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.

Neoadjuvant Nivolumab and Ipilimumab in Resectable Stage III Melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Phase 1-2 trials involving patients with resectable, macroscopic stage III melanoma have shown that neoadjuvant immunotherapy is more efficacious than adjuvant immunotherapy. METHODS: In this phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned patients with resectable, macroscopic stage III melanoma, in a 1:1 ratio, to receive two cycles of neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab and then undergo surgery or to undergo surgery and then receive 12 cycles of adjuvant nivolumab. Only the patients in the neoadjuvant group who had a partial response or nonresponse received subsequent adjuvant treatment. The primary end point was event-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 423 patients underwent randomization. At a median follow-up of 9.9 months, the estimated 12-month event-free survival was 83.7% (99.9% confidence interval [CI], 73.8 to 94.8) in the neoadjuvant group and 57.2% (99.9% CI, 45.1 to 72.7) in the adjuvant group. The difference in restricted mean survival time was 8.00 months (99.9% CI, 4.94 to 11.05; P<0.001; hazard ratio for progression, recurrence, or death, 0.32; 99.9% CI, 0.15 to 0.66). In the neoadjuvant group, 59.0% of the patients had a major pathological response, 8.0% had a partial response, 26.4% had a nonresponse (>50% residual viable tumor), and 2.4% had progression; in 4.2%, surgery had not yet been performed or was omitted. The estimated 12-month recurrence-free survival was 95.1% among patients in the neoadjuvant group who had a major pathological response, 76.1% among those who had a partial response, and 57.0% among those who had a nonresponse. Adverse events of grade 3 or higher that were related to systemic treatment occurred in 29.7% of the patients in the neoadjuvant group and in 14.7% in the adjuvant group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with resectable, macroscopic stage III melanoma, neoadjuvant ipilimumab plus nivolumab followed by surgery and response-driven adjuvant therapy resulted in longer event-free survival than surgery followed by adjuvant nivolumab. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; NADINA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04949113.).

Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab, dabrafenib and trametinib in BRAFV600-mutant resectable melanoma: the randomized phase 2 NeoTrio trial.

Immune checkpoint inhibitors and BRAF-targeted therapy each improve survival in melanoma. Immune changes early during targeted therapy suggest the mechanisms of each drug class could work synergistically. In the non-comparative, randomized, phase 2 NeoTrio trial, we investigated whether targeted therapy could boost the proportion of patients achieving long-term recurrence-free survival with neoadjuvant immunotherapy in resectable stage III BRAFV600-mutant melanoma. Sixty patients (42% females) were randomized to pembrolizumab alone (n = 20), sequential therapy (dabrafenib plus trametinib followed by pembrolizumab; n = 20) or concurrent (triple) therapy (n = 20), followed by surgery and adjuvant therapy. The primary outcome was pathological response; secondary outcomes included radiographic response, recurrence-free survival, overall survival, surgical outcomes, peripheral blood and tumor analyses and safety. The pathological response rate was 55% (11/20; including six pathological complete responses (pCRs)) with pembrolizumab, 50% (10/20; three pCRs) with sequential therapy and 80% (16/20; ten pCRs) with concurrent therapy, which met the primary outcome in each arm. Treatment-related adverse events affected 75-100% of patients during neoadjuvant treatment, with seven early discontinuations (all in the concurrent arm). At 2 years, event-free survival was 60% with pembrolizumab, 80% with sequential therapy and 71% with concurrent therapy. Recurrences after major pathological response were more common in the targeted therapy arms, suggesting a reduction in response 'quality' when targeted therapy is added to neoadjuvant immunotherapy. Risking the curative potential of immunotherapy in melanoma cannot be justified. Pending longer follow-up, we suggest that immunotherapy and targeted therapy should not be combined in the neoadjuvant setting for melanoma. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT02858921 .

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.

First Phase Development of a Patient-reported Outcome Measure for Midface Oncology.

