Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden.
Department of Clinical Science and Education, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm, Sweden; Department of Surgery, Södersjukhuset, Stockholm, Sweden.
Lancet. 2019 Aug 10;394(10197):471-477. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(19)31132-8. Epub 2019 Jul 4.
The optimal surgical excision margins are uncertain for patients with thick (>2 mm) localised cutaneous melanomas. In our previous report of this multicentre, randomised controlled trial, with a median follow-up of 6·7 years, we showed that a narrow excision margin (2 cm vs 4 cm) did not affect melanoma-specific nor overall survival. Here, we present extended follow-up of this cohort.
In this open-label, multicentre randomised controlled trial, we recruited patients from 53 hospitals in Sweden, Denmark, Estonia, and Norway. We enrolled clinically staged patients aged 75 years or younger diagnosed with localised cutaneous melanoma thicker than 2 mm, and with primary site on the trunk or upper or lower extremities. Patients were randomly allocated (1:1) to treatment either with a 2-cm or a 4-cm excision margin. A physician enrolled the patients after histological confirmation of a cutaneous melanoma thicker than 2 mm. Some patients were enrolled by a physician acting as responsible for clinical care and as a trial investigator (follow-up, data collection, and manuscript writing). In other cases physicians not involved in running the trial enrolled patients. Randomisation was done by telephone call to a randomisation office, by sealed envelope, or by computer generated lists using permuted blocks. Patients were stratified according to geographical region. No part of the trial was masked. The primary outcome in this extended follow-up study was overall survival and the co-primary outcome was melanoma-specific survival. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT03638492.
Between Jan 22, 1992, and May 19, 2004, 936 clinically staged patients were recruited and randomly assigned to a 4-cm excision margin (n=465) or a 2-cm excision margin (n=471). At a median overall follow-up of 19·6 years (235 months, IQR 200-260), 621 deaths were reported-304 (49%) in the 2-cm group and 317 (51%) in the 4-cm group (unadjusted HR 0·98, 95% CI 0·83-1·14; p=0·75). 397 deaths were attributed to cutaneous melanoma-192 (48%) in the 2-cm excision margin group and 205 (52%) in the 4-cm excision margin group (unadjusted HR 0·95, 95% CI 0·78-1·16, p=0·61).
A 2-cm excision margin was safe for patients with thick (>2 mm) localised cutaneous melanoma at a follow-up of median 19·6 years. These findings support the use of 2-cm excision margins in current clinical practice.
The Swedish Cancer Society, Stockholm Cancer Society, the Swedish Society for Medical Research, Radiumhemmet Research funds, Stockholm County Council, Wallström funds.
对于厚度大于 2 毫米(>2 毫米)的局限性皮肤黑色素瘤患者,最佳的手术切除边缘尚不确定。在我们之前的这项多中心随机对照试验的报告中,中位随访时间为 6.7 年,我们表明,窄切除边缘(2 厘米比 4 厘米)并不影响黑色素瘤特异性或总体生存率。在这里,我们呈现了该队列的扩展随访结果。
在这项开放标签、多中心随机对照试验中,我们从瑞典、丹麦、爱沙尼亚和挪威的 53 家医院招募了患者。我们招募了年龄在 75 岁以下、临床分期为皮肤黑色素瘤厚度大于 2 毫米、原发部位在躯干或上下肢的局限性皮肤黑色素瘤患者。患者被随机分配(1:1)接受 2 厘米或 4 厘米的切除边缘治疗。在组织学证实皮肤黑色素瘤厚度大于 2 毫米后,由医生招募患者。一些患者由负责临床护理和临床试验研究者的医生招募(随访、数据收集和撰写论文)。在其他情况下,未参与试验运行的医生招募了患者。随机化通过电话呼叫随机化办公室、密封信封或通过使用随机块生成的计算机列表进行。患者根据地理位置分层。试验的任何部分都没有进行掩饰。这项扩展随访研究的主要终点是总生存率,主要次要终点是黑色素瘤特异性生存率。所有分析均基于意向治疗进行。该研究在 ClinicalTrials.gov 注册,编号为 NCT03638492。
在 1992 年 1 月 22 日至 2004 年 5 月 19 日期间,共招募了 936 名临床分期患者,并随机分配至 4 厘米切除边缘组(n=465)或 2 厘米切除边缘组(n=471)。在中位总随访时间为 19.6 年(235 个月,IQR 200-260)期间,报告了 621 例死亡-2 厘米组 304 例(49%),4 厘米组 317 例(51%)(未调整的 HR 0.98,95%CI 0.83-1.14;p=0.75)。397 例死亡归因于皮肤黑色素瘤-2 厘米切除边缘组 192 例(48%),4 厘米切除边缘组 205 例(52%)(未调整的 HR 0.95,95%CI 0.78-1.16,p=0.61)。
在中位随访 19.6 年的情况下,2 厘米的切除边缘对厚度大于 2 毫米(>2 毫米)的局限性皮肤黑色素瘤患者是安全的。这些发现支持在当前临床实践中使用 2 厘米的切除边缘。
瑞典癌症协会、斯德哥尔摩癌症协会、瑞典医学研究协会、Radiumhemmet 研究基金、斯德哥尔摩郡议会、瓦尔斯特伦基金。