Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24947251›Full record

ArticleFuture oncology (London, England)2014

Sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma: final results of MSLT-I.

Alison B Durham, Sandra L Wong

Abstract readComment
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Future oncology (London, England), 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 30% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Alison B DurhamDepartment of Dermatology, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.
Sandra L Wong
Michigan Medicine · USUniversity of Michigan–Ann Arbor · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In 1994 an international randomized controlled clinical trial, MSLT-I, opened to study the utility of sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) for patients with clinically localized melanoma. This trial compared outcomes of patients treated with wide local excision (WLE) and SLNB (followed by immediate completion lymph node dissection [CLND] for those with a positive sentinel node [SN]) with outcomes of patients treated with WLE alone and CLND upon the development of clinically apparent disease. In February 2014 the final analysis of long-term outcomes data was published. Importantly, these data showed that the rates of nodal positivity were the same between the two arms of the trial. Although no difference in 10-year melanoma-specific survival was noted between the two arms, this was not entirely surprising as the overall rate of nodal disease within the trial was 20.8%, meaning that 79.2% of patients could not derive a benefit from SLNB. Subset analysis was performed to determine the impact of early intervention for those patients most likely to have a benefit from early detection. This analysis showed that for patients with nodal disease and intermediate-thickness melanoma (defined as 1.2-3.5-mm Breslow depth), early treatment following positive SLNB was associated with improved 10-year distant disease-free survival and improved 10-year melanoma-specific survival.

Indexed as

Lymph Node ExcisionSentinel Lymph Node BiopsyFemaleHumansMaleMelanomaSkin NeoplasmsmelanomaMSLT-Isentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID24947251
OpenAlexW2092180644

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.