Background: Facial cancer surgery involving the midface (comprising the lower eyelids, nose, cheeks, and upper lip) can have debilitating life-changing functional, social, and psychological impacts on the patient. Midface symptoms are inadequately captured by existing patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). PROMs are increasingly used for individual patient care, quality improvement, and standardized reporting of treatment outcomes. This study aimed to present our findings from the first phase of the development of a midface, specifically periocular and nasal, PROM. Methods: After international guidance for PROM development, the first phase comprised identification of salient issues and item generation. Fifteen patients who had midface surgery and 10 clinicians from various specialties with more than 5 years' experience treating these patients were recruited. Semi-structured interviews explored aesthetic, functional, social, and psychological outcomes, with specific attention to deficiencies in current PROMs. Thematic analysis was used to develop an item pool, and group interviews with clinicians were carried out to create and refine PROM scales. Results: Qualitative data from patient interviews were grouped into aesthetic, functional, and psychosocial domains for the eyelids and nose. Ninety-nine draft items were generated across these domains. Following focus group discussions, the final version of the midface-specific PROM contained 31 items (13 eye-specific, 10-nose-specific, eight general midface items). Conclusions: This midface-specific PROM is valuable in assessing and comparing patient-reported outcomes in those who have undergone complex resection and reconstruction of the midface. This PROM is currently undergoing field testing.

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).

Prognostic and predictive biomarkers in head and neck cancer: something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue and a sixpence in your shoe.

A biomarker is a measurable indicator of biological or pathological processes or the response to an exposure or intervention and is used to guide management decisions. In head and neck pathology, biomarkers are assessed by histological criteria and immunohistochemical and molecular studies. Surgical resection remains the mainstay of management of many head and neck malignancies. Adjuvant radiotherapy and/or systemic therapy may be administered depending on the presence of adverse prognostic factors identified on histopathological or immunohistochemical examination. In this review, we outline the clinically relevant prognostic and predictive factors in head and neck malignancies including conventionally recognised factors such as tumour size, depth of invasion, lymphovascular and perineural invasion and margin status as well as novel evolving factors such as recurrent genetic rearrangements and assessment of immune checkpoints. Practical issues are discussed to assist with recognising and reporting of these factors. A summary of useful tools such as structured pathology report formats is also included to assist with comprehensive reporting of all clinically relevant parameters, minimise risk and improve workflow efficiencies.

Associations between patient-level health literacy and diagnostic time intervals for head and neck cancer: A prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Health literacy (HL) comprises skills and knowledge required to understand, access, and make decisions about healthcare. Our aim was to examine associations between patient HL and time intervals (defined in the Aarhus statement) along the pathway to treatment of head and neck cancer (HNC). METHODS: A prospective cohort study was conducted from October 2018 to March 2020. Participants completed the Health Literacy Questionnaire (HLQ®) and described key events and dates along the pathway to treatment using validated questionnaires. Correlations between six diagnostic time intervals and domains of HL were explored, and factors predicting exceeding maximum acceptable timeframes were assessed using logistic regression. RESULTS: One hundred patients with a diagnosis of HNC within the preceding 6 months were recruited. HLQ® Domain 2 (sufficient information to manage health) was significantly negatively associated with four intervals: the patient interval (first symptom to first presentation), primary care interval (first presentation to referral to secondary care), diagnostic interval (first presentation to diagnosis), and total interval (first symptom to treatment onset); correlation coefficients -0.25 to -0.27 (P < 0.05). Domain 8 (ability to find good information) was significantly negatively associated with three intervals (primary care interval, diagnostic interval, and total interval; correlation coefficients -0.23 to -0.34; P < 0.05). Higher education, age, and comorbidity levels were associated with shorter patient and diagnostic intervals. CONCLUSIONS: HL may be a potential target to improve timeliness of HNC diagnosis and reduce disparities in outcomes.

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.

Use of Rare Anatomical Variant of the Free Fibula Flap to Reconstruct the Nasal Septum.

The osteocutaneous fibula free flap (FFF)'s skin paddle is commonly vascularized by the septocutaneous (SC) perforators of the peroneal artery that course through the posterior intercrural septum. However, a rare anatomical variant exists in which the skin paddle is vascularized via a separate arterial system to the fibula. We report the case of a 31-year-old man who was planned for osteocutaneous FFF reconstruction of his anterior maxilla and hard palate following resection of nasal septal chondrosarcoma. Intraoperatively, he was found to have a rare anatomical variant: the perforator to the skin paddle arose proximal to the peroneal artery, off the tibioperoneal trunk. This was a fortuitous, rare anatomical variant, as it enabled a double free flap reconstruction from a single donor site-an intraoral fasciocutaneous free flap oriented with its long axis perpendicular to that of an osseous FFF. This particular defect enabled reconstructive freedom beyond that of the standard osteocutaneous free flap, in which the skin paddle orientation is limited by the risk of kinking the septal perforator. This case report summarizes the flap raising technique and the learning points relevant to the osteocutaneous FFF with no SC perforators. The extant literature on this anatomical variant is then summarized. The average estimated rate of FFF with no SC perforators is between 3% and 25%, based on four published studies.

