4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Prognostic implications of multiple lymphatic basin drainage in patients with truncal melanoma

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 23, 期 3, 页码 518-524

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.00.075

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Lymphatic drainage to multiple basins (MLBD) is frequently observed in patients with truncal melanoma undergoing sentinel lymph node (SLN) mapping. Recently published data suggest that patients with MLBD are at increased risk of nodal metastases compared with those with single lymphatic basin drainage (SLBD). We studied the impact of MLBD on SLN positivity and survival. Patients and Methods We identified 266 patients with truncal melanoma undergoing SLN mapping and biopsy from 1995 to 2001. MLBD was defined as lymphoscintigraphic and intraoperative identification of an SLN in more than one nodal basin. Clinical and pathologic variables were recorded and analyzed for their impact on survival. Results MLBD occurred in 76 patients (29%), and SLBD occurred in 190 patients (71%). Clinical and pathologic variables were similar between the two groups, although there were more males in the MLBD group (78% v 64%; P = .034). Patients with MLBD did not have higher risk for positive SLNs compared with those with SLBD (22% v 21%, respectively). Five-year survival for patients with MLBD was less favorable than that of patients with SLBD (68% v 78%, respectively; log-rank P = .04). Multivariate analysis revealed that increasing Breslow thickness (P < .001), SLN metastasis (P < .001), and MLBD (P = .04) were independent predictors of poor overall and relapse-free survival. The negative prognostic implication of MLBD remained significant when only patients with negative SLNs were analyzed (relative risk, 2.7; P = .03). Conclusion MLBD in patients with truncal melanoma undergoing SLN mapping is associated with a less favorable survival compared with patients with SLBD, independent of SLN status. (C) 2005 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据