International Center-Level Variation in Utilization of Completion Lymph Node Dissection and Adjuvant Systemic Therapy for Sentinel Lymph Node-Positive Melanoma at Major Referral Centers.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine overall trends and center-level variation in utilization of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) and adjuvant systemic therapy for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: Based on recent clinical trials, management options for SLN-positive melanoma now include effective adjuvant systemic therapy and nodal observation instead of CLND. It is unknown how these findings have shaped practice or how these contemporaneous developments have influenced their respective utilization. METHODS: We performed an international cohort study at 21 melanoma referral centers in Australia, Europe, and the United States that treated adults with SLN-positive melanoma and negative distant staging from July 2017 to June 2019. We used generalized linear and multinomial logistic regression models with random intercepts for each center to assess center-level variation in CLND and adjuvant systemic treatment, adjusting for patient and disease-specific characteristics. RESULTS: Among 1109 patients, performance of CLND decreased from 28% to 8% and adjuvant systemic therapy use increased from 29 to 60%. For both CLND and adjuvant systemic treatment, the most influential factors were nodal tumor size, stage, and location of treating center. There was notable variation among treating centers in management of stage IIIA patients and use of CLND with adjuvant systemic therapy versus nodal observation alone for similar risk patients. CONCLUSIONS: There has been an overall decline in CLND and simultaneous adoption of adjuvant systemic therapy for patients with SLN-positive melanoma though wide variation in practice remains. Accounting for differences in patient mix, location of care contributed significantly to the observed variation.

Surveillance of Sentinel Node-Positive Melanoma Patients Who Receive Adjuvant Therapy Without Undergoing Completion Lymph Node Dissection.

INTRODUCTION: Adjuvant therapy trials required completion lymph node dissection (CLND) for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma prior to systemic treatment, but nodal surveillance without CLND is now common. For patients receiving adjuvant therapy without CLND, patterns of recurrence are unknown and the value of regional nodal ultrasound alongside cross-sectional imaging is not well-defined. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort of SLN-positive melanoma patients managed with nodal surveillance from June 2014 to June 2019, we evaluated the association between adjuvant treatment and location of first recurrence (locoregional, nodal, distant, or multisite) using Chi-square tests. We compared methods of recurrence detection and cost by surveillance intensity using Chi-square and Dunn's tests. RESULTS: Among 177 nodal surveillance patients, 66 (37%) received adjuvant therapy. Median follow-up was 24 months, during which 48 patients (27%) recurred. Adjuvant treatment did not alter patterns of initial recurrence (p = 0.76). Adjuvant therapy recipients more often had both nodal ultrasound and cross-sectional imaging surveillance (p < 0.01). Among 13 isolated nodal recurrences, 85% were within the first year and 85% were detected by examination and/or ultrasound. Increasing surveillance intensity was not associated with recurrence detection rates but increased overall cost and cost per detected recurrence. CONCLUSION: Regardless of adjuvant treatment, most nodal recurrences occurred in the first year and were initially detected clinically or by ultrasound. Findings support continued use of examination and nodal basin ultrasound in addition to any planned cross-sectional imaging surveillance.

Active surveillance of patients who have sentinel node positive melanoma: An international, multi-institution evaluation of adoption and early outcomes after the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial II (MSLT-2).

BACKGROUND: For patients with sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive cutaneous melanoma, the Second Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy trial demonstrated equivalent disease-specific survival (DSS) with active surveillance using nodal ultrasound versus completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Adoption and outcomes of active surveillance in clinical practice and in adjuvant therapy recipients are unknown. METHODS: In a retrospective cohort of SLN-positive adults treated at 21 institutions in Australia, Europe, and the United States from June 2017 to November 2019, the authors evaluated the impact of active surveillance and adjuvant therapy on all-site recurrence-free survival (RFS), isolated nodal RFS, distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and DSS using Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. RESULTS: Among 6347 SLN biopsies, 1154 (18%) were positive and had initial negative distant staging. In total, 965 patients (84%) received active surveillance, 189 (16%) underwent CLND. Four hundred thirty-nine patients received adjuvant therapy (surveillance, 38%; CLND, 39%), with the majority (83%) receiving anti-PD-1 immunotherapy. After a median follow-up of 11 months, 220 patients developed recurrent disease (surveillance, 19%; CLND, 22%), and 24 died of melanoma (surveillance, 2%; CLND, 4%). Sixty-eight patients had an isolated nodal recurrence (surveillance, 6%; CLND, 4%). In patients who received adjuvant treatment without undergoing prior CLND, all isolated nodal recurrences were resectable. On risk-adjusted multivariable analyses, CLND was associated with improved isolated nodal RFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.15-0.88), but not all-site RFS (HR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.45-1.02). Adjuvant therapy improved all-site RFS (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.47-0.57). DSS and DMFS did not differ by nodal management or adjuvant treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Active surveillance has been adopted for most SLN-positive patients. At initial assessment, real-world outcomes align with randomized trial findings, including in adjuvant therapy recipients. LAY SUMMARY: For patients with melanoma of the skin and microscopic spread to lymph nodes, monitoring with ultrasound is an alternative to surgically removing the remaining lymph nodes. The authors studied adoption and real-world outcomes of ultrasound monitoring in over 1000 patients treated at 21 centers worldwide, finding that most patients now have ultrasounds instead of surgery. Although slightly more patients have cancer return in the lymph nodes with this strategy, typically, it can be removed with delayed surgery. Compared with up-front surgery, ultrasound monitoring results in the same overall risk of melanoma coming back at any location or of dying from melanoma.

Surveillance of Sentinel Node-Positive Melanoma Patients with Reasons for Exclusion from MSLT-II: Multi-Institutional Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

BACKGROUND: In sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma, two randomized trials demonstrated equivalent melanoma-specific survival with nodal surveillance vs completion lymph node dissection (CLND). Patients with microsatellites, extranodal extension (ENE) in the SLN, or >3 positive SLNs constitute a high-risk group largely excluded from the randomized trials, for whom appropriate management remains unknown. STUDY DESIGN: SLN-positive patients with any of the three high-risk features were identified from an international cohort. CLND patients were matched 1:1 with surveillance patients using propensity scores. Risk of any-site recurrence, SLN-basin-only recurrence, and melanoma-specific mortality were compared. RESULTS: Among 1,154 SLN-positive patients, 166 had ENE, microsatellites, and/or >3 positive SLN. At 18.5 months median follow-up, 49% had recurrence (vs 26% in patients without high-risk features, p < 0.01). Among high-risk patients, 52 (31%) underwent CLND and 114 (69%) received surveillance. Fifty-one CLND patients were matched to 51 surveillance patients. The matched cohort was balanced on tumor, nodal, and adjuvant treatment factors. There were no significant differences in any-site recurrence (CLND 49%, surveillance 45%, p = 0.99), SLN-basin-only recurrence (CLND 6%, surveillance 14%, p = 0.20), or melanoma-specific mortality (CLND 14%, surveillance 12%, p = 0.86). CONCLUSIONS: SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, or >3 positive SLN constitute a high-risk group with a 2-fold greater recurrence risk. For those managed with nodal surveillance, SLN-basin recurrences were more frequent, but all-site recurrence and melanoma-specific mortality were comparable to patients treated with CLND. Most recurrences were outside the SLN-basin, supporting use of nodal surveillance for SLN-positive patients with microsatellites, ENE, and/or >3 positive SLN.

Oncologic Outcomes After Isolated Limb Infusion for Advanced Melanoma: An International Comparison of the Procedure and Outcomes Between the United States and Australia.

BACKGROUND: Isolated limb infusion (ILI) is a minimally invasive procedure for delivering high-dose chemotherapy to extremities affected by locally advanced or in-transit melanoma. This study compared the outcomes of melanoma patients treated with ILI in the United States of America (USA) and Australia (AUS). METHODS: Patients with locally recurrent in-transit melanoma treated with ILI at USA or AUS centers between 1992 and 2018 were identified. Demographic and clinicopathologic characteristics were collected. Primary outcomes of treatment response, in-field progression-free survival (IPFS), distant progression-free survival (DPFS), and overall survival (OS) were evaluated by the Kaplan-Meier method. Multivariable analysis evaluated whether availability of new systemic therapies affected outcomes. RESULTS: More ILIs were performed in AUS (n = 411, 60 %) than in the USA (n = 276, 40 %). In AUS, more ILIs were performed for stage 3B disease than in the USA (62 % vs 46 %; p < 0.001). The reported complete response rates were similar (AUS 30 % vs USA 29 %). Among the stage 3B patients, AUS patients had better IPFS (p = 0.001), whereas DPFS and OS were similar between the two countries. Among the stage 3C patients, the USA patients had better OS (p < 0.001), whereas IPFS and DPFS were similar. Availability of new systemic therapies did not affect IPFS or DPFS in either country. However, the USA patients who received ILI after ipilimumab approval in 2011 had significantly improved OS (hazard ratio, 0.62; p = 0.013). CONCLUSIONS: AUS patients were treated at an earlier disease stage than the USA patients with better IPFS for stage 3B disease. The USA patients treated after the availability of new systemic therapies had a better OS.

Perioperative Outcomes of Melanoma Patients Undergoing Surgery After Receiving Immunotherapy or Targeted Therapy.

BACKGROUND: Traditional chemotherapy agents adversely affect wound healing and need to be held prior to or after surgery. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted agents are now standard of care for the several treatment cancers. We hypothesize that ICI and targeted therapy do not have similar adverse effects on perioperative outcomes. METHODS: We performed a review of melanoma patients undergoing surgery at an academic hospital between 2011 and 2019. All patients received ICI or targeted therapy ≤ 60 days prior to surgery, including palliative procedures. Preoperative performance status was assessed using Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group score and American Society of Anesthesiologists Classification System. Thirty-day complications were classified by Clavien-Dindo grade. No statistical comparisons were performed. RESULTS: Of 63 patients included in the analysis, 29 (46%) patients received ICI and 34 (54%) received targeted therapy with median of 14 days (IQR 5-27 days) between the last preoperative dose and day of surgery (ICI, median 18 days [IQR 13-34.5]; targeted therapy, median 7 days [IQR 3-22.25]). There were no perioperative mortalities. Among patients treated with ICI, 22 patients (76%) had no complications. Four patients had wound infections (2 readmitted), 1 had reoperation (hematoma) and 2 readmitted for other reasons (fever; volvulus). Among patients treated with targeted therapy, 25 patients (74%) had no complications. Seven patients had wound infections (none readmitted), 1 had reoperation (flap failure) and 1 had dehiscence (not treated). CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing treatment with ICI or targeted therapies can safely undergo surgery without substantially increased risk of serious intraoperative and postoperative complications.

The emergence of neoadjuvant therapy in advanced melanoma.

The discovery of immunotherapy and targeted therapy has introduced new and effective treatment options for advanced melanoma, providing therapeutic options where none existed before. The natural extension of these novel therapies is to identify their role in the neoadjuvant setting. Neoadjuvant therapy for advanced melanoma is still in its infancy, with a wealth of clinical trials underway. Early results are promising, allowing for management of a disease that previously had few options. We review the current literature and interim results from several ongoing investigations to understand the current state of neoadjuvant treatment options and what is to come. These studies pave the way for further advancements in melanoma therapy.