The Prognostic Significance of Tumoral Melanosis.

BACKGROUND: Tumoral melanosis (TM) is a histological term to describe a nodular aggregation of macrophages containing melanin pigment (melanophages) that is devoid of viable melanocytes. It is most often identified in skin, where it may be appreciated clinically as a pigmented lesion; however, it can also be found in other organs such as lymph nodes. The presence of TM is usually thought to signify the presence of a regressed melanoma or other pigmented tumor. Until recently, it was a relatively uncommon finding; however, with the use of effective systemic therapies against melanoma, its occurrence in histological specimens is more frequent. METHODS: We identified and reviewed all histopathological diagnoses of TM at any organ site reported at a single institution from 2006 to 2018. TM cases were paired with non-TM cases of cutaneous melanoma through propensity score matching at a 1:2 ratio, and their survival outcomes were compared. The clinical outcomes examined included recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: TM was reported in 79 patients. Their median age was 65 years (range 22-88), with a 2:1 male predominance (51 out of 79, 65%). The most common organ involved was the skin (67%), with a third of all cases localized to a lower limb (36%). TM had a strong association with the presence of melanoma (91%) and regression at other sites of melanoma (54%), suggesting that it is part of a systemic immune response against melanoma. Most patients with TM either previously or subsequently developed histologically confirmed melanoma in the same anatomical region as the TM (89%). Thirty-five TM patients were matched with 70 non-TM cases. Patients with melanoma who developed TM without prior regional or systemic therapy showed improved MSS (p = 0.03), whereas no statistically significant differences were observed in terms of RFS, DDFS, and OS. CONCLUSIONS: TM usually occurs in the context of a previous or subsequent cutaneous melanoma and is associated with improved MSS. It is important that TM is recognized by pathologists and documented in pathology reports.

Long-Term survival across breslow thickness categories: Findings from a Population-Based study of 210,042 Australian melanoma patients.

The prognosis of a patient with a primary cutaneous melanoma is known to be related to the Breslow thickness of their tumor. This study sought to determine long-term (30-year) survival rates for the four AJCC 8th Edition T-categories by analyzing Australian registry data for 210,042 melanoma patients diagnosed from 1982-2014. The 30-year incidence rates of death due to melanoma and non-melanoma causes (with 95% confidence intervals) were 7.1% (CI 6.9-7.3%) and 32.8% (CI 32.3-33.3%), respectively. For T2 melanomas, the corresponding rates were 21.6% (CI 21.0-22.3%) and 35.6% (CI 34.7-36.6%), for T3 melanomas 34.2% (CI 33.4-35.1%) and 39.6% (CI 38.5-40.8%), and for T4 melanomas 44.3% (CI 43.2-45.3%) and 39.6% (CI 38.3-41.0%). A plateau in melanoma-related deaths occurred in T4 patients after 20 years but there were ongoing melanoma-related deaths for the other T-categories beyond 30 years. A progressive rise in the risk of death from other causes occurred across all T-categories.

Comparison of clinicopathological features and treatment outcomes for cutaneous melanomas of the head and neck and melanomas arising at other sites: Implications for systemic therapy.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma is increasingly recognized as a heterogeneous disease, with conflicting evidence regarding whether cutaneous head and neck melanoma (CHNM) represents a distinct entity. OBJECTIVE: Comparison of clinicopathological features and treatment outcomes of CHNM and cutaneous melanomas of other sites (CMOS). METHODS: Patients with CHNM and CMOS diagnosed between 2000 and 2018 were included. Locoregional control, distant metastasis-free survival, melanoma-specific survival (MSS), and overall survival (OS) were described using the Kaplan-Meier method. Cox regression analyses were performed to examine associations between prognostic factors and outcomes. Additional analyses of survival from time of stage IV disease diagnosis were undertaken, stratified by receipt of BRAF-targeted therapy and immune checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy. RESULTS: Of 3007 CHNM and 10,637 CMOS patients, CHNM had more adverse pathological features (median age 65.9 vs 58.5, P < .001; median Breslow thickness 1.7 mm vs 1.2 mm, P < .001; and ulceration 21.2% vs 18.2%, P < .001). CHNM had worse locoregional control (hazard ratio (HR) 1.17, P < .001) and distant metastasis-free survival (HR 1.25, P < .001) but there were no significant differences in MSS or OS. Among stage IV patients who received immune checkpoint inhibitor, CHNM had better MSS (HR 0.56, P = .001) and OS (HR 0.57, P < .001) on multivariable analyses. LIMITATIONS: Retrospective study, offset by prospective data collection. CONCLUSION: CHNM is associated with a distinct clinicopathological and prognostic profile.

