Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41345808›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of clinical oncology2026

Prognostic outcomes of immediate complete lymph node dissection versus observation in patients with acral melanoma of the sole with sentinel node metastasis: a retrospective, multicenter study.

Sadao Inoue, Shigeru Koizumi, Naoya Yamazaki, Yuki Ichigozaki, Hiroshi Kitagawa, Yukiko Kiniwa, Sayuri Sato, Toshihiro Takai, Reiichi Doi, Takamichi Ito and 43 more

Abstract readMulticenter StudyComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of clinical oncology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

53 authors.

Sadao InoueDepartment of Skin Oncology/Dermatology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama, 350-1298, Japan.
Shigeru KoizumiDepartment of Skin Oncology/Dermatology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama, 350-1298, Japan.
Naoya YamazakiDepartment of Dermatologic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Yuki IchigozakiDepartment of Dermatology and Plastic Surgery, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Hiroshi KitagawaDepartment of Dermatology, Mie University, Tsu, Japan.
Yukiko KiniwaDepartment of Dermatology, Shinshu University, Matsumoto, Japan.
Sayuri SatoDepartment of Dermatology, Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan.
Toshihiro TakaiDepartment of Dermatology, Hyogo Cancer Center, Akashi, Japan.
Reiichi DoiDepartment of Dermatology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Japan.
Takamichi ItoDepartment of Dermatology, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan.
Masahito YasudaDepartment of Dermatology, Gunma University, Maebashi, Gunma, Japan.
Yutaka KuwatsukaDepartment of Dermatology and Allergology, Nagasaki University Hospital, Nagasaki, Japan.
Takeo MaekawaDepartment of Dermatology, Jichi Medical University, Shimotsuke, Tochigi, Japan.
Jun AsaiDepartment of Dermatology, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, Kyoto, Japan.
Takuya MiyagawaDepartment of Dermatology, University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan.
Shigeto MatsushitaDepartment of Dermato-Oncology, NHO Kagoshima Medical Center, Kagoshima, Japan.
Takeru FunakoshiDepartment of Dermatology, Keio University School of Medicine, Tokyo, Japan.
Yosuke YamamotoDepartment of Dermatology, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Takashi InozumeDepartment of Dermatology, Chiba University, Chiba, Japan.
Akiko KishiDepartment of Dermatology, Toranomon Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Tatsuya TakenouchiDepartment of Dermatology, Niigata Cancer Center Hospital, Niigata, Japan.
Hiraku KokubuDepartment of Dermatology, Shiga University of Medical Science, Otsu, Japan.
Shusaku ItoDepartment of Dermatology, Hitachi General Hospital, Hitachi, Ibaraki, Japan.
Yoshiyasu UmedaDepartment of Dermatology, Kawasaki Medical School, Kurashiki, Japan.
Yuki YamamotoDepartment of Dermatology, Wakayama Medical University, Wakayama, Japan.
Shoichiro IshizukiDepartment of Dermatology, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan.
Shiro IinoDepartment of Dermatology, University of Fukui, Fukui, Japan.
Hiroshi UchiDepartment of Dermatology, NHO Kyushu Cancer Center, Fukuoka, Japan.
Tomoe NakagawaDepartment of Dermatology, Asahikawa Medical University, Asahikawa, Japan.
Kazuhiro InafukuDepartment of Dermatology, Kimitsu Chuo Hospital, Kisarazu, Japan.
Takahiro HagaDepartment of Dermatology, Kesennuma City Hospital, Kesennuma, Miyagi, Japan.
Takahide KanekoDepartment of Dermatology, Juntendo University Urayasu Hospital, Urayasu, Japan.
Masahiro NakagawaDepartment of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, Hamamatsu University School of Medicine, Hamamatsu, Japan.
Hideki KamiyaDepartment of Dermatology, Central Japan International Medical Center, Gifu, Japan.
Masaru ArimaDepartment of Dermatology, Fujita Health University School of Medicine, Toyoake, Aichi, Japan.
Toshihiko HoashiDepartment of Dermatology, Nippon Medical School Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Azusa HiuraDepartment of Dermatology, Teikyo University, Tokyo, Japan.
Nobuo KanazawaDepartment of Dermatology, Hyogo Medical University, Nishinomiya, Hyogo, Japan.
Keiko ManabeDepartment of Dermatology, Takamatsu Red Cross Hospital, Takamatsu, Japan.
Masashi IshikawaDepartment of Dermatology, Saitama Cancer Center, Saitama, Japan.
Kenji AsagoeDepartment of Dermatology, NHO Okayama Medical Center, Okayama, Japan.
Utsugi IwasawaDepartment of Dermatology, Metropolitan Hiroo Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Takafumi KadonoDepartment of Dermatology, St. Marianna University, Kawasaki, Japan.
Naohito HattaDepartment of Dermatology, Toyama Prefectural Central Hospital, Toyama, Japan.
Shoichiro MinamiDepartment of Dermatology, Itami City Hospital, Itami, Japan.
Eiji NakanoDepartment of Dermatologic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Dai OgataDepartment of Dermatologic Oncology, National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan.
Satoshi FukushimaDepartment of Dermatology and Plastic Surgery, Faculty of Life Sciences, Kumamoto University, Kumamoto, Japan.
Hisashi UharaDepartment of Dermatology, Sapporo Medical University School of Medicine, Sapporo, Japan.
Kenta NakamaDepartment of Dermatology, Kurume University School of Medicine, Kurume, Japan.
Takaya KomoriDepartment of Skin Oncology/Dermatology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama, 350-1298, Japan.
Ken IgawaDepartment of Dermatology, Dokkyo Medical University, Mibu, Tochigi, Japan.
Yasuhiro NakamuraDepartment of Skin Oncology/Dermatology, Saitama Medical University International Medical Center, 1397-1 Yamane, Hidaka, Saitama, 350-1298, Japan. ynakamur@saitama-med.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-3664-5818