The Emerging Role of Artificial Intelligence Tools for Outcome Measurement in Facial Reanimation Surgery: A Review.

Importance: Surgeons treating facial paralysis with reanimation surgery measure the outcomes of surgery and adjust treatment to each patient's needs. Our objective is to review the current subjective facial paralysis assessment tools and the emerging computer-based objective analysis, which may involve artificial intelligence. Observations: In recent years, many new automated approaches to outcome measurement in facial reanimation surgery have been developed. Most of these tools utilize artificial intelligence to analyze emotional expression and symmetry of facial landmarks. Other tools have provided automated approaches to existing clinician-guided scales. Conclusions: Newly developed computer-based tools using artificial intelligence have been developed to both improve existing clinician-graded scales and provide new approaches to facial symmetry and emotional expressivity analysis.

Epidemiology, staging and management of mucosal melanoma of the head and neck: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Mucosal melanoma of the head and neck (MMHN) are rare, aggressive neoplasms of melanocyte origin that remain incompletely understood and have a poor prognosis, with high rates of locoregional recurrence and distant metastasis. Several recent studies having expanded understanding of MMHN, we undertook a review of the latest evidence pertaining to its epidemiology, staging, and management. METHODS: A literature search was conducted for peer-reviewed articles reporting and discussing the epidemiology, staging, and management of MMHN. PubMed, Medline, Embase and the Cochrane Library were searched to identify relevant publications. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: MMHN remains an uncommon disease. The current TNM staging system for MMHN provides inadequate risk stratification, and consideration of an alternative staging model such as one based on a nomogram may be justifiable. Tumour resection with clear histological margins remains the cornerstone of optimal treatment. Adjuvant radiotherapy may improve locoregional control but does not appear to affect survival. Immune checkpoint inhibitors and c-KIT inhibitors demonstrate promising efficacy in patients with advanced or unresectable mucosal melanomas, and warrant further research exploring the utility of combination therapies. Their roles as adjuvant therapies have not been determined. The efficacy of neoadjuvant systemic therapy is also not yet clear, although early results suggest that it may improve outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: New insights into the epidemiology, staging and management of MMHN have transformed the standard of care for this rare malignancy. Nonetheless, the results of ongoing clinical trials and future prospective studies are required to better understand this aggressive disease and optimise its management.

Travel-associated cost savings to patients and the health system through provision of specialist head and neck surgery outreach clinics in rural New South Wales, Australia.

INTRODUCTION: Centralisation of head and neck surgical services means that patients in regional and remote Australia need to travel long distances for treatment and follow-up, imparting a significant financial burden on patients and the health system. OBJECTIVE: To estimate costs of travel to local outreach clinics and determine potential cost savings to patients and the health system by avoiding patient travel to major cities for head and neck surgical care. DESIGN: Retrospective audit of three head and neck surgery outreach clinics in New South Wales, Australia over 4 years (2017-2020). Direct costs of travel from a patient's residence to their local outreach clinic were estimated. Costs of travel and accommodation to Sydney for an appointment were calculated for different travel modes. Estimated reimbursements for travel through government support schemes were calculated based on published rates. FINDINGS: Some 657 patients attended the three clinics, accounting for 1981 appointments. Depending on mode of travel, the estimated median cost of return travel (including accommodation) to Sydney was $379 to $739 per patient per trip and the median government reimbursement ranged from $182 to $279 per trip. In comparison, the cost of return travel by car to local outreach clinics ranged from $28 to $163 per appointment. Outreach clinics were estimated to save patients a median of $285 per trip and avoided government reimbursements of $215 per trip. DISCUSSION: Despite uptake in telehealth, outreach medical services remain an important asset for people living in regional areas to address inequities in access. However, the cost benefits are likely to be underestimated as our approach did not account for indirect costs associated with travel. CONCLUSION: Outreach head and neck surgical services located in regional areas can reduce the financial burden on both patients and the healthcare system. Greater investment in outreach clinics could ensure sustainability of services to promote equitable access to specialised surgical services.

External validation in an Australian population of the EORTC-DeCOG nomogram predicting recurrence, distant metastasis and overall mortality in melanoma patients with positive sentinel lymph nodes.

