Predicting Disease Progression After Regional Therapy for In-Transit Melanoma | Dermatology | JAMA Surgery | JAMA Network
[Skip to Navigation]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 18.204.227.34. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
1.
Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2012.  CA Cancer J Clin. 2012;62(1):10-2922237781PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
2.
Balch C. Cutaneous melanoma. In: Balch C, ed. Principles and Practice of Oncology. Philadelphia, PA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 1993:1612-1661
3.
Pawlik TM, Ross MI, Johnson MM,  et al.  Predictors and natural history of in-transit melanoma after sentinel lymphadenectomy.  Ann Surg Oncol. 2005;12(8):587-59616021533PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
4.
Balch CM, Gershenwald JE, Soong SJ,  et al.  Final version of 2009 AJCC melanoma staging and classification.  J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(36):6199-620619917835PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
5.
Raymond AK, Beasley GM, Broadwater G,  et al.  Current trends in regional therapy for melanoma: lessons learned from 225 regional chemotherapy treatments between 1995 and 2010 at a single institution.  J Am Coll Surg. 2011;213(2):306-31621493111PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
6.
Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA,  et al; European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer; National Cancer Institute of the United States; National Cancer Institute of Canada.  New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors.  J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000;92(3):205-21610655437PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
7.
Trotti A, Colevas AD, Setser A,  et al.  CTCAE v3.0: development of a comprehensive grading system for the adverse effects of cancer treatment.  Semin Radiat Oncol. 2003;13(3):176-18112903007PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
8.
Beasley GM, Petersen RP, Yoo J,  et al.  Isolated limb infusion for in-transit malignant melanoma of the extremity: a well-tolerated but less effective alternative to hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion.  Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(8):2195-220518528730PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
9.
Thompson JF, Hunt JA, Shannon KF, Kam PC. Frequency and duration of remission after isolated limb perfusion for melanoma.  Arch Surg. 1997;132(8):903-9079267277PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
10.
McMahon N, Cheng TY, Beasley GM,  et al.  Optimizing melphalan pharmacokinetics in regional melanoma therapy: does correcting for ideal body weight alter regional response or toxicity?  Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16(4):953-96119184236PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
11.
Aloia TA, Grubbs E, Onaitis M,  et al.  Predictors of outcome after hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion: role of tumor response.  Arch Surg. 2005;140(11):1115-112016301451PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
12.
Kaplan EL, Meier P. Nonparametric estimation from incomplete observations.  J Am Stat Assoc. 1958;53(282):457-481Google ScholarCrossref
13.
Grotz TE, Mansfield AS, Kottschade LA,  et al.  In-transit melanoma: an individualized approach.  Oncology (Williston Park). 2011;25(14):1340-134822329185PubMedGoogle Scholar
14.
Atkins MB, Lotze MT, Dutcher JP,  et al.  High-dose recombinant interleukin 2 therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma: analysis of 270 patients treated between 1985 and 1993.  J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(7):2105-211610561265PubMedGoogle Scholar
15.
Anderson CM, Buzaid AC, Legha SS. Systemic treatments for advanced cutaneous melanoma.  Oncology (Williston Park). 1995;9(11):1149-1158; discussion 1163-1164, 1167-11688703684PubMedGoogle Scholar
16.
Chapman PB, Einhorn LH, Meyers ML,  et al.  Phase III multicenter randomized trial of the Dartmouth regimen versus dacarbazine in patients with metastatic melanoma.  J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(9):2745-275110561349PubMedGoogle Scholar
17.
Chapman PB, Hauschild A, Robert C,  et al; BRIM-3 Study Group.  Improved survival with vemurafenib in melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation.  N Engl J Med. 2011;364(26):2507-251621639808PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
18.
Robert C, Thomas L, Bondarenko I,  et al.  Ipilimumab plus dacarbazine for previously untreated metastatic melanoma.  N Engl J Med. 2011;364(26):2517-252621639810PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
19.
Beasley GM, Caudle A, Petersen RP,  et al.  A multi-institutional experience of isolated limb infusion: defining response and toxicity in the US.  J Am Coll Surg. 2009;208(5):706-715; discussion 715-71719476821PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
20.
Kroon HM, Moncrieff M, Kam PC, Thompson JF. Outcomes following isolated limb infusion for melanoma. A 14-year experience.  Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(11):3003-301318509706PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
21.
Cornett WR, McCall LM, Petersen RP,  et al; American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0020.  Randomized multicenter trial of hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion with melphalan alone compared with melphalan plus tumor necrosis factor: American College of Surgeons Oncology Group Trial Z0020.  J Clin Oncol. 2006;24(25):4196-420116943537PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
22.
Di Filippo F, Calabrò A, Giannarelli D,  et al.  Prognostic variables in recurrent limb melanoma treated with hyperthermic antiblastic perfusion.  Cancer. 1989;63(12):2551-25612720604PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
23.
Klaase JM, Kroon BB, van Geel AN, Eggermont AM, Franklin HR, Hart AA. Prognostic factors for tumor response and limb recurrence-free interval in patients with advanced melanoma of the limbs treated with regional isolated perfusion with melphalan.  Surgery. 1994;115(1):39-458284759PubMedGoogle Scholar
24.
Kroon BB, Van Geel AN, Benckhuijsen C, Wieberdink J. Normothermic isolation perfusion with melphalan for advanced melanoma of the limbs.  Anticancer Res. 1987;7:(3, pt B)  441-4423631900PubMedGoogle Scholar
25.
Minor DR, Allen RE, Alberts D, Peng YM, Tardelli G, Hutchinson J. A clinical and pharmacokinetic study of isolated limb perfusion with heat and melphalan for melanoma.