| Title |
Predictors and Survival Impact of False-Negative Sentinel Nodes in Melanoma
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Annals of Surgical Oncology, November 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1245/s10434-015-4912-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David Y. Lee, Kelly T. Huynh, Annabelle Teng, Briana J. Lau, Sarah Vitug, Ji-Hey Lee, Stacey L. Stern, Leland J. Foshag, Mark B. Faries |
| Abstract |
The status of the sentinel lymph node in melanoma is an important prognostic factor. The clinical predictors and implications of false-negative (FN) biopsy remain debatable. We compared patients with positive sentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) [true positive (TP)] and negative SNB with and without regional recurrence [FN, true negative (TN)] from our prospective institutional database. Among 2986 patients (84 FN, 494 TP, and 2408 TN; median follow-up 93 months), the incidence of FN-SNB was 2.8 %. While calculated FN rate was 14.5 % [84 FN/(494 TP + 84 FN) × 100], when we accounted for local/in-transit recurrence (LITR) this rate was 8.5 % [46 FN/(494 TP + 46 FN) × 100 %]. On multivariate analysis, male gender (OR 2.0, 95 % CI 1.1-3.6, p = 0.018), head/neck primaries (OR 2.5, 95 % CI 1.3-4.8, p < 0.006), and LITR (OR 3.5, 95 % CI 2.1-5.8, p < 0.001) were associated with FN-SNB. Melanoma-specific survival (MSS) for the FN group was similar to the TP group at 5 years (68 vs. 73 %, p = 0.539). However, MSS declined more for the FN group with a longer follow up and was significantly worse at 10 years (44 vs. 64 %, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, FN-SNB was a significant predictor of worse MSS in melanomas <4 mm in Breslow thickness (HR 1.6; 95 % CI 1.1-2.5, p = 0.021). Male gender, LITR, and head and neck tumors were associated with FN-SNB. FN-SNB was an independent predictor of worse MSS in melanomas <4 mm in thickness, but this survival difference did not become apparent until after 5 years of follow-up. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 37 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 8 | 22% |
| Other | 7 | 19% |
| Researcher | 6 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 5 | 14% |
| Unknown | 5 | 14% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Medicine and Dentistry | 23 | 62% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 2 | 5% |
| Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science | 1 | 3% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 3% |
| Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2016.
All research outputs
#14,222,096
of 23,577,761 outputs
Outputs from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#4,067
of 6,673 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#195,910
of 390,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Annals of Surgical Oncology
#57
of 117 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,761 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,673 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.4. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 390,102 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 117 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.