IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0252021.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Survival of sentinel node biopsy versus observation in intermediate-thickness melanoma: A Dutch population-based study

Author

Listed:
  • R M H Roumen
  • M S Schuurman
  • M J Aarts
  • A J G Maaskant-Braat
  • G Vreugdenhil
  • W J Louwman

Abstract

Background: The Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial (MSLT-1) comparing survival after a sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) versus nodal observation in melanoma patients did not show a significant benefit favoring SLNB. However, in subgroup analyses melanoma-specific survival among patients with nodal metastases seemed better. Aim: To evaluate the association of performing a SLNB with overall survival in intermediate thickness melanoma patients in a Dutch population-based daily clinical setting. Methods: Survival, excess mortality adjusted for age, gender, Breslow-thickness, ulceration, histological subtype, location, co-morbidity and socioeconomic status were calculated in a population of 1,989 patients diagnosed with malignant cutaneous melanoma (1.2–3.5 mm) on the trunk or limb between 2000–2016 in ten hospitals in the South East area, The Netherlands. Results: A SLNB was performed in 51% of the patients (n = 1008). Ten-year overall survival after SLNB was 75% (95%CI, 71%-78%) compared to 61% (95%CI 57%-64%) following observation. After adjustment for risk factors, a lower risk on death (HR = 0.80, 95%CI 0.66–0.96) was found after SLNB compared to observation only. Conclusions: SLNB in patients with intermediate-thickness melanoma on trunk or limb resulted in a 14% absolute and significant 10-year survival difference compared to those without SLNB.

Suggested Citation

  • R M H Roumen & M S Schuurman & M J Aarts & A J G Maaskant-Braat & G Vreugdenhil & W J Louwman, 2021. "Survival of sentinel node biopsy versus observation in intermediate-thickness melanoma: A Dutch population-based study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-13, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0252021
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252021
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252021
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252021&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0252021?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0252021. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.