Treatment of melanoma brain metastases with radiation and immunotherapy or targeted therapy: A systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with melanoma brain metastases are now frequently treated with immunotherapy (IMT) or targeted therapy (TT). The aim of this systematic review was to determine relative survival outcomes after combining radiotherapy (RT) with IMT or TT. METHODS: 126 studies were identified by searching Medline, Embase and Cochrane CENTRAL (to 7Aug 2023). RESULTS: Multivariable analyses showed that the risk of death was reduced by 30 % for combined stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS)+IMT compared to IMT alone, by 65 % for patients treated with SRS+anti-PD1 and by 59 % for patients treated with SRS+anti-CTLA4 and/or anti-PD1 (HR 0.41, 95 %CI 0.31-0.54) compared to SRS alone. Four studies compared SRS+anti-CTLA4 with SRS+anti-PD1, showing a 42 % reduction in risk of death with SRS+anti-PD1 treatment. Combined treatment with SRS+TT showed a 59 % reduction in risk compared to SRS alone. CONCLUSION: The systematic review suggests a substantial survival benefit for combining SRS with IMT or TT for patients with melanoma brain metastases.

When does a melanoma metastasize? Implications for management.

Selecting which patients with clinically-localized melanoma require treatment other than wide excision of the primary tumor is based on the risk or presence of metastatic disease. This in turn is linked to survival. Knowing if and when a melanoma is likely to metastasize is therefore of great importance. Several studies employing a range of different methodologies have suggested that many melanomas metastasize long before the primary lesion is diagnosed. Therefore, waiting for dissemination of metastatic disease to become evident before making systemic therapy available to these patients may be less effective than giving them post-operative adjuvant therapy initially if the metastatic risk is high. The identification of these high-risk patients will assist in selecting those to whom adjuvant systemic therapy can most appropriately be offered. Further studies are required to better identify high-risk patients whose primary melanoma is likely to have already metastasized.

Effect of smoking on melanoma incidence: a systematic review with meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: There is a strong correlation between cigarette smoking and the development of many cancer types. It is therefore paradoxical that multiple reports have suggested a reduced incidence of melanoma in smokers. This study aimed to analyze all existing studies of melanoma incidence in smokers relative to non-smokers. METHODS: Searches of MEDLINE and Embase were conducted for studies reporting data on melanoma in smokers and never-smokers. No study design limitations or language restrictions were applied. The outcome examined was the association between smoking status and melanoma. Analyses focussed on risk of melanoma in smokers and never-smokers generated from multivariable analyses and these were pooled using a fixed effects model. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa tool. FINDINGS: Forty-nine studies that included 59,429 melanoma patients were identified. Pooled analyses showed that current-smokers had a significantly-reduced risk of melanoma both in males (risk ratio (RR) 0.60, 95%CI_0.56 to0.65, p < .001) and females (RR 0.79- 95%-CI-0.73-to-0.86, p < .001). Male former-smokers had a 16% reduction in melanoma risk compared to never-smokers (RR-0.84,-95%CI-0.77-to-0.93, p < .001), but no risk reduction was observed in female former-smokers (RR-1.0-95%CI-0.92-to-1.08). INTERPRETATION: Current-smokers have a significantly-reduced risk of developing melanoma compared to never-smokers, with a reduction in melanoma risk of 40% in men and 21% in women.

The Effect of Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy on Surgical Outcomes After Lymph Node Dissections for Stage III Melanoma; An Australian Cohort.

