Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32739767›Full record

ArticleEuropean journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)2020

Timing of sentinel node biopsy independently predicts disease-free and overall survival in clinical stage I-II melanoma patients: A multicentre study of the Italian Melanoma Intergroup (IMI).

Mario Mandalà, Francesca Galli, Roberto Patuzzo, Andrea Maurichi, Simone Mocellin, Carlo R Rossi, Eliana Rulli, Maria Montesco, Pietro Quaglino, Virginia Caliendo and 13 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 39% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 7 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

23 authors at 10 institutions in 1 country.

Mario MandalàUnit of Medical Oncology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy. Electronic address: mmandala@asst-pg23.it.
Francesca GalliMethodology for Clinical Research Laboratory, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Roberto PatuzzoMelanoma and Sarcoma Unit, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Fondazione Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Andrea MaurichiMelanoma and Sarcoma Unit, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Fondazione Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Simone MocellinUnit of Surgery, Veneto Institute of Oncology - IOV.
Carlo R RossiUniversity of Padua, Italy.
Eliana RulliMethodology for Clinical Research Laboratory, Istituto di Ricerche Farmacologiche Mario Negri IRCCS, Milan, Italy.
Maria MontescoPathological Anatomy and Histology, Veneto Institute of Oncology - IOV, Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico, Padua, Italy.
Pietro QuaglinoDermatologic Clinic, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin Medical School, Turin, Italy.
Virginia CaliendoDepartment of Surgery, University of Turin Madical Scholl.
Vincenzo De GiorgiDepartment of Dermatology, University of Florence, Italy.
Barbara MerelliUnit of Medical Oncology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy.
Corrado CaracòIstituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione 'G. Pascale', Naples, Italy.
Dario PiazzalungaUnit of Surgery, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy.
Alice LabiancaUnit of Medical Oncology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy.
Simone RiberoDermatologic Clinic, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin Medical School, Turin, Italy.
Rebecca SenettaPathology Division, 'Città della Salute e della Scienza di Torino' University Hospital, Turin, Italy.
Andrea GianattiUnit of Pathology, Papa Giovanni XXIII Hospital, Bergamo, Italy.
Barbara ValeriDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, IRCCS Fondazione Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori di Milano, Milan, Italy.
Daniela MassiHistopatology and Molecular Diagnostics, Careggi University Hospital, Florence, Italy.
Paolo A AsciertoUnit Melanoma, Cancer Immunotherapy and Innovative Therapies, Istituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS Fondazione 'G. Pascale', Naples, Italy.
Mario SantinamiMelanoma and Sarcoma Unit, Department of Surgery, IRCCS Fondazione Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy.
Italian Melanoma Intergroup (IMI)
Ospedale Papa Giovanni XXIII · ITFondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori · ITUniversity of Turin · ITIstituto Nazionale Tumori IRCCS "Fondazione G. Pascale" · ITIstituto Oncologico Veneto · ITMario Negri Institute for Pharmacological Research · ITAzienda Ospedaliera Citta' della Salute e della Scienza di Torino · ITAzienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria Careggi · ITUniversity of Florence · ITUniversity of Padua · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSentinel lymph node biopsy (SNB) still remains a key procedure to appropriately stage melanoma patients and to select those who are candidate to novel treatments with immunotherapy and targeted therapy in the adjuvant setting. The impact of timing of SNB on disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS) is still unclear. MATERIAL AND

methodsThe study was conducted at 6 Italian Melanoma Intergroup (IMI) centres and included 8953 consecutive clinical stage I-II melanoma patients who were diagnosed, treated, and followed up between November 1997 and March 2018. All patients were prospectively included in dedicated IMI database. Multivariable Cox regression analyses were performed to investigate how baseline characteristics and time interval until SNB are related to DFS and OS.

resultsConsidering the whole population, at multivariable analysis, after adjusting for age, gender, Breslow thickness, site, ulceration, and the SNB status, a delay in the timing of SNB was associated with a better DFS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR, delayed versus early SNB] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-0.99, p < 0.001) and OS (aHR 0.98, 95% CI 0.97-0.99, p = 0.001). Specifically, in patients with a negative SNB status, a beneficial impact of delayed SNB (i.e. at least 32 days after primary excision) was confirmed for DFS (aHR 0.70, 95%CI 0.63-0.79, p < 0.001) and OS (aHR 0.69, 95%CI 0.61-0.78, p < 0.001), whereas in those with a positive SNB status, DFS (aHR 0.96, 95%CI 0.84-1.09, p = 0.534) and OS (aHR 0.94 95%CI 0.81-1.08, p = 0.374) were not significantly different in patients with early or delayed SNB.

conclusionsOur study does not support a strict time interval for SNB. These results may be useful for national guidelines, for counselling patients and reducing the number of high urgency referrals.

Indexed as

MelanomaPrognosisSentinel lymph node

Identifiers

PMID32739767
PMCPMC7391020
OpenAlexW3045516651

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.