Thick cutaneous melanoma of the trunk and extremities: an institutional review

One-cm Versus 2-cm Excision Margins for Patients With Intermediate Thickness Melanoma: A Matched-Pair Analysis

BACKGROUND

Optimum excision margins used in the removal of intermediate thickness melanomas remain unclear.

OBJECTIVE

This study's aim was to compare the clinical outcomes of 1-cm margins with 2-cm margins in patients with a tumor thickness of 1.1- to 4.0-mm.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study, which was based on a matched-pairs design. Equal patient cohorts were constructed in terms of gender, age, Breslow thickness, and the anatomic location of the primary lesion. There were 80 patients whom underwent an excision with a 1-cm margin and 80 patients with a 2-cm margin. Follow-up data were analyzed by the Kaplan-Meier method and a Cox regression model.

RESULTS

After a median follow-up time of 41 months, there were no differences in relapse-free survival or melanoma-specific survival between study groups. The wound was closed directly in 62 patients (78%) in the 1-cm group and in 36 patients (45%) in the 2-cm group (p < .001).

CONCLUSION

A 1-cm excision margin may be sufficient in melanomas of 1.1 to 2.0 mm in Breslow thickness based on these findings of low recurrence. With thicker tumors (2.1-4.0 mm), this recommendation cannot be given due to inherent study limitations.

The importance of adequate primary tumor excision margins and sentinel node biopsy in achieving optimal locoregional control for patients with thick primary melanomas

OBJECTIVE

This study sought to investigate the impact of histopathologically measured excision margins and SNB on local and locoregional disease control in patients with primary cutaneous melanomas more than 4 mm thick.

BACKGROUND

Most current guidelines recommend at least a 2-cm surgical margin (which corresponds to a 16-mm histopathologic margin). These guidelines are based on limited evidence, mostly obtained in patients who did not have an SNB.

METHODS

Histopathologic tumor excision margins for clinically lymph node-negative patients with melanomas more than 4 mm thick, treated at Melanoma Institute Australia (1992-2009), were determined. Clinicopathologic predictors of local and locoregional disease-free survival were investigated.

RESULTS

There were 632 patients eligible for the study; of these, 397 (62.8%) had an SNB. The median histopathologic excision margin was 15 mm (interquartile range, 11.0-19.5 mm). After a median follow-up of 37 months, local and locoregional recurrences were observed in 48 (7.6%) and 159 (25.2%) patients, respectively. Excision margin as a continuous variable was a significant predictor of local [hazard ratio (HR), 0.91; P < 0.001) and locoregional (HR, 0.97; P = 0.042) tumor control on multivariate analyses. Patients with histopathologic margins 16 mm or less had worse local disease-free survival (HR, 2.41; P = 0.01). Patients who did not have an SNB were at higher risk of locoregional recurrence (HR, 1.67; P = 0.003).

CONCLUSIONS

Histopathologically determined primary tumor excision margins more than 16 mm, corresponding to 2-cm surgical margins, were associated with better local control in patients with melanomas more than 4 mm thick. Patients achieved the best local and locoregional control when SNB was coupled with a more than 16-mm histologic excision margin.

Follow-up requirements for thick cutaneous melanoma

The primary aim of postoperative melanoma follow-up is the early detection and treatment of treatable recurrences which gives a survival advantage to these patients. The need for follow-up is universally accepted. However, there is ongoing controversy about the duration of follow-up and frequency of reviews. We present a retrospective review of 244 patients with localised thick (> or = 4.0 mm) cutaneous melanoma, who had completed a 10-year follow-up or had died form their melanoma within 10 years. For these criteria, this is the largest series of this type which has been reported to date. The incidence of treatable recurrences peaked in the first postoperative year at 40% and then rapidly decreased, levelling off after year 5 at 2.5% per annum. We believe that this high incidence of treatable recurrences reinforces the need for 10-year follow-up of these patients. We also recommend that the annual frequency of follow-up reviews in each year be based on that year's risk for getting a treatable recurrence. Following this principle, we provide an example of such a follow-up programme.