Sentinel lymph node positivity in melanoma: Which risk prediction tool is most accurate?

Abstract

Background: Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma determines treatment and prognostic factors and improves disease-specific survival. To risk-stratify patients for sentinel lymph node biopsy consideration, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center and Melanoma Institute Australia developed nomograms to predict sentinel lymph node positivity. We aimed to compare the accuracy of these 2 nomograms.

Methods: A multi-institutional study of patients with melanoma receiving sentinel lymph node biopsy between September 2018 and December 2022 was performed. The accuracy of the 2 risk prediction tools in determining a positive sentinel lymph node biopsy was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic curves and area under the curve.

Results: In total, 532 patients underwent sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma; 98 (18.4%) had positive sentinel lymph node. Increasing age was inversely related to sentinel lymph node positivity (P < .01); 35.7% of patients ≤30 years had positive sentinel lymph node compared with 9.7% of patients ≥75 years. When we analyzed the entire study population, accuracy of the 2 risk prediction tools was equal (area under the curve_{Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center}: 0.693; area under the curve_MIA: 0.699). However, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center tool was a better predictor in patients aged ≥75 years (area under the curve_{Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center}: 0.801; area under the curve_{Melanoma Institute Australia}: 0.712, P < .01) but Melanoma Institute Australia tool performed better in patients with a higher mitotic index (mitoses/mm² ≥2; area under the curve_{Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center}: 0.659; area under the curve_{Melanoma Institute Australia}: 0.717, P = .027). Both models were poor predictors of sentinel lymph node positivity in young patients (age ≤30 years; area under the curve_{Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center}: 0.456; area under the curve_{Melanoma Institute Australia}: 0.589, P = .283).

Conclusion: The current study suggests that the 2 risk stratification tools differ in their abilities to predict sentinel lymph node positivity in specific populations: Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center tool is a better predictor for older patients, whereas Melanoma Institute Australia tool is more accurate in patients with a higher mitotic index. Both nomograms performed poorly in predicting sentinel lymph node positivity in young patients.