Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, AL; Department of Surgery, University of Alabama at Birmingham, AL.
Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, AL.
Surgery. 2022 Jul;172(1):226-233. doi: 10.1016/j.surg.2021.12.025. Epub 2022 Feb 1.
Melanoma clinical trials demonstrated that completion lymph node dissection is low value for most sentinel lymph node-positive patients. Contemporaneous trials of adjuvant systemic immunotherapy and BRAF/MEK targeted therapy showed improved recurrence-free survival in high-risk sentinel lymph node-positive patients. To better understand how oncologic evidence is incorporated into practice (implementation), we evaluated factors associated with discontinuation of completion lymph node dissection and adoption of systemic treatment at United States Commission on Cancer-accredited centers.
In a retrospective cohort study of adults with sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma treated from 2012 to 2017 using the National Cancer Database, we evaluated use of completion lymph node dissection and adjuvant systemic treatment using mixed-effects logistic regression, reporting results as odds ratios with 95% confidence intervals.
Among 10,240 sentinel lymph node-positive melanoma patients, performance of completion lymph node dissection declined from 60% to 27%. Adjuvant systemic treatment increased from 29% to 43% (37% in stage IIIA patients, 46% in IIIB-C). Completion lymph node dissection was less common with lower extremity tumors (odds ratio = 0.53, 95% confidence interval = 0.44-0.64) and more common with multiple positive sentinel lymph nodes (odds ratio = 2.36, 95% confidence interval = 2.08-2.67), treatment at a high- or moderate-volume center (odds ratio = 1.49, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-2.12; odds ratio = 1.32, 95% confidence interval = 1.05-1.64), and receipt of systemic therapy (odds ratio = 1.44, 95% confidence interval = 1.27-1.63). The increased likelihood of completion lymph node dissection in patients receiving adjuvant systemic treatment persisted in the most recent study years and in patients with a single positive sentinel lymph node.
At a population level, completion lymph node dissection declined and adjuvant systemic treatment increased, reflecting evidence-responsive care. Variation in persistent use of completion lymph node dissection and in provision of adjuvant treatment for lower risk patients highlights residual gaps in both evidence and implementation.
黑色素瘤临床试验表明,对于大多数前哨淋巴结阳性的患者来说,完成淋巴结清扫术的价值较低。同时期的辅助系统免疫治疗和 BRAF/MEK 靶向治疗试验显示,在前哨淋巴结阳性的高危患者中,无复发生存率得到了改善。为了更好地了解肿瘤学证据是如何被纳入实践(实施)的,我们评估了与美国癌症委员会认证中心停止完成淋巴结清扫术和采用系统治疗相关的因素。
在一项回顾性队列研究中,我们使用国家癌症数据库对 2012 年至 2017 年间接受前哨淋巴结阳性黑色素瘤治疗的成年人进行了评估,使用混合效应逻辑回归评估了完成淋巴结清扫术和辅助系统治疗的使用情况,结果以比值比和 95%置信区间表示。
在 10240 名前哨淋巴结阳性黑色素瘤患者中,完成淋巴结清扫术的比例从 60%下降到 27%。辅助系统治疗的比例从 29%增加到 43%(37%在 IIIA 期患者,46%在 IIIB-C 期)。下肢肿瘤的完成淋巴结清扫术较少(比值比=0.53,95%置信区间=0.44-0.64),而多个前哨淋巴结阳性的患者则更常见(比值比=2.36,95%置信区间=2.08-2.67),在高或中量中心治疗(比值比=1.49,95%置信区间=1.05-2.12;比值比=1.32,95%置信区间=1.05-1.64),以及接受系统治疗(比值比=1.44,95%置信区间=1.27-1.63)。在接受辅助系统治疗的患者中,完成淋巴结清扫术的可能性增加,这种趋势在最近的研究年份和单个前哨淋巴结阳性的患者中仍然存在。
在人群水平上,完成淋巴结清扫术的比例下降,辅助系统治疗的比例增加,反映了对证据的反应性护理。完成淋巴结清扫术的持续使用和为低风险患者提供辅助治疗的差异突出了证据和实施方面的遗留差距。