The importance of mitotic rate as a prognostic factor for localized cutaneous melanoma

被引:80
作者
Barnhill, RL
Katzen, J
Spatz, A
Fine, J
Berwick, M
机构
[1] George Washington Univ, Med Ctr, Dept Dermatol, Washington, DC 20037 USA
[2] Inst Gustave Roussy, Villejuif, France
[3] Mem Sloan Kettering Canc Ctr, Epidemiol Serv, New York, NY 10021 USA
关键词
D O I
10.1111/j.0303-6987.2005.00310.x
中图分类号
R75 [皮肤病学与性病学];
学科分类号
100206 ;
摘要
Background: Tumor ulceration (TU) is considered the second most important prognostic factor after Breslow thickness for localized cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM). However, many studies have not included mitotic rate (MR) with TU in these analyses. When both TU and MR are included in the same analysis, MR appears to be the more important than TU and TU loses its significance as an independent prognostic factor. Methods: The relative importance of TU and MR as prognostic factors in localized CMM were compared in a population-based series of 650 consecutive invasive CMM cases ascertained from the Connecticut tumor registry and reviewed by a single dermatopathologist (RLB), during the period between January 15, 1987 and May 15, 1989. Seventeen clinical and histopathological variables including tumor thickness measured in mm, TU recorded as present or absent, and MR recorded as number per mm(2) were included in an unconditional logistic regression model and selected for inclusion using a backward stepwise algorithm with death as an endpoint or at least five-years follow-up. Results: In the multivariate regression, the independent prognostic factors included: 1. tumor thickness in millimeters (OR = 1.5, 95% CI = 1.3-1.9) 2. moderate mitotic index (between 1 and 6): (OR = 8.3, 95% CI 2.4-28.7), 3. mitotic index (>6): (OR = 11.6, 95% CI = 3.0-44.6), 4. solar elastosis: (inversely associated with mortality)(OR = 0.4, 95% CI = 0.2-8). After adjustment for MR, TU lost its significance. When MR was left out of the analysis, ulceration then became an independent prognostic factor. The model with ulceration only (excluding MR) showed a relative risk (RR) of 2.4 (95%CI: 1.1-5.1). In the model with MR only, MR had a RR of 14.5 (95% CI3.9-53.7). Finally, regression analysis including both TU and MR yielded an RR of 11.6 for MR and 1.7 for TU. Conclusions: Our results suggest that MR as a proxy for tumor proliferation is a more important prognostic factor than TU.
引用
收藏
页码:268 / 273
页数:6
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   PLANTAR LENTIGINOUS MELANOMA - DISTINCTIVE VARIANT OF HUMAN CUTANEOUS MALIGNANT-MELANOMA [J].
ARRINGTON, JH ;
REED, RJ ;
ICHINOSE, H ;
KREMENTZ, ET .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF SURGICAL PATHOLOGY, 1977, 1 (02) :131-143
[2]   Tumor mitotic rate is a more powerful prognostic indicator than ulceration in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma - An analysis of 3661 patients from a single center [J].
Azzola, MF ;
Shaw, HM ;
Thompson, JF ;
Soong, SJ ;
Scolyer, RA ;
Watson, GF ;
Colman, MH ;
Zhang, YT .
CANCER, 2003, 97 (06) :1488-1498
[3]   Prognostic factors analysis of 17,600 melanoma patients: Validation of the American Joint Committee on Cancer melanoma staging system [J].
Balch, CM ;
Soong, SJ ;
Gershenwald, JE ;
Thompson, JF ;
Reintgen, DS ;
Cascinelli, N ;
Urist, M ;
McMasters, KM ;
Ross, MI ;
Kirkwood, JM ;
Atkins, MB ;
Thompson, JA ;
Coit, DG ;
Byrd, D ;
Desmond, R ;
Zhang, YT ;
Liu, PY ;
Lyman, GH ;
Morabito, A .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2001, 19 (16) :3622-3634
[4]  
BARNHILL RL, 1993, SEMIN DIAGN PATHOL, V10, P47
[5]  
Barnhill RL, 1996, CANCER-AM CANCER SOC, V78, P427
[6]  
Barnhill RL., 1995, PATHOLOGY MELANOCYTI
[7]   Screening for cutaneous melanoma by skin self-examination [J].
Berwick, M ;
Begg, CB ;
Fine, JA ;
Roush, GC ;
Barnhill, RL .
JOURNAL OF THE NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE, 1996, 88 (01) :17-23
[9]  
CLARK WH, 1969, AM J PATHOL, V55, P39
[10]   THE BIOLOGIC FORMS OF MALIGNANT-MELANOMA [J].
CLARK, WH ;
ELDER, DE ;
VANHORN, M .
HUMAN PATHOLOGY, 1986, 17 (05) :443-450