BACKGROUND: Neoadjuvant systemic therapy (NAST) for patients with stage III melanoma achieves high major pathologic response rates and high recurrence-free survival rates. This study aimed to determine how NAST with targeted therapies (TTs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) influences surgical outcomes after lymph node dissection in terms of complications, morbidity, and textbook outcomes. METHODS: Patients who underwent a lymph node dissection after either NAST in a clinical trial or upfront surgery for stage III melanoma between 2014 and 2022 were identified from an institutional research database. RESULTS: The study included 89 NAST-treated patients and 79 upfront surgery-treated patients. The rate of postoperative complications did not differ between the NAST- and upfront surgery-treated patients (55% vs. 51%; p = 0.643), and steroid treatment for drug toxicity did not influence the complication rate (odds ratio [OR], 1.1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.4-3; p = 0.826). No significant differences in postoperative morbidity were observed in terms of seroma (23% vs. 11%; p = 0.570) or lymphedema (36% vs. 51%; p = 0.550). The rate of achieving a textbook outcome was comparable for the two groups (61% vs. 57%; p = 0.641). CONCLUSIONS: The surgical outcomes after lymph node dissections were comparable between the patients who received NAST and those who had upfront surgery, indicating that surgery can be safely performed after NAST with TT or ICI for stage III melanoma.

Impact of an Online Risk Calculator for Sentinel Node Positivity on Management of Patients with T1 and T2 Melanomas.

BACKGROUND: Predicting which patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) T1-T2 melanomas will have a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN) is challenging. Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) developed an internationally validated SLN metastatic risk calculator. This study evaluated the nomogram's impact on T1-T2 melanoma patient management at MIA. METHODS: SLN biopsy (SLNB) rates were compared for the pre- and post-nomogram periods of 1 July 2018-30 June 2019 and 1 August 2020-31 July 2021, respectively. RESULTS: Overall, 850 patients were identified (pre-nomogram, 383; post-nomogram, 467). SLNB was performed in 29.0% of patients in the pre-nomogram group and 34.5% in the post-nomogram group (p = 0.091). The overall positivity rate was 16.2% in the pre-nomogram group and 14.9% in the post-nomogram group (p = 0.223). SLNB was performed less frequently in T1a melanoma patients in the pre-nomogram group (1.1%, n = 2/177) than in the post-nomogram group (8.6%, n = 17/198) [p ≤ 0.001]. This increase was particularly for melanomas with a risk score ≥ 5%, with an SLN positivity rate of 11.8% in the post-nomogram group (p = 0.004) compared with zero. For T1b melanomas with a risk score of > 10%, the SLNB rate was 40.0% (8/20) pre-nomogram and 75.0% (12/16) post-nomogram (p = 0.049). CONCLUSIONS: In this specialized center, the SLN risk calculator appears to influence practice for melanomas previously considered low risk for metastasis, with increased use of SLNB for T1a and higher-risk T1b melanomas. Further evaluation is required across broader practice settings. Melanoma management guidelines could be updated to incorporate the availability of nomograms to better select patients for SLNB than previous criteria.

Development and validation of a novel model to predict recurrence-free survival and melanoma-specific survival after sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma: an international, retrospective, multicentre analysis.

BACKGROUND: The introduction of adjuvant systemic treatment for patients with high-risk melanomas necessitates accurate staging of disease. However, inconsistencies in outcomes exist between disease stages as defined by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (8th edition). We aimed to develop a tool to predict patient-specific outcomes in people with melanoma rather than grouping patients according to disease stage. METHODS: Patients older than 13 years with confirmed primary melanoma who underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) between Oct 29, 1997, and Nov 11, 2013, at four European melanoma centres (based in Berlin, Germany; Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the Netherlands; and Warsaw, Poland) were included in the development cohort. Potential predictors of recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival assessed were sex, age, presence of ulceration, primary tumour location, histological subtype, Breslow thickness, sentinel node status, number of sentinel nodes removed, maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis, and Dewar classification. A prognostic model and nomogram were developed to predict 5-year recurrence-free survival on a continuous scale in patients with stage pT1b or higher melanomas. This model was also calibrated to predict melanoma-specific survival. Model performance was assessed by discrimination (area under the time-dependent receiver operating characteristics curve [AUC]) and calibration. External validation was done in a cohort of patients with primary melanomas who underwent SLNB between Jan 30, 1997, and Dec 12, 2013, at the Melanoma Institute Australia (Sydney, NSW, Australia). FINDINGS: The development cohort consisted of 4071 patients, of whom 2075 (51%) were female and 1996 (49%) were male. 889 (22%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3182 (78%) had sentinel node-negative disease. The validation cohort comprised 4822 patients, of whom 1965 (41%) were female and 2857 (59%) were male. 891 (18%) had sentinel node-positive disease and 3931 (82%) had sentinel node-negative disease. Median follow-up was 4·8 years (IQR 2·3-7·8) in the development cohort and 5·0 years (2·2-8·9) in the validation cohort. In the development cohort, 5-year recurrence-free survival was 73·5% (95% CI 72·0-75·1) and 5-year melanoma-specific survival was 86·5% (85·3-87·8). In the validation cohort, the corresponding estimates were 66·1% (64·6-67·7) and 83·3% (82·0-84·6), respectively. The final model contained six prognostic factors: sentinel node status, Breslow thickness, presence of ulceration, age at SLNB, primary tumour location, and maximum diameter of the largest sentinel node metastasis. In the development cohort, for the model's prediction of recurrence-free survival, the AUC was 0·80 (95% CI 0·78-0·81); for prediction of melanoma-specific survival, the AUC was 0·81 (0·79-0·84). External validation showed good calibration for both outcomes, with AUCs of 0·73 (0·71-0·75) and 0·76 (0·74-0·78), respectively. INTERPRETATION: Our prediction model and nomogram accurately predicted patient-specific risk probabilities for 5-year recurrence-free and melanoma-specific survival. These tools could have important implications for clinical decision making when considering adjuvant treatments in patients with high-risk melanomas. FUNDING: Erasmus Medical Centre Cancer Institute.

Transmission and Non-transmission of Melanoma From Deceased Solid Organ Donors to Transplant Recipients: Risks and Missed Opportunities.

BACKGROUND: Biovigilance concerns are in tension with the need to increase organ donation. Cancer transmission risk from donor to recipient may be overestimated, as non-transmission events are rarely reported. We sought to estimate melanoma transmission risk in deceased organ donation and identify missed opportunities for donation in an Australian cohort with high melanoma prevalence. METHODS: We used a population-based approach and linked deceased organ donors, transplant recipients, and potential donors forgone, 2010-2018, with the Central Cancer Registry (CCR), 1976-2018. We identified melanomas using ICD-O-3 classification, assessed the probability of transmission, and compared suspected melanoma history in potential donors forgone with melanoma notifications in the CCR. RESULTS: There were 9 of 993 donors with melanoma in CCR; 4 in situ low-risk and 5 invasive high-to-unacceptable risk. Four were unrecognized before donation. Of 16 transplant recipients at risk, we found 0 of 14 transmission events (2 recipients had insufficient follow-up). Of 35 of 3588 potential donors forgone for melanoma risk alone, 17 were otherwise suitable for donation; 6 of 35 had no melanoma in CCR, 2 of 35 had in situ melanomas and 9 of 35 had thin invasive melanomas (localized, ≤0.8 mm thickness). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings contribute to current evidence that suggests donors with melanomas of low metastatic potential may provide an opportunity to safely increase organ donation and so access to transplantation.

Smoking Status and Survival in Patients With Early-Stage Primary Cutaneous Melanoma.

