Sentinel lymph node positivity in melanoma: Which risk prediction tool is most accurate?

BACKGROUND: Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma determines treatment and prognostic factors and improves disease-specific survival. To risk-stratify patients for sentinel lymph node biopsy consideration, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Melanoma Institute Australia developed nomograms to predict sentinel lymph node positivity. We aimed to compare the accuracy of these 2 nomograms. METHODS: A multi-institutional study of patients with melanoma receiving sentinel lymph node biopsy between September 2018 and December 2022 was performed. The accuracy of the 2 risk prediction tools in determining a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve. RESULTS: In total, 532 patients underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma; 98 (18.4%) had positive sentinel lymph node. Increasing age was inversely related to sentinel lymph node positivity (P < .01); 35.7% of patients ≤30 years had positive sentinel lymph node compared with 9.7% of patients ≥75 years. When we analyzed the entire study population, accuracy of the 2 risk prediction tools was equal (area under the curveMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: 0.693; area under the curveMIA: 0.699). However, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center tool was a better predictor in patients aged ≥75 years (area under the curveMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: 0.801; area under the curveMelanoma Institute Australia: 0.712, P < .01) but Melanoma Institute Australia tool performed better in patients with a higher mitotic index (mitoses/mm2 ≥2; area under the curveMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: 0.659; area under the curveMelanoma Institute Australia: 0.717, P = .027). Both models were poor predictors of sentinel lymph node positivity in young patients (age ≤30 years; area under the curveMemorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: 0.456; area under the curveMelanoma Institute Australia: 0.589, P = .283). CONCLUSION: The current study suggests that the 2 risk stratification tools differ in their abilities to predict sentinel lymph node positivity in specific populations: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center tool is a better predictor for older patients, whereas Melanoma Institute Australia tool is more accurate in patients with a higher mitotic index. Both nomograms performed poorly in predicting sentinel lymph node positivity in young patients.

Potential Misinformation in the Official Disability Guidelines About the Diagnosis and Treatment of Rotator Cuff Tendinopathy.

OBJECTIVE: We selected statements in the Official Disability Guidelines that had the potential to reinforce misconceptions regarding symptoms from rotator cuff tendinopathy. These statements were revised and presented with the original statement to specialists. METHODS: Twelve statements regarding rotator cuff tendinopathy were identified as deviating from principles based on ethics, values, and the evidence regarding both pathophysiology and human illness behavior. One hundred fifteen upper extremity surgeons reviewed both original and revised versions of the statements and indicated their preference. RESULTS: We found that upper extremity surgeons preferred 3 revised statements, 4 Official Disability Guidelines statements, and 5 were rated as neutral between the 2 statements. CONCLUSIONS: Statements revised for evidence, ethics, and healthy mindset were not preferred by specialists, which may indicate limited awareness about how negative thoughts and distressing symptoms impact human illness.