BACKGROUND: Calculating an accurate prognosis for melanoma patients who have a positive sentinel node (SN) biopsy is important both for them and for their treating doctors to guide decision-making, particularly when adjuvant systemic therapy is being considered. The recently published EORTC-DeCOG nomograms aim to provide this via an online portal that predicts 5-year rates for recurrence, distant metastasis and overall mortality. The present study provides external validation of these nomograms. METHODS/MATERIALS: De-identified data from patients with a positive SN biopsy between 2003 and 2015 were extracted from the prospectively maintained Melanoma Institute Australia (MIA) research database. ROC-curves with C-statistics, regression co-efficients and Decision Curve Net Benefit analyses were performed using the integrated private validation portal on the nomograms' hosting platform (Evidencio). RESULTS: Complete data were available for 352 patients. The respective C-statistics for recurrence, distant metastasis and overall mortality nomogram validations were 0.68, 0.69 and 0.66. CONCLUSION: The performance of the nomograms in predicting recurrence and distant metastasis was similar in the MIA and the development populations, suggesting that they are robust. However, the overall mortality nomogram performance was significantly poorer in the MIA population (C-statistic 0.66) than in the original EORTC-DeCOG derivation cohort (C-statistic 0.70) and may therefore be less reliable for clinical use.

Does preoperative imaging for scalp non-melanocytic skin cancer accurately predict invasion of the cranial vault? A systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: This study aimed to determine the diagnostic accuracy of CT and MRI in the preoperative detection of bone involvement for non-melanoma skin cancers (NMSCs) located on the scalp. This study further aimed to evaluate the predictive value of these imaging modalities in determining the need for craniectomy and to identify gaps in the existing literature. METHODS: Electronic searches of the MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane and Google Scholar databases were performed for English language studies of any type. Studies reporting detection or exclusion of histopathologically confirmed bone involvement through preoperative imaging were identified according to PRISMA guidelines. Studies reporting dural involvement, non-scalp tumours, and lacking tumour type(s) or outcome data were excluded. Outcomes were preoperative imaging result and histopathologically confirmed bone invasion. Meta-analysis was performed and sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV) and negative predictive value (NPV) were calculated (excluding case report and MRI data due to insufficient quality and quantity respectively). RESULTS: Four studies with a total of 69 patients were included in the final review, of which two studies totalling 66 patients were included in the meta-analysis. Preoperative CT had a sensitivity of 38%, specificity of 98%, PPV of 90% and NPV of 73%. CONCLUSIONS: The available data suggests that a preoperative CT finding of calvarial involvement by a scalp NMSC is likely to be real, but the absence of such a finding is unreliable. Current evidence suggests that preoperative imaging cannot exclude the necessity for craniectomy and future research is needed, particularly on the role of MRI.

Has the advent of modern adjuvant systemic therapy for melanoma rendered sentinel node biopsy unnecessary?

The prognostic value of sentinel node biopsy (SNB) is well established and SNB was therefore adopted as a requirement for pathological staging of melanomas>1 mm thick in the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th edition. Consequently, a negative SNB status became an eligibility criterion for clinical trials of adjuvant systemic therapy in resected stage IIB/C melanoma. However, since the Keynote 716 trial demonstrated an improvement in relapse-free survival (RFS) in patients with Stage IIB/C melanoma, all of whom had SNB staging, some have argued that SNB is no longer required for patients with T3 and T4 primary melanomas. The rationale for omitting SNB is that these patients will be able to access adjuvant immunotherapy regardless of SNB status, avoiding the costs and potential complications of SNB. However, this argument overlooks the prognostic value of knowing a patient's nodal status and the therapeutic benefit of SNB in regional disease control. Based on extrapolation of data from multiple sources, we demonstrate that the risk of regional node-field relapse with SNB and immunotherapy for T3b and T4 melanomas is around 7-9% but is 20-27% without SNB. Similarly, the node-field recurrence rate with SNB alone is around 14% compared to around 40% with no SNB or immunotherapy. Consequently, in the absence of prospective data, we propose that the optimal management of the regional node-field for high-risk T3b and T4 primary melanomas is likely to be achieved by combining SNB and adjuvant immunotherapy for those patients who are suitable, rather than either treatment alone.

Comparing Genomic Landscapes of Oral and Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Quest for Novel Diagnostic Markers.

