Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Mitotic Rate and Younger Age Are Predictors of Sentinel Lymph Node Positivity: Lessons Learned From the Generation of a Probabilistic Model

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

Abstract

Background: Sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy allows surgeons to identify patients with subclinical nodal involvement who may benefit from lymphadenectomy and, possibly, adjuvant therapy. Several factors have been variably, and sometimes discordantly, reported to have predictive value for SLN metastasis to best select which patients require SLN biopsy.

Methods: We reviewed 419 patients who underwent SLN biopsy for melanoma from a prospectively collected melanoma database. To derive a probabilistic model for the occurrence of a positive SLN, a multivariate logistic model was fit by using a stepwise variable selection method. The accuracy of each model was evaluated by using receiver operator characteristic curves.

Results: On univariate analysis, the number of mitoses per square millimeter, increasing Breslow depth, decreasing age, ulceration, and melanoma on the trunk showed a significant relationship to a positive SLN. Multivariate analysis revealed that once age, mitotic rate, and Breslow thickness were included, no other factor, including ulceration, was significantly associated with a positive SLN. The data suggest that younger patients with tumors <1 mm may still have a substantial risk for a positive SLN, especially if the mitotic rate is high.

Conclusions: In addition to Breslow depth, mitoses per square millimeter and younger age were factors identified as independent predictors of a positive SLN. This model may identify patients with thin melanoma at sufficient risk for metastases to justify SLN biopsy.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Morton DL, Thompson JF, Essner R, et al. 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 1999;230:453–63.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Gershenwald JE, Thompson W, Mansfield PF, et al. 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 1999;17:976–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Cherpelis BS, Haddad F, Messina J, et al. Sentinel lymph node micrometastasis and other histologic factors that predict outcome in patients with thicker melanomas. J Am Acad Dermatol 2001; 44:762–6.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Thompson JF, Uren RF, Shaw HM, et al. Location of sentinel lymph nodes in patients with cutaneous melanoma: new insights into lymphatic anatomy. J Am Coll Surg 1999;189:195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg 1992;127:392–9.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. McMasters KM, Reintgen DS, Ross MI, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: controversy despite widespread agreement. J Clin Oncol 2001;19:2851–5.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cascinelli N, Belli F, Santinami M, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy in cutaneous melanoma: the WHO Melanoma Program experience. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7:469–74.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Mraz-Gernhard S, Sagebiel RW, Kashani-Sabet M, Miller JR III, Leong SP. Prediction of sentinel lymph node micrometastasis by histological features in primary cutaneous malignant melanoma. Arch Dermatol 1998;134:983–7.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Belli F, Lenisa L, Clemente C, et al. Sentinel node biopsy and selective dissection for melanoma nodal metastases. Tumori 1998;84:24–8.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Lenisa L, Santinami M, Belli F, et al. Sentinel node biopsy and selective lymph node dissection in cutaneous melanoma patients. J Exp Clin Cancer Res 1999;18:69–74.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gershenwald JE, Mansfield PF, Lee JE, Ross MI. Role for lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with thick (≥4 mm) primary melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7:160–5.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Essner R, Conforti A, Kelley MC, et al. Efficacy of lymphatic mapping, sentinel lymphadenectomy, and selective complete lymph node dissection as a therapeutic procedure for early-stage melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol 1999;6:442–9.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nguyen CL, McClay EF, Cole DJ, et al. Melanoma thickness and histology predict sentinel lymph node status. Am J Surg 2001;181:8–11.

    Google Scholar 

  14. McMasters KM, Wong SL, Edwards MJ, et al. Factors that predict the presence of sentinel lymph node metastasis in patients with melanoma. Surgery 2001;130:151–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Balch CM, Soong S-J, 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.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Clary BM, Brady MS, Lewis JJ, Coit DG. 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 2001;233:250–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Joseph E, Brobeil A, Glass F, et al. Results of complete lymph node dissection in 83 melanoma patients with positive sentinel nodes. Ann Surg Oncol 1998;5:119–25.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Bedrosian I, Faries MB, Guerry D IV, et al. Incidence of sentinel node metastasis in patients with thin primary melanoma (≤1 mm) with vertical growth phase. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7:262–7.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Sabel MS, Gibbs JF, Cheney R, McKinley BP, Lee JS, Kraybill WG. Evolution of sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma at a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center. Surgery 2000;128:556–63.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Wagner JD, Gordon MS, Chuang TY, et al. Predicting sentinel and residual lymph node basin disease after sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma. Cancer 2000;89:453–62.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Jansen L, Nieweg OE, Peterse JL, Hoefnagel CA, Olmos RAV, Kroon BBR. Reliability of sentinel lymph node biopsy for staging melanoma. Br J Surg 2000;87:484–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Gershenwald JE, Tseng CH, Thompson W, et al. Improved sentinel lymph node localization in patients with primary melanoma with the use of radiolabeled colloid. Surgery 1998;124:203–10.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Porter GA, Ross MI, Berman RS, Lee JE, Mansfield PF, Gershenwald JE. Significance of multiple nodal basin drainage in truncal melanoma patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy. Ann Surg Oncol 2000;7:256–61.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Karimipour DJ, Lowe L, Su L, et al. Standard immunostains for melanoma in sentinel lymph node specimens: which ones are most useful? J Am Acad Dermatol (in press).

  25. Spatz A, Cook MG, Elder DE, Piepkorn M, Ruiter DJ, Barnhill RL. Interobserver reproducibility of ulceration assessment in primary cutaneous melanomas. Eur J Cancer 2003;39:1861–5.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Zapas JL, Coley HC, Beam SL, Brown SD, Jablonski KA, Elias EG. The risk of regional lymph node metastases in patients with melanoma less than 1.0 mm thick: recommendations for sentinel lymph node biopsy. J Am Coll Surg 2003;197:403–7.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Departments of Surgery, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

    Vernon K. Sondak MD, Michael S. Sabel MD, Amelia C. Grover MD, Alfred E. Chang MD, Alan M. Yahanda MD & Timothy M. Johnson MD

  2. Biostatistics, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

    Jeremy M. G. Taylor PhD, Yue Wang PhD & James Moon MS

  3. Pathology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

    Lori Lowe MD

  4. Dermatology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

    Lori Lowe MD & Timothy M. Johnson MD

  5. Otolaryngology, University of Michigan Health System, Ann Arbor, Michigan

    Timothy M. Johnson MD

  6. Room 3306, Cancer Center, 1500 East Medical Center Drive, Ann Arbor, MI, 48109-0932

    Vernon K. Sondak MD

Authors
  1. Vernon K. Sondak MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jeremy M. G. Taylor PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Michael S. Sabel MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yue Wang PhD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Lori Lowe MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Amelia C. Grover MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Alfred E. Chang MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Alan M. Yahanda MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. James Moon MS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Timothy M. Johnson MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Vernon K. Sondak MD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Sondak, V.K., Taylor, J.M.G., Sabel, M.S. et al. Mitotic Rate and Younger Age Are Predictors of Sentinel Lymph Node Positivity: Lessons Learned From the Generation of a Probabilistic Model. Ann Surg Oncol 11, 247–258 (2004). https://doi.org/10.1245/ASO.2004.03.044

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/ASO.2004.03.044

Key Words

Search

Navigation