Observational studyThe oncologist2025
Management of acral melanoma with lymph node macrometastasis in the post-MSLT-II era: focus on the effect and timing of lymph node dissection.
Observational study in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundLimited studies have exclusively investigated the role of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) in acral melanoma (AM) with lymph node macrometastasis (macroLNM). This multicenter study aimed to evaluate the impact of CLND and its performance timing on AM patients with macroLNM. PATIENTS AND
methodsThe study enrolled 384 non-metastatic AM patients with initial or recurrent macroLNM from 4 tertiary hospitals. These patients were categorized into 3 groups based on the type of CLND: No CLND, CLND, or therapeutic lymph node dissection (TLND). The CLND group was further divided into early and late groups according to the timing of CLND. Kaplan-Meier and Cox multivariable analyses were performed to assess survival differences.
resultsOf the total cohort, both the 5-year overall survival (OS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS) in the No CLND group were significantly worse than those in the CLND and TLND groups (P = .009 and P = .021, respectively). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that CLND performance remained to be significantly associated with both OS and RFS (all P < .05). Among the CLND group, CLND timing independently predicted worse RFS (P = .049) but not OS at multivariate analysis. Notably, the late CLND group tended to significantly have more large-size metastatic nodes. Pearson correlation analysis revealed a significant correlation between preoperative time interval and the enlargement in size of lymph node metastasis (r = 0.356, P = .002).
conclusionsCLND remains crucial for improving prognosis for AM with macroLNM. Furthermore, delayed CLND might lead to larger metastatic lymph nodes and decreased RFS. Thus, performing CLND earlier may be beneficial for this patient population.
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.