ArticleAnnals of surgical oncology2025
Declining Clinical Utility of Tools for Predicting Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy Status: A Single Institution Experience from 2000 to 2021.
Article in Annals of surgical oncology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Long Live the Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy in Primary Cutaneous Melanoma.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
- ASO Author Reflections: Insight of In-Hospital Outcomes for Paraplegia Patients Undergoing Radical Cystectomy.Annals of surgical oncology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
introductionClinicopathologic data-based sentinel lymph node (SLN) prediction models are used to select patients with melanoma for sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). However, the temporal performance of these models is unknown. Therefore, we investigated whether the performance and clinical utility of the Melanoma Institute of Australia, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, and Friedman et al. models changed over time. PATIENTS AND
methodsPrimary cutaneous melanoma cases that underwent SLNB at a single tertiary-care cancer center from 2000 to 2021 were identified from a prospectively maintained database. Calibration plots were generated. Values for estimated risks of SLN positivity and area under the receiver operator curve (AUC) were calculated. Clinical utility was assessed at thresholds between 5 and 10% using decision curve analysis.
resultsIn total, 2977 SLNB cases were included. The estimated risk of SLN positivity and AUCs were similar across periods for all models. However, calibration decreased over time for all models, with progressive underprediction of SLN positivity. Clinical utility also declined over time; in the most recent period investigated (2018-2021), no model offered clinical utility at risk thresholds ≤ 8%, and only the Friedman model provided clinical utility at risk thresholds of 9-10%.
conclusionsThe calibration and clinical utility of three predominant models for SLN prediction declined over time. There is a need to periodically reassess the performance of SLN prognostic tools as they are applied to contemporary cohorts. Future studies are needed to determine whether findings are generalizable outside of this study cohort.
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.