Funding

Japan Agency for Medical Research and Development 24ck0106765h0003
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe clinical utility of immediate complete lymph node dissection (CLND) following positive sentinel node (SN) remains controversial in acral melanoma (AM), in Asian populations where AM is more prevalent. This study aimed to compare the survival outcomes of immediate CLND versus observation (OBS) in Japanese patients with stage III sole AM and positive SN.

methodsThis retrospective, multicenter study included 154 patients (CLND: 90, OBS: 64) with stage III sole AM with positive SN, across 44 Japanese institutions. Recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), regional metastasis-free survival (RMFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between the two groups. Cox multivariable analysis and propensity score matching (PSM) were performed to adjust for potential confounders.

resultsWith a median follow-up of 3.9 years, non-significant differences were observed in RFS, DMFS, RMFS, or OS between the CLND and OBS groups (P = 0.33, 0.32, 0.08, and 0.21, respectively). Cox multivariable analysis identified N3a nodal stage as an independent negative factor for OS (HR: 2.6, P = 0.02), whereas CLND and other variables were not associated. After PSM, 92 (46 each) were matched. RFS and DMFS remained comparable (P = 0.16 and 0.19), with a non-significant trend toward improved RMFS in the CLND group (P = 0.08), and no difference in OS (P = 0.14).

conclusionsImmediate CLND did not provide a survival advantage over OBS in patients with stage III sole AM and positive SN. These findings do not support the routine use of CLND in this population. Trial registration Not applicable.

Indexed as

Lymph Node ExcisionMelanomaSentinel Lymph NodeSkin NeoplasmsAdultAgedAged, 80 and overDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleFootHumansJapanLymphatic MetastasisMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasm StagingAcral melanomaAdjuvant therapyImmediate complete lymph node dissectionMicrometastasisObservationSentinel lymph node biopsy

Identifiers

PMID41345808

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.