Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

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

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

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.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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. Breslow A. Thickness, cross-sectional areas, and depth of invasion in the prognosis of cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg. 1970;172:902–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Hilsenbeck SG, Clark GM. Practical p value adjustment for optimally selected cut points. Stat Med. 1996;15:103–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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. Cumming G, Finch S. Inference by eye: confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. Am Psychol. 2005;60:170–80.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Woodward M. Epidemiology: study design and data analysis. 2nd ed. Boca Raton: Chapman and Hall/CRC Press; 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  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.

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Shaw HM, McCarthy WH, McCarthy SW, Milton GW. Thin malignant melanomas and recurrence potential. Arch Surg. 1987;122:1147–50.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  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.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Glusac EJ. The melanoma “epidemic”: lessons from prostate cancer. J Cutan Pathol. 2012;39:17–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  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.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Disclosure

There are no conflicts of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, North Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Serigne N. Lo PhD, Richard A. Scolyer MD & John F. Thompson MD

  2. Sydney Medical School, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Serigne N. Lo PhD, Richard A. Scolyer MD & John F. Thompson MD

  3. Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Camperdown, NSW, Australia

    Richard A. Scolyer MD & John F. Thompson MD

Authors
  1. Serigne N. Lo PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Richard A. Scolyer MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. John F. Thompson MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to John F. Thompson MD.

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 877 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lo, S.N., Scolyer, R.A. & Thompson, J.F. 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. Ann Surg Oncol 25, 894–902 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6325-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-017-6325-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation