Validation of a scoring system to predict non‐sentinel lymph node metastasis in melanoma
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has been widely accepted as the lymph node sampling procedure of choice for melanoma patients. Current standards of practice suggest completion lymph node dissection (CLND) for patients with a positive SLNB result. The rationale for SLNB+/-CLND is for staging and prognosis as well as local control and possibly survival improvement. CLND, however, entails significant morbidity. In addition, most patients (approximately 80%) will have no further melanoma metastases in non-sentinel nodes and these patients may not benefit from the additional dissection. We had previously developed a score (based on patient age and the total size of metastasis within the SLN) that predicted which SLN-positive patients would have a positive CLND. Utilization of this scoring system would spare a significant number of melanoma patients the risks associated with CLND. The purpose of this study was to validate this score using different melanoma populations. METHODS: A retrospective chart review of all patients that had undergone SLNB for melanoma at four different Canadian centers was undertaken. Data from the Calgary Foothills Medical Center, the Winnipeg Health Sciences Center, and the Toronto Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center from January 1999 to present was collected. In addition, we identified all patients from April 2007 to present at the Misericordia Hospital in Edmonton for this study. This patient information had not been utilized when we were developing this score. The collected variables included patient age, Breslow thickness, result of SLNB, total size of SLN metastasis, largest size of SLN metastasis, and results of CLND. Logistic regression was used to test the significance of a score system's correlation (based on cutoff age of 55 years and cutoff total SLN metastasis of 5 mm) with the CLND results. We also used logistic regression to test the correlation of cutoff values of total SLN metastasis with non-sentinel lymph node (NSLN) metastasis. RESULTS: Data were collected on 599 patients across the four centers. Breslow thickness significantly correlated with SLN metastasis. The risk score system (based on patient age and total SLN metastasis) was significantly predictive of the CLND result in SLNB-positive patients. However, the age became non-significant on multivariate analysis. Total SLN metastasis emerged as the variable that is most predictive of NSLN metastasis. Patients with total SLN metastasis less than 2 mm had a 3.6% risk of NSLN metastasis, those with SLN metastasis from 2-5 mm had a 12.5% risk of NSLN metastasis, whereas those with total SLN metastasis of 5 mm or greater had a 30% risk of NSLN metastasis. CONCLUSION: Using cutoff values of 2 and 5 mm for total SLN metastasis, prediction of NSLN metastasis can be made in melanoma patients. Patients with less than 2 mm of total SLN metastasis are unlikely (<3.67% likelihood) to harbor NSLN metastasis; these patients may not benefit from additional nodal dissection beyond SLNB.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».