Importance: While smoking is associated with a decreased incidence of cutaneous melanoma, the association of smoking with melanoma progression and death is not well defined. Objective: To determine the association of smoking with survival in patients with early-stage primary cutaneous melanoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This cohort study performed a post hoc analysis of data derived from the randomized, multinational first and second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trials (MSLT-I and MSLT-II). Participants were accrued for MSLT-I from January 20, 1994, to March 29, 2002; MSLT-II, from December 21, 2004, to March 31, 2014. Median follow-up was 110.0 (IQR, 53.4-120.0) months for MSLT-I and 67.6 (IQR, 25.8-110.2) months for MSLT-II. Patients aged 18 to 75 years with clinical stages I or II melanoma with a Breslow thickness of 1.00 mm or greater or Clark level IV to V and available standard prognostic and smoking data were included. Analyses were performed from October 4, 2022, to March 31, 2023. Exposure: Current, former, and never smoking. Main Outcomes and Measures: Melanoma-specific survival of patients with current, former, and never smoking status was assessed for the entire cohort and for nodal observation and among subgroups with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB)-negative and SLNB-positive findings. Results: Of 6279 included patients, 3635 (57.9%) were men, and mean (SD) age was 52.7 (13.4) years. The most common tumor location was an extremity (2743 [43.7%]), and mean (SD) Breslow thickness was 2.44 (2.06) mm. Smoking status included 1077 (17.2%) current, 1694 (27.0%) former, and 3508 (55.9%) never. Median follow-up was 78.4 (IQR, 30.5-119.6) months. Current smoking was associated with male sex, younger age, trunk site, thicker tumors, tumor ulceration, and SLNB positivity. Current smoking was associated with a greater risk of melanoma-associated death by multivariable analysis for the entire study (hazard ratio [HR], 1.48 [95% CI, 1.26-1.75]; P < .001). Former smoking was not. The increased risk of melanoma-specific mortality associated with current smoking was greatest for patients with SLNB-negative melanoma (HR, 1.85 [95% CI, 1.35-2.52]; P < .001), but also present for patients with SLNB-positive melanoma (HR, 1.29 [95% CI, 1.04-1.59]; P = .02) and nodal observation (HR, 1.68 [95% CI, 1.09-2.61]; P = .02). Smoking at least 20 cigarettes/d doubled the risk of death due to melanoma for patients with SLNB-negative disease (HR, 2.06 [95% CI, 1.36-3.13]; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this cohort study suggest that patients with clinical stage I and II melanoma who smoked had a significantly increased risk of death due to melanoma. Smoking status should be assessed at time of melanoma diagnosis and may be considered a risk factor for disease progression.

Predicting Recurrence-Free and Overall Survival for Patients With Stage II Melanoma: The MIA Calculator.

PURPOSE: Improvements in recurrence-free survival (RFS) were demonstrated in two recent randomized trials for patients with sentinel node (SN)-negative stage IIB or IIC melanoma receiving adjuvant systemic therapy (pembrolizumab/nivolumab). However, adverse events also occurred. Accurate individualized prognostic estimates of RFS and overall survival (OS) would allow patients to more accurately weigh the risks and benefits of adjuvant therapy. Since the current American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition (AJCC-8) melanoma staging system focuses on melanoma-specific survival, we developed a multivariable risk prediction calculator that provides estimates of 5- and 10-year RFS and OS for these patients. METHODS: Data were extracted from the Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) database for patients diagnosed with stage II (clinical or pathological) melanoma (n = 3,220). Survival prediction models were developed using multivariable Cox regression analyses (MIA models) and externally validated twice using data sets from the United States and the Netherlands. Each model's performance was assessed using C-statistics and calibration plots and compared with Cox models on the basis of AJCC-8 staging (stage models). RESULTS: The 5-year and 10-year RFS C-statistics were 0.70 and 0.73 (MIA-model) versus 0.61 and 0.60 (stage-model), respectively. For OS, the 5-year and 10-year C-statistics were 0.71 and 0.75 (MIA-model) compared with 0.62 and 0.61 (stage-model), respectively. The MIA models were well calibrated and externally validated. CONCLUSION: The MIA models offer accurate and personalized estimates of both RFS and OS in patients with stage II melanoma even in the absence of pathological staging with SN biopsy. These models were robust on external validations and may be used in everyday practice both with (ideally) and without performing SN biopsy to identify high-risk patients for further management strategies. An online tool will be available at the MIA website (Risk Prediction Tools).

Population-Based Validation of the MIA and MSKCC Tools for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Status.

Importance: Patients with melanoma are selected for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) based on their risk of a positive SLN. To improve selection, the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) developed predictive models, but the utility of these models remains to be tested. Objective: To determine the clinical utility of the MIA and MSKCC models. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a population-based comparative effectiveness research study including 10 089 consecutive patients with cutaneous melanoma undergoing SLNB from the Swedish Melanoma Registry from January 2007 to December 2021. Data were analyzed from May to August 2023. Main Outcomes and Measures,: The predicted probability of SLN positivity was calculated using the MSKCC model and a limited MIA model (using mitotic rate as absent/present instead of count/mm2 and excluding the optional variable lymphovascular invasion) for each patient. The operating characteristics of the models were assessed and compared. The clinical utility of each model was assessed using decision curve analysis and compared with a strategy of performing SLNB on all patients. Results: Among 10 089 included patients, the median (IQR) age was 64.0 (52.0-73.0) years, and 5340 (52.9%) were male. The median Breslow thickness was 1.8 mm, and 1802 patients (17.9%) had a positive SLN. Both models were well calibrated across the full range of predicted probabilities and had similar external area under the receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC; MSKCC: 70.8%; 95% CI, 69.5-72.1 and limited MIA: 69.7%; 95% CI, 68.4-71.1). At a risk threshold of 5%, decision curve analysis indicated no added net benefit for either model compared to performing SLNB for all patients. At risk thresholds of 10% or higher, both models added net benefit compared to SLNB for all patients. The greatest benefit was observed in patients with T2 melanomas using a threshold of 10%; in that setting, the use of the nomograms led to a net reduction of 8 avoidable SLNBs per 100 patients for the MSKCC nomogram and 7 per 100 patients for the limited MIA nomogram compared to a strategy of SLNB for all. Conclusions and Relevance: This study confirmed the statistical performance of both the MSKCC and limited MIA models in a large, nationally representative data set. However, decision curve analysis demonstrated that using the models only improved selection for SLNB compared to biopsy in all patients when a risk threshold of at least 7% was used, with the greatest benefit seen for T2 melanomas at a threshold of 10%. Care should be taken when using these nomograms to guide selection for SLNB at the lowest thresholds.

Role of Concurrent Ultrasound Surveillance of Sentinel Node-Positive Node Fields in Melanoma Patients Having Routine Cross-Sectional Imaging.

PURPOSE: In sentinel node-positive (SN+ve) melanoma patients, active surveillance with regular ultrasound examination of the node field has become standard, rather than completion lymph node dissection (CLND). A proportion of these patients now receive adjuvant systemic therapy and have routine cross-sectional imaging (computed tomography [CT] or positron emission tomography [PET]/CT). The role of concurrent ultrasound (US) surveillance in these patients is unclear. The purpose of our study was to describe the modality of detection of nodal recurrence in SN+ve node fields. METHODS: SN+ve melanoma patients who did not undergo CLND treated at a single institution from January 1, 2016 to December 31, 2020 were included. RESULTS: A total of 225 SN+ve patients with a median follow-up of 23 months were included. Of these, 119 (53%) received adjuvant systemic therapy. Eighty (36%) developed a recurrence at any site; 24 (11%) recurred first in the SN+ve field, of which 12 (5%) were confirmed node field recurrence only at 2 months follow-up. The nodal recurrences were first detected by ultrasound in seven (3%), CT in seven (3%), and PET/CT in seven (3%) patients. All nodal recurrences evident on US were also evident on PET/CT and vice versa. CONCLUSIONS: The high rate of recurrences outside the node field and the identification of all US-detected nodal recurrences on concurrent cross-sectional imaging modalities suggest that routine concurrent ultrasound surveillance of the node-positive field may be unnecessary for SN+ve melanoma patients having routine cross-sectional imaging.