Squamous cell carcinoma is the most common head and neck malignancy arising from the oral mucosa and the skin. The histologic and immunohistochemical features of oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC) and head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (HNcSCC) are similar, making it difficult to identify the primary site in cases of metastases. With the advent of immunotherapy, reliable distinction of OSCC and HNcSCC at metastatic sites has important treatment and prognostic implications. Here, we investigate and compare the genomic landscape of OSCC and HNcSCC to identify diagnostically useful biomarkers. Whole-genome sequencing data from 57 OSCC and 41 HNcSCC patients were obtained for tumor and matched normal samples. Tumor mutation burden (TMB), Catalogue of Somatic Mutations in Cancer (COSMIC) mutational signatures, frequent chromosomal alterations, somatic single nucleotide, and copy number variations were analyzed. The median TMB of 3.75 in primary OSCC was significantly lower (P < .001) than that of 147.51 mutations/Mb in primary HNcSCC. The COSMIC mutation signatures were significantly different (P < .001) between OSCC and HNcSCC. OSCC showed COSMIC single-base substitution (SBS) mutation signature 1 and AID/APOBEC activity-associated signature 2 and/or 13. All except 1 HNcSCC from hair-bearing scalp showed UV damage-associated COSMIC SBS mutation signature 7. Both OSCC and HNcSCC demonstrated a predominance of tumor suppressor gene mutations, predominantly TP53. The most frequently mutated oncogenes were PIK3CA and MUC4 in OSCC and HNcSCC, respectively. The metastases of OSCC and HNcSCC demonstrated TMB and COSMIC SBS mutation signatures similar to their primary counterparts. The combination of high TMB and UV signature in a metastatic keratinizing squamous cell carcinoma suggests HNcSCC as the primary site and may also facilitate decisions regarding immunotherapy. HNcSCC and OSCC show distinct genomic profiles despite histologic and immunohistochemical similarities. Their genomic characteristics may underlie differences in behavior and guide treatment decisions in recurrent and metastatic settings.

Improving Selection for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Among Patients With Melanoma.

Importance: Refining eligibility guidelines may identify more appropriate patients to undergo useful medical procedures. Objective: To improve cost-effectiveness in selecting patients with melanoma for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). Design, Setting, and Participants: This hybrid prognostic study/decision analytical model was conducted among patients with melanoma who were eligible for SLNB at 2 melanoma centers from Australia and the US from 2000 to 2014. Participants consisted of 2 cohorts of patients with melanoma undergoing SLNB and a cohort of eligible patients without SLNB. Individualized probabilities of SLNB positivity generated by a patient-centered methodology (PCM) were compared with those generated by conventional multiple logistic regression analysis investigating 12 prognostic factors. Prognostic accuracy was assessed by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUROC) for each methodology and by matched-pair analyses. Interventions: Triaging appropriate patients to undergo SLNB. Main Outcomes and Measures: Total number of SLNBs performed (giving total cost) vs number of SLNB-positive outcomes (a measure of effectiveness) was evaluated. Improved cost-effectiveness through judicious patient selection was interpreted as increased numbers of SLNB-positive outcomes achieved, decreased numbers of SLNBs performed, or both outcomes simultaneously. Results: Among 7331 patients with melanoma, SLNB outcomes were assessed in 3640 Australian patients (2212 males [60.8%]; 2447 aged >50 years [67.2%]) and 1342 US patients (774 males [57.7%]; 885 aged >50 years [66.0%]); 2349 patients eligible for SLNB who did not undergo the procedure were included in the simulation. PCM-generated probabilities achieved an AUROC of 0.803 in predicting SLNB positivity in the Australian cohort and 0.826 in the US cohort, higher than corresponding AUROCs generated by conventional logistic regression analysis. In simulation, adopting many SLNB-positive probabilities as minimally acceptable patient-selection criteria resulted in fewer procedures performed or increased the expected numbers of positive SLNBs. A minimally acceptable PCM-generated probability of 8.7% elicited the same number of SLNBs as historically performed (3640 SLNBs), with 1066 positive SLNBs (29.3%), constituting an improvement of 287 additional positive SLNBs compared with 779 actual positive SLNBs (36.8% improvement). In contrast, adopting a 23.7% PCM-generated minimum cutoff probability resulted in performing 1825 SLNBs, or 1815 fewer SLNBs than the actual experience (49.9%). It resulted in the same expected number of positive results (779 SLNBs), for a 42.7% positivity rate. Conclusions and Relevance: This prognostic study/decision analytical model found that the PCM approach outperformed conventional multiple logistic regression analysis in predicting which patients would have positive results on SLNB. These findings suggest that systematically producing and exploiting more accurate SLNB-positivity probabilities could improve the selection of patients with melanoma for SLNB compared with using established guidelines, thus improving the cost-effectiveness of the selection process. Eligibility guidelines to undergo SLNB should include a context-tailored minimum cutoff probability.