Advertisement

Annals of Surgical Oncology

, Volume 25, Issue 4, pp 894–902 | Cite as

Long-Term Survival of Patients with Thin (T1) Cutaneous Melanomas: A Breslow Thickness Cut Point of 0.8 mm Separates Higher-Risk and Lower-Risk Tumors

  • Serigne N. Lo
  • Richard A. Scolyer
  • John F. ThompsonEmail author
Melanomas

Abstract

Background

Counterintuitively, more deaths from melanoma occur among patients with thin (T1) primary melanomas (≤ 1 mm) than among those with thick primary melanoma because the great majority present with T1 tumors. Therefore, it is important to stratify their risk as accurately as possible to guide their management and follow-up. This study sought to explore the relationship between tumor thickness and prognosis for patients with thin primary melanomas.

Methods

A retrospective, single-institution study investigated 6263 patients with cutaneous melanoma (including 2117 T1 cases) who had a minimum follow-up period of 10 years.

Results

For the entire patient cohort, the 10-year melanoma-specific survival (MSS) rate ranged between 92% for the patients with primary melanomas up to 0.3 mm thick and 32% for those with melanomas thicker than 8 mm. When divided into 25-quantile-thickness groups there was a significant difference in 10-year MSS between the two consecutive groups 0.8 and 0.9 mm; the differences in survival were not significantly different for any other consecutive cut points within the less than or equal to 1 mm thickness range, indicating a biologically-relevant difference in outcome above and below 0.8 mm. For the patients treated initially at the authors’ institution, the 10- and 20-year MSS rates for those with tumors up to 0.8 mm thick were respectively 93.4 and 85.7%, and for tumors 0.9 to 1.0 mm, the rates were respectively 81.1 and 71.4%. Only 29.3% of the T1 patients who died of melanoma were deceased within 5 years.

Conclusions

A naturally occurring thickness cut point of 0.8 mm predicts higher or lower risk for patients with thin primary cutaneous melanomas. Long-term follow-up assessment of patients with T1 melanoma is important because late mortality due to melanoma is more common than early mortality.

Notes

Disclosure

There are no conflicts of interest.

Supplementary material

10434_2017_6325_MOESM1_ESM.docx (869 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 877 kb)

