Prognosis based on primary breast carcinoma instead of pathological nodal status.

In breast cancer patients, prognostic information required to plan post-surgical therapy is obtained mainly through axillary dissection. This study was designed to establish a new prognostic score based solely on parameters of the primary tumour as an alternative to axillary surgery in assessing prognosis. Eight different prognostic factors, including menopausal status, tumour size, grading, lymphatic invasion, desmoplasia, necrosis, c-erbB-2 and laminin receptor expression, were evaluated retrospectively on a large series of primary breast carcinoma patients. From multivariate analysis, four independent parameters were selected and examined, alone and in combination, for their prognostic potential. These parameters were used to generate a prognostic score that was analysed retrospectively in 467 N0-N1a patients to determine its predictive value for survival. The score, which includes variables such as tumour size, grading, laminin receptor and c-erbB-2 overexpression, was established based on the number of negative prognostic factors: score 1 refers to cases in which all four parameters reflect a good prognosis, scores 2 and 3 refer to tumours in which, respectively, one or two of the four parameters reflect a poor prognosis, whereas score 4 refers to tumours with three or four poor prognosis factors. Analysis of the overall survival of the four score groups shows that patients with score 1 tumours (22% of the total) had the best prognosis with a 15 year survival of 82%, patients with score 2 and 3 had an intermediate prognosis, whereas score 4 patients had the poorest prognosis with a 15 year survival of only 38%. Moreover, survival in the N+ score 1 cases was found to be longer than that in the total N- patients. Our data suggest that the primary tumour score provides more reliable prognostic information than pathological nodal status, and that axillary dissection can be avoided in a large number of patients

Prognosis of Sentinel Node Staged Patients with Primary Cutaneous Melanoma

Background: This study investigated survival probabilities and prognostic factors in sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) staged patients with cutaneous melanoma (CM) with the aim of defining subgroups of patients who are at higher risk for recurrences and who should be considered for adjuvant clinical trials.\ud \ud Methods: Patients with primary CM who underwent SLNB in the Department of Dermatology, University of Tuebingen, Germany, between 1996 and 2009 were included into this study. Survival probabilities and prognostic factors were evaluated by Kaplan-Meier and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models.\ud \ud Results: 1909 SLNB staged patients were evaluated. Median follow-up time was 44 months. Median tumor thickness was 1.8 mm, ulceration was present in 31.8% of cases. The 5-year Overall Survival (OS) was 90.3% in SLNB negative patients (IB 96.2%, IIA 87.0%, IIB 78.1%, IIC 72.6%). Patients with micrometastases (stage IIIA/B) had a 5-year OS rate of 70.9% which was clearly less favorable than for stages I–II. Multivariate analysis revealed tumor thickness, ulceration, body site, histopathologic subtype and SLNB status as independent significant prognostic factors.\ud \ud Conclusion: Survival rates of patients with primary CM in stages I–II were shown to be much more favorable than previously reported from non sentinel node staged collectives. For future clinical trials, sample size calculations should be adapted using survival probabilities based on sentinel node staging

Thick primary melanoma has a heterogeneous tumor biology: an institutional series

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Thick melanomas (TM) ≥4 mm have a high risk for nodal and distant metastases. Optimal surgical management, prognostic significance of sentinel node biopsy (SLNB), and benefits of interferon (IFN) for these patients are unclear. As a continuum of increasing tumor thickness is placed into a single TM group, differences in biologic and clinical behavior may be lost. The purpose of this study was to better characterize the diverse biology in TM, including the value of increasing thickness and nodal status information, potentially identifying high risk TM subgroups that may warrant more aggressive treatment/follow up.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>155 consecutive TM patients treated at a single institution between 1971 and 2007 were retrospectively reviewed. Patient, disease and treatment features were analyzed with respect to disease-free (DFS) and overall survival (OS).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Median patient age was 66 years and 68% of patients were men. The trunk was the most common TM location (35%), followed by the head and neck (29%) and lower extremities (20%). Median thickness was 6 mm and 61% were ulcerated. 6% patients had stage IV disease, 12% had clinical nodal metastases. Clinically negative lymph node basins were treated by observation (22 patients - 15.4%), elective lymph node dissection (ELND) (24 patients - 17.6%) or SLNB (91 patients - 67%). 75% of ELND's and 53% of SLNB's were positive. Completion node dissection was performed in 38 SLNB+ patients and 22% had additional positive nodes. 17% of the study patients received IFN. At median follow up of 26 months, 5 year DFS and OS were 42% and 43.6%. For SLNB positive vs negative, median DFS were 22 vs 111 months (p = 0.006) and median OS were 41 vs 111 months (p = 0.006). When stratified by tumor thickness ≤ vs > 6 mm, 5 year DFS was 58.3% vs 20% (p < 0.0001) and OS was 62% vs 20% (P < 0.0001). IFN had no impact on DFS or OS (p = 0.98 and 0.8 respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Within the high risk group of patients with TM, cases with tumor thickness > 6 mm or a positive SLNB had a significantly worse DFS and OS (p < .0001, <.0001 and .006, .006).</p

The influence of sentinel lymph node tumour burden on additional lymph node involvement and disease-free survival in cutaneous melanoma – a retrospective analysis of 392 cases

Twenty per cent of sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma patients have positive non-SLN lymph nodes in completion lymph node dissection (CLND). We investigated SLN tumour load, non-sentinel positivity and disease-free survival (DFS) to assess whether certain patients could be spared CLND. Sentinel lymph node biopsy was performed on 392 patients between 1999 and 2005. Median observation period was 38.8 months. Sentinel lymph node tumour load did not predict non-SLN positivity: 30.8% of patients with SLN macrometastases (⩾2 mm) and 16.4% with micrometastases (⩽2 mm) had non-SLN positivity (P=0.09). Tumour recurrences after positive SLNs were more than twice as frequent for SLN macrometastases (51.3%) than for micrometastases (24.6%) (P=0.005). For patients with SLN micrometastases, the DFS analysis was worse (P=0.003) when comparing those with positive non-SLNs (60% recurrences) to those without (17.6% recurrences). This difference did not translate into significant differences in DFS: patients with SLN micrometastasis, either with (P=0.022) or without additional positive non-SLNs (P<0.0001), fared worse than patients with tumour-free SLNs. The 2-mm cutoff for SLN tumour load accurately predicts differences in DFS. Non-SLN positivity in CLND, however, cannot be predicted. Therefore, contrary to other studies, no recommendations concerning discontinuation of CLND based on SLN tumour load can be deduced