ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2024
Validation of the Melanoma Institute of Australia's Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Risk Prediction Tool for Cutaneous Melanoma.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2024. 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 14 papers.
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
14 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparing the i31-SLNB and the MIA Nomogram for Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Positivity Prediction in Cutaneous Melanoma: A Prospective Cohort Analysis.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Article
- Review
- Patterns and Predictors of Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Utilization in High- and Low-Risk Thin Melanomas.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Sentinel lymph node status and oncological outcomes of high-risk and low-risk cutaneous primary melanoma.World journal of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Validation of risk prediction models for sentinel lymph node metastasis in melanoma in a high UV index region.JAAD international · 2025Article
- Global Applicability of a Risk Prediction Tool for Sentinel Node Positivity in Patients With Primary Cutaneous Melanoma.JAMA dermatology · 2025Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Eroding Utility of Prognostic Tools for Melanoma Sentinel Lymph Node Metastasis During Two Decades.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Declining Clinical Utility of Tools for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Status: A Single Institution Experience from 2000 to 2021.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Are Nomograms Useful for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Status in Melanoma Patients?Journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Surgical Management of Thick Primary Cutaneous Melanoma in the US.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
- A prospective, multicenter analysis of the integrated 31-gene expression profile test for sentinel lymph node biopsy (i31-GEP for SLNB) test demonstrates reduced number of unnecessary SLNBs in patients with cutaneous melanoma.World journal of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- Integrating the melanoma 31-gene expression profile test with clinical and pathologic features can provide personalized precision estimates for sentinel lymph node positivity: an independent performance cohort.World journal of surgical oncology · 2024Article
- Comparing Two Gene Expression Profile Tests to Standard of Care for Identifying Patients With Cutaneous Melanoma at Low Risk of Sentinel Lymph Node Positivity.Cancer diagnosis & prognosisArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundFor patients with cutaneous melanoma, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is used to stage regional lymph nodes pathologically and inform prognosis, treatment, and surveillance. To reduce unnecessary surgeries, predictive tools aim to identify those at lowest risk for node-positive disease. The Melanoma Institute of Australia (MIA)'s Prediction Tool for Sentinel Node Metastasis Risk estimates risk of a positive SLNB using patient age and primary melanoma Breslow depth, histologic subtype, ulceration, mitotic rate, and lymphovascular invasion.
methodsA single-institution validation was performed of the MIA Calculator with 982 cutaneous melanoma patients that included all relevant clinicopathologic factors and SLNB pathology outcomes. The study evaluated discrimination via receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves, calibration via calibration plots, and clinical utility via decision curve analysis of the MIA model in various subgroups. The data were fit to MIA model parameters via a generalized linear model to assess the odds ratio of parameters in our dataset.
resultsThe Calculator demonstrated limited discrimination based on ROC curves (C-statistic, 0.709) and consistently underestimated risk of SLN positivity. It did not provide a net benefit over SLNB performed on all patients or reduce unnecessary procedures in the risk domain of 0% to 16%. Compared with the original development and validation cohorts, the current study cohort had thinner tumors and a larger proportion of acral melanomas.
conclusionsThe Calculator generally underestimated SLN positivity risk, including assessment in patients who would be counseled to forego SLNB based on a predicted risk lower than 5%. Recognition of the tool's current limitations emphasizes the need to refine it further for use in medical decision-making.
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.