minimal therapeutic and survival advantage, and potential morbidity such as lymphedema [19,20]. Additionally, survival rates for T1 patients generally range from 91 to 95%, and patients with melanomas less than 1.0 mm in depth have a relatively low risk (2% to 6%) of metastatic melanoma in the SLN node [8,10,21,22]. Compare this to when all patients with melanoma between 1 and 4 mm in depth are considered, the risk of SLN positivity ranges from 15% to 20% [23-25].

Arguments for SLNB for those melanomas of Breslow depth between 0.75 and 1.0 mm include identification of patients who are at an increased risk of early metastases and local recurrence. It is speculated that early identification may confer a therapeutic and survival advantage, although this has not been proven [26-29]. Nonetheless, most physicians offer SLN mapping to patients with thin melanoma (1 mm or less) if it is a Clark’s level IV lesion or deeper [30]. This recommendation is based on data to suggest that in patients with otherwise favorable melanoma based on Breslow depth (0.76 mm or less), Clark’s level IV, and severe histologic regression are independently predictive of mortality from recurrent disease [31]. Similarly, McKinnon et al., suggest SLN biopsy may be reasonable in patients with melanoma of 1 mm or less in the presence of one or more poor prognostic features. Those include ulceration, mitotic rate, and Breslow thickness between 0.76 and 1 mm [32].
Methods
Approximately 1500 pathology reports from the years 1987 through 2005 were evaluated. Approximately 300 of these reports contained information on sentinel lymph node biopsy status. From these 300 reports, Breslow depth, Clark staging, and sentinel lymph node biopsy status were recorded. In all, thirty patients fell within the 0.75 to 1.0 mm Breslow depth and had the necessary sentinel lymph node biopsies performed. In addition, 60 patients fell within Breslow depths between 1.0 and 2.0 mm. These two groups were compared for rates of lymph node positivity. In addition, an attempt was made to determine if Clark’s level added any predictive value to lymph node status.

Note: As a consequence of being a chart-review based retrospective analysis, no IRB was required for this study.
Results and Discussion
Of the thirty patients who fell within the 0.75 to 1.0 mm Breslow depth, Table illustrates that 2 of these patients or 6% had positive sentinel lymph node biopsies, which, falls into the range of previous reports of 3 to 6% [8,10,21,22]. This study also revealed (not in table) a 20% (12/60) positive sentinel node percent for those melanomas with Breslow depths between 1 and 2 mm, which, also seems congruous with results of other authors [23-25]. Although the pathology reports did not uniformly provide Clark’s level as well as Breslow depth, the two positive sentinel nodes were from melanomas with advanced Clark’s levels of IV and V (Table 1), whereas only 35% of the negative node melanomas had levels of ulceration this advanced (Table 2). This finding further substantiates the recommendation that SLN biopsies be performed for thin melanomas with Clark’s level of IV or greater [30-32].
Conclusion
Though the data subset scrutinized in this study is small at thirty patients, the risk of lymph node positivity in thin melanomas as offered by this study is 6%, falling in line with previous reports of 3 to 6% [8,10,21,22]. The data from this study further suggests that sentinel lymph node biopsies should be performed for melanomas with Breslow depths between 0.75 and 1.0 mm, if a Clark’s level IV or greater, confirming previous reports [30-32].

References
  1. Wrone DA, Tanabe KK, Cosimi AB, Gadd MA, Souba WW, et al. (2000) Lymphedema after sentinel lymph node biopsy for cutaneous melanoma: a report of 5 cases. Arch Dermatol 136: 511-514.
  2. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, Economou JS, Cagle LA, et al. (1992) Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 127: 392-399.
  3. Lingam MK, Mackie RM, McKay AJ (1997) Intraoperative identification of sentinel lymph node in patients with malignant melanoma. Br J Cancer 75: 1505-1508.
  4. Reintgen D, Rapaport D, Tanabe KK, Ross M (1997) Lymphatic mapping and sentinel node biopsy in patients with malignant melanoma. J Fla Med Assoc 84: 188-193.
  5. Messina JL, Glass LF (1997) Pathologic examination of the sentinel lymph node. J Fla Med Assoc 84: 153-156.
  6. Joseph E, Messina J, Glass FL, Cruse CW, Rapaport DP, et al. (1997) Radioguided surgery for the ultrastaging of the patient with melanoma. Cancer J Sci Am 3: 341-345.
  7. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Essner R, Elashoff R, Stern SL, et al. (1999) 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 230: 453-463.
  8. Harlow SP, Krag DN, Ashikaga T, Weaver DL, Meijer SJ, et al. (2001) Gamma probe guided biopsy of the sentinel node in malignant melanoma: a multicentre study. Melanoma Res 11: 45-55.
  9. Porter GA, Ross MI, Berman RS, Sumner WE 3rd, Lee JE, et al. (2000) How many lymph nodes are enough during sentinel lymphadenectomy for primary melanoma? Surgery 128: 306-311.
  10. Clary BM, Brady MS, Lewis JJ, Coit DG (2001) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in the management of patients with primary cutaneous melanoma: review of a large single-institutional experience with an emphasis on recurrence. Ann Surg 233: 250-258.
  11. Wagner JD, Corbett L, Park HM, Davidson D, Coleman JJ, et al. (2000) Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: experience with 234 consecutive procedures. Plast Reconstr Surg 105: 1956-1966.
  12. Bachter D, Michl C, Büchels H, Vogt H, Balda BR (2001) The predictive value of the sentinel lymph node in malignant melanomas. Recent Results Cancer Res 158: 129-136.
  13. Blaheta HJ, Schittek B, Breuninger H, Garbe C (2001) Detection of micrometastasis in sentinel lymph nodes of patients with primary cutaneous melanoma. Recent Results Cancer Res 158: 137-146.
  14. Balch CM, Soong S, Ross MI, Urist MM, Karakousis CP, et al. (2000) Long-term results of a multi-institutional randomized trial comparing prognostic factors and surgical results for intermediate thickness melanomas (1.0 to 4.0 mm). Intergroup Melanoma Surgical Trial. Ann Surg Oncol 7: 87-97.
  15. Frahm SO, Schubert C, Parwaresch R, Rudolph P (2001) High proliferative activity may predict early metastasis of thin melanomas. Hum Pathol 32: 1376-1381.
  16. Pontikes LA, Temple WJ, Cassar SL, Lafrenière R, Huchcroft SA, et al. (1993) Influence of level and depth on recurrence rate in thin melanomas. Am J Surg 165: 225-228.
  17. Büttner P, Garbe C, Bertz J, Burg G, d'Hoedt B, et al. (1995) Primary cutaneous melanoma. Optimized cutoff points of tumor thickness and importance of Clark's level for prognostic classification. Cancer 75: 2499-2506.
  18. McMasters KM, Reintgen DS, Ross MI, Gershenwald JE, Edwards MJ, et al. (2001) Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: controversy despite widespread agreement. J Clin Oncol 19: 2851-2855.
  19. Slingluff CL Jr, Seigler HF (1992) “Thin” malignant melanoma: risk factors and clinical management. Ann Plast Surg 28: 89-94.
  20. Fearfield LA, Rowe A, Francis N, Fisher C, Gore ME, et al. (2001) Clinico-pathological features of relapsing very thin melanoma. Clin Exp Dermatol 26: 686-695.
  21. Balch CM, Buzaid AC, Soong SJ, Atkins MB, Cascinelli N, et al. (2001) Final version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol 19: 3635-3648.
  22. Gershenwald JE, Thompson W, Mansfield PF, Lee JE, Colome MI, et al. (1999) Multi-institutional melanoma lymphatic mapping experience: the prognostic value of sentinel lymph node status in 612 stage I or II melanoma patients. J Clin Oncol 17: 976-983.
  23. Joseph E, Brobeil A, Glass F, Glass J, Messina J, et al. (1998) Results of complete lymph node dissection in 83 melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes. Ann Surg Oncol 5: 119-125.
  24. Landi G, Polverelli M, Moscatelli G, Morelli R, Landi C, et al. (2000) Sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma: study of 455 cases. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 14: 35-45.
  25. Bleicher RJ, Essner R, Foshag LJ, Wanek LA, Morton DL (2003) Role of sentinel lymphadenectomy in thin invasive cutaneous melanomas. J Clin Oncol 21: 1326-1331.
  26. Cook MG, Spatz A, Brocker EB, Ruiter DJ (2002) Identification of histological features associated with metastatic potential in thin (<1.0 mm) cutaneous melanoma with metastases. A study on behalf of the EORTC Melanoma Group. J Pathol 197: 188-193.
  27. Corsetti RL, Allen HM, Wanebo HJ (2000) Thin < or = 1 mm level III and IV melanomas are higher risk lesions for regional failure and warrant sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 7: 456-460.
  28. Gershenwald JE, Colome MI, Lee JE, Mansfield PF, Tseng C, et al. (1998) Patterns of recurrence following a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy in 243 patients with stage I or II melanoma. J Clin Oncol 16: 2253-2260.
  29. Statius Muller MG, Borgstein PJ, Pijpers R, van Leeuwen PA, van Diest PJ, et al. (2000) Reliability of the sentinel node procedure in melanoma patients: analysis of failures after long-term follow-up. Ann Surg Oncol 7: 461-468.
  30. Dubois RW, Swetter SM, Atkins M, McMasters K, Halbert R, et al. (2001) Developing indications for the use of sentinel lymph node biopsy and adjuvant high-dose interferon alfa-2b in melanoma. Arch Dermatol 137: 1217-1224.
  31. Slingluff CL Jr, Vollmer RT, Reintgen DS, Seigler HF (1988) Lethal “thin” malignant melanoma. Identifying patients at risk. Ann Surg 208: 150-161.
  32. McKinnon JG, Yu XQ, McCarthy WH, Thompson JF (2003) Prognosis for patients with thin cutaneous melanoma: long-term survival data from New South Wales Central Cancer Registry and the Sydney Melanoma Unit. Cancer 98: 1223-1231.

Tables
2 Positive SLNBx Breslow Depth Clark’s level
  0.80 mm V
  0.79 mm IV
Table 1: Breslow Depth and Clark’s Level -Correlation with Positive SLNBx.

2 Positive SLNBx
(17 with recorded Clark’s level, 11 not recorded)

Breslow Depth Clark’s level
11/17 = 65% 0.75 mm - 1.00 mm I, II, III
6/17 = 35% 0.75 mm - 1.00 mm IV, V
11 0.75 mm - 1.00 mm Not recorded
Table 2: Constant Breslow Depth with Increasing Clark’s Level - Correlation with Positive SLNBx.

Citation: Hughes K, Jewell W, Brown CS (2015) Examining the Utility of Performing Sentinel Node Biopsies for T1 Melanomas with Breslow Depths between 0.75 and 1.0 mm: A Review of a 20 Year Experience. J Clin Dermatol Ther 2: 013.