Poster Presentation New Zealand Association of Plastic Surgeons ASM & AGM

How has melanoma care changed since MSLT-II?: A review of the literature (1310)

Charlotte Blau 1
  1. Plastic Surgery, MMH, Auckland

Background: 

Results of the MSLT-II trial, released in 2017, revolutionised melanoma treatment by demonstrating that clearance lymph node dissection (CLND) had no survival benefit over sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB).1 A new paradigm of post-positive-SLNB surveillance was born. However, although Fairies, et al described 4 sonographic lymph node abnormalities, the threshold for “suspicious” was not described. Use of USS for lymph nodes, and what qualifies as abnormal, has long been a point of contention, and a technical challenge due to inter-operator differences.2 Without an explicit suggested follow-up protocol, there is room for varied interpretation. This literature review seeks to establish how melanoma treatment and follow-up care, specifically that guided by USS, has been affected by the publication of MSLT-II.

 

Methods:

A PubMed search of (Melanoma) AND (Ultrasound) AND (Sentinel node), English language papers from 2018 to 2020. Exclusion criteria: no reference to MSLT-II, study performed prior to MSLT-II, non-human models. 92 abstracts were reviewed for relevance, full papers reviewed when the abstracts were inadequate, and 79 immediately excluded. Closer scrutiny of the remaining 13 left 5 eligible papers.

 

Results: 

5 papers: 2 national guidelines, 2 reviews, 1 prospective observational study.3,4,5,6,7

All papers supported the change in melanoma management from CLND to follow-up with surveillance USS in low risk patients with positive SLNBs. 3 papers described a concern regarding access to routine USS follow-up. There was no critique of the new standard of care in any paper. None specified an USS methodology or suggested criteria for an abnormal node on USS.

 

Conclusion:

 3 years after the release of MSLT-II results, 5 papers demonstrate that international treatment of melanoma SLNB-positive patients is changing from CLND to surveillance. This review, however, highlights the absence of a published protocol to ensure reliable and reproducible surveillance of eligible melanoma patients.

  1. 1.Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ,et al. Completion Dissection or Observation for Sentinel-Node Metastasis in Melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017 Jun 8;376(23):2211-2222.
  2. 2. Catalano O. Critical analysis of the ultrasonographic criteria for diagnosing lymph node metastasis in patients with cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review. J Ultrasound Med. 2011 Apr;30(4):547-60.
  3. 3. Nijhuis AAG, et al. Current management of patients with melanoma who are found to be sentinel node-positive. ANZ J Surg. 2020 Apr;90(4):491-496.
  4. 4. Garbe C, et al. AMM; European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC). European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for melanoma. Treatment - Update 2019. Eur J Cancer. 2020 Feb;126:159-177.
  5. 5. Peach H, et al. Current role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in the management of cutaneous melanoma: A UK consensus statement. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg. 2020 Jan;73(1):36-42.
  6. 6. Aldrink JH, et al. What's new in pediatric melanoma: An update from the APSA cancer committee. J Pediatr Surg. 2020 Sep;55(9):1714-1721. 7. Hieken TJ, et al The Role of Completion Lymph Node Dissection for Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2019 Apr;26(4):1028-1034.