References

  1. 1.
    Balch CM, Gershenwald JE, Soong SJ, Thompson JF, Atkins MB, Byrd DR, et al. Final version of 2009 AJCC melanoma staging and classification. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:6199–206.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balch CM, Soong SJ, Shaw HM, Milton GW. An analysis of prognostic factors in 8500 patients with cutaneous melanoma. In: Balch CM, Houghton AN, Milton GW, Sober AJ, Soong SJ, editors. Cutaneous melanoma: clinical management and treatment results worldwide. 2nd ed. JB Lipincott, Philadelphia, 1992, pp. 165–187.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Breslow A. Thickness, cross-sectional areas, and depth of invasion in the prognosis of cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg. 1970;172:902–8.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Garbe C, Buttner P, Bertz J, Burg G, d’Hoedt B, Drepper H, et al. Primary cutaneous melanoma: identification of prognostic groups and estimation of individual prognosis for 5093 patients. Cancer. 1995;75:2484–91.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Masback A, Olsson H, Westerdahl J, Ingvar C, Jonsson N. Prognostic factors in invasive cutaneous malignant melanoma: a population-based study and review. Melanoma Res. 2001;11:435–45.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Scolyer RA, Judge MJ, Evans A, Frishberg DP, Prieto VG, Thompson JF, et al, International collaboration on cancer R. Data set for pathology reporting of cutaneous invasive melanoma: recommendations from the international collaboration on cancer reporting (ICCR). Am J Surg Pathol. 2013;37:1797–814.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Buettner P, Garbe C, Guggenmoos-Holzmann I. Problems in defining cutoff points of continuous prognostic factors: example of tumor thickness in primary cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Epidemiol. 1997;50:1201–10.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gimotty PA, Elder DE, Fraker DL, Botbyl J, Sellers K, Elenitsas R, et al. Identification of high-risk patients among those diagnosed with thin cutaneous melanomas. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1129–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kalady MF, White RR, Johnson JL, Tyler DS, Seigler HF. Thin melanomas: predictive lethal characteristics from a 30-year clinical experience. Ann Surg. 2003;238:528–35.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Altman DG, Lausen B, Sauerbrei W, Schumacher M. Dangers of using “optimal” cut points in the evaluation of prognostic factors. J Natl Cancer Inst. 1994;86:829–35.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Contal C, O’Quigley J. An application of change-point methods in studying the effect of age on survival in breast cancer. Comput Stat Data Anal. 1999;30:253–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Faraggi D, Simon R. A simulation study of cross-validation for selecting an optimal cut point in univariate survival analysis. Stat Med. 1996;15:2203–13.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Hilsenbeck SG, Clark GM. Practical p value adjustment for optimally selected cut points. Stat Med. 1996;15:103–12.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hilsenbeck SG, Clark GM, McGuire WL. Why do so many prognostic factors fail to pan out? Breast Cancer Res Treat. 1992;22:197–206.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, Carducci MA, Compton CA, editors. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. 8th ed. New York: Springer International Publishing: 2017.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cumming G, Finch S. Inference by eye: confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. Am Psychol. 2005;60:170–80.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Woodward M. Epidemiology: study design and data analysis. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press; 2005.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Gershenwald JE, Scolyer RA, Hess KR, Sondak VK, Long GV, Ross MI, et al. Melanoma staging: evidence-based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Cancer Staging Manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67:472–92.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Green AC, Baade P, Coory M, Aitken JF, Smithers M. Population-based 20-year survival among people diagnosed with thin melanomas in Queensland, Australia. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30:1462–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mansson-Brahme E, Carstensen J, Erhardt K, Lagerlof B, Ringborg U, Rutqvist LE. Prognostic factors in thin cutaneous malignant melanoma. Cancer. 1994;73:2324–32.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Balch CM, Wilkerson JA, Murad TM, Soong SJ, Ingalls AL, Maddox WA. The prognostic significance of ulceration of cutaneous melanoma. Cancer. 1980;45:3012–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    McKinnon JG, Yu XQ, McCarthy WH, Thompson JF. Prognosis for patients with thin cutaneous melanoma: long-term survival data from New South Wales Central Cancer Registry and the Sydney Melanoma Unit. Cancer. 2003;98:1223–31.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shaw HM, McCarthy WH, McCarthy SW, Milton GW. Thin malignant melanomas and recurrence potential. Arch Surg. 1987;122:1147–50.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Yonick DV, Ballo RM, Kahn E, Dahiya M, Yao K, Godellas C, et al. Predictors of positive sentinel lymph node in thin melanoma. Am J Surg. 2011;201:324–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Keefe M, Mackie RM. The relationship between risk of death from clinical stage 1 cutaneous melanoma and thickness of primary tumour: no evidence for steps in risk. Br J Cancer. 1991;64:598–602.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Clark WH Jr, From L, Bernardino EA, et al. The histogenesis and biological behavior of primary human malignant melanoma of the skin. Cancer Res. 1969;29:705–27.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Scolyer R, Shaw H, Thompson J, Li L, Colman M, Lo S, et al. Interobserver reproducibility of histopathologic prognostic variables in primary cutaneous melanomas. Am J Surg Pathol. 2003;27:1571–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Murali R, Hughes M, FitzGerald P, Thompson J, Scolyer R. Interobserver variation in the histopathologic reporting of key prognostic parameters, particularly Clark level, affects pathologic staging of primary cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg. 2009;249:641–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Braun RP, Gutkowicz-Krusin D, Rabinovitz H, Cognetta A, Hofmann-Wellenhof R, Ahlgrimm-Siess V, et al. Agreement of dermatopathologists in the evaluation of clinically difficult melanocytic lesions: how golden is the “gold standard”? Dermatology. 2012;224:51–8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Glusac EJ. The melanoma “epidemic”: lessons from prostate cancer. J Cutan Pathol. 2012;39:17–20.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mihic-Probst D, Shea C, Duncan L, de la Fouchardiere A, Landman G, Landsberg J, et al. Update on thin melanoma: outcome of an international workshop. Adv Anat Pathol. 2016;23:24–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Monheit G, Cognetta AB, Ferris L, Rabinovitz H, Gross K, Martini M, et al. The performance of MelaFind: a prospective multicenter study. Arch Dermatol. 2011;147:188–94.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society of Surgical Oncology 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Serigne N. Lo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Richard A. Scolyer
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • John F. Thompson
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of SydneyNorth SydneyAustralia
  2. 2.Sydney Medical SchoolThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Royal Prince Alfred HospitalCamperdownAustralia

Personalised recommendations