Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The Number of Lymph Nodes Involved with Metastatic Disease Does Not Affect Outcome in Melanoma Patients as Long as All Disease Is Confined to the Sentinel Lymph Node

  • Melanomas
  • Published:
Annals of Surgical Oncology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

In melanoma, a direct relationship exists between the number of nodes involved with metastatic disease and prognosis. This study was undertaken to determine whether an individual with metastatic disease confined to the sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) would have a better prognosis than individuals with metastatic disease that has spread to the non-SLNs, regardless of the number of nodes involved.

Methods

The study group consists of 229 melanoma patients with a positive SLN who underwent regional nodal dissection. Cox proportional hazard regression models were used to assess association of the number of SLNs and non-SLNs involved with disease with overall survival (OS) and disease-free survival (DFS).

Results

DFS and OS were unchanged regardless of how many SLNs were positive, as long as all disease was confined to SLNs. Among 183 patients without involvement of non-SLNs, OS remained the same despite an increasing number of SLNs involved (P = .59). This was true after controlling for ulceration, Breslow depth, age, sex, and adjuvant treatment. Once disease was present beyond the SLN, DFS and OS were negatively affected. Among patients with involvement of non-SLNs, there was no statistically significant association between the number of positive SLNs and survival. The risk of mortality increased with the number of non-SLNs involved with metastatic disease (P < .001).

Conclusions

The number of regional nodes involved with metastatic disease does not affect DFS and OS if disease is confined to the SLNs. Consideration should be given to specifying SLN versus non-SLN involvement in the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging manual.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Balch CM, Soon SJ, Gershenwald JE, et al. Prognostic factors analysis of 17,600 melanoma patients: validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system. J Clin Oncol. 2001;19:3622–34.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Greene FL, Page DL, Fleming ID, et al. Melanoma of the skin in AJCC cancer staging manual. 6th ed. New York: Springer-Verlag, 2002. p. 209–17.

  3. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy or nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2006;355:1307–17.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Houghton AN, Akerley W, Bickakjian CK, Daud A, Dilawari RA. Melanoma. NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology 2009. Available at: http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/melanoma.pdf. Accessed April 13, 2009.

  5. James JW, Reintgen D. Regional lymph node surgery for patients with malignant melanoma. In: Rigel DS, Dzubow LM, Reingen DS, Bystryn JC, Marks R, editors. Cancer of the skin. Philadelphia: Elsevier Saunders; 2005. p. 561–71.

  6. Kaplan E, Meier P. Non-parametric estimation from incomplete observations. JASA. 1958;53:457–81.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Therneau TM, Grambsch PM. Modeling survival data: extending the Cox model. In: Gail KK, Samet JM, Tsiatis A, Wong W, editors. Statistics for biology and health. New York: Springer; 2000. p. 333–45.

  8. Singletary SE, Shallenberger R, Guinee FV, McBride CM. Melanoma with metastasis to regional axillary or inguinal lymph nodes: prognostic factors and results of surgical treatment in 714 patients. South Med J. 1988;81:5–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. White RR, Stanley WE, Johnson JL, Tyler DS, Seigler HF. Long-term survival in 2,505 patients with melanoma with regional lymph node metastasis. Ann Surg. 2002;235:879–87.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Cascinelli N, Vaglini M, Nava M, et al. Prognosis of skin melanoma with regional node metastases (stage II). J Surg Oncol. 1984;25:240–7.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Kissin MW, Simpson DA, Easton D, White H, Westbury G. Prognostic factors related to survival and groin recurrence following therapeutic lymph node dissection for lower limb malignant melanoma. Br J Surg. 1987;74:1023–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Karakousis CP, Seddik MK, Moore R. Prognostic value of lymph node dissection in malignant melanoma. Arch Surg. 1980;115:719–22.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. van Akkooi AC, Bouwhuis MG, van Geel AN, et al. Morbidity and prognosis after therapeutic lymph node dissections for malignant melanoma. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2007;33:102–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Takeuchi H, Kitajima H, Kitagawa Y. Sentinel lymph node as a target of molecular diagnosis of lymphatic micrometastasis and local immunoresponse to malignant cells. Cancer Sci. 2008;99:441–50.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Rinderknecht M, Detmar M. Tumor lymphangiogenesis and melanoma metastasis. J Cell Physiol. 2008;216:347–54.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Cascinelli N, Bombardieri E, Bufalino R, et al. Sentinel and nonsentinel node status in stage IB and II melanoma patients: two-step prognostic indicators of survival. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4464–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Lee JH, Essner R, Torisu-Itakura H, et al. Factors predictive of tumor-positive nonsentinel lymph nodes after tumor-positive sentinel lymph node dissection for melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2004;22:3677–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Jakub JW, Reintgen DS, Shivers S, Pendas S. Regional node dissection for melanoma: techniques and indication. Surg Oncol Clin N Am. 2007;16:247–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Sabel MS, Griffith K, Sondak VK, et al. Predictors of nonsentinel lymph node positivity in patients with a positive sentinel node for melanoma. J Am Coll Surg. 2005;201:37–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. McMasters KM, Wong SL, Edwards MJ, et al. Frequency of nonsentinel lymph node metastasis in melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9:137–41.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Roka F, Mastan P, Binder M, et al. Prediction of non-sentinel node status and outcome in sentinel node-positive melanoma patients. Eur J Surg Oncol. 2008;34:82–8.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Wong SL, Edwards MJ, Chao C, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for breast cancer: impact of the number of sentinel nodes removed on the false-negative rate. J Am Coll Surg. 2001;192:684–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Satzger I, Volker B, Meier A, Kapp A, Gutzmer R. Criteria in sentinel lymph nodes of melanoma patients that predict involvement of nonsentinel lymph nodes. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15:1723–32.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Vuylsteke RJ, Borgstein PJ, van Leeuwen PA, et al. Sentinel lymph node tumor load: an independent predictor of additional lymph node involvement and survival in melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12:440–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Morton DL, Scheri RP, Balch CM. Can completion lymph node dissection be avoided for a positive sentinel node in melanoma? Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14:2437–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cox C, DuPont EL, Furman B, et al. The clinical relevance of positive sentinel nodes only versus positive nonsentinel lymph nodes in breast cancer patients. Am J Surg. 2003;186:333–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Ariyan C, Brady MS, Gonen M, Busam K, Coit D. Positive nonsentinel node status predicts mortality in patients with cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16:186–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgment

We thank Lisa Kleis and Maureen Zimmermann for their assistance in preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Surgery, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    James W. Jakub MD

  2. Department of Biostatistics, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USA

    Marianne Huebner PhD & William S. Harmsen

  3. Department of Surgical Oncology, Lakeland Regional Cancer Center, Lakeland, FL, USA

    Steve Shivers PhD, Christopher Nobo & Douglas S. Reintgen MD

  4. Department of Surgery, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer and Research Center, Tampa, FL, USA

    Christopher Puleo

Authors
  1. James W. Jakub MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Marianne Huebner PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Steve Shivers PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Christopher Nobo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Christopher Puleo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. William S. Harmsen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Douglas S. Reintgen MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to James W. Jakub MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Jakub, J.W., Huebner, M., Shivers, S. et al. The Number of Lymph Nodes Involved with Metastatic Disease Does Not Affect Outcome in Melanoma Patients as Long as All Disease Is Confined to the Sentinel Lymph Node. Ann Surg Oncol 16, 2245–2251 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0530-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-009-0530-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation