ArticleBritish journal of cancer2005
Sentinel node status in melanoma patients is not predictive for overall survival upon multivariate analysis.
Article in British journal of cancer, 2005. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 49 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Eccrine Porocarcinoma: A Review of the Literature.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
- The utility of high-frequency 18 MHz ultrasonography for preoperative evaluation of acral melanoma thickness in Chinese patients.Frontiers in oncology · 2023Article
- Clinical and prognostic factors in 98 patients with malignant melanoma in China.The Journal of international medical research · 2017Article
- Clinicopathologic prognostic markers of survival: an analysis of 259 patients with malignant melanoma >or=1 mm.Tumour biology : the journal of the International Society for Oncodevelopmental Biology and Medicine · 2010Article
- Proposal for the applicability of modified Breslow (measured from the basal membrane) as a predictor of survival and sentinel lymph node outcome in patients with cutaneous melanoma.Anais brasileiros de dermatologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) has become a widely accepted standard procedure in the staging of patients with cutaneous melanoma and absence of clinical lymph node metastases, although there is no final proof that SLNB influences overall survival in these patients. This study investigated the accuracy of SLNB and the clinical outcome of patients after a mean follow-up of 22 months. Between 1998 and 2003, SLNB was performed in 309 consecutive patients. Patients with one or more positive sentinel lymph nodes (SLNs) were subjected to selective lymphadenectomy (SL). Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier approach. A Cox proportional-hazard analysis was used for univariate and multivariate analysis to explore the effect of variables on survival. Sentinel lymph nodes were identified in 299 of 309 patients (success rate: 96.8%). Of these, 69 (23%) had a positive SLN. The false-negative rate was 9.2%. Recurrence of disease to the regional lymph node basin (3.0%) and to the locoregional skin (2.6%) was rare in SLN-negative patients in contrast to SLN-positive patients (7.2 and 17.4%, respectively). The 3-year overall survival was 93 and 83% for SLN-negative and SLN-positive patients, respectively. Upon multivariate analysis, SLN status (P<0.001), Breslow thickness (P<0.02) and ulceration (P<0.026) were all found to be independent prognostic factors with respect to disease-free survival, whereas Breslow thickness proved to be the only significant factor with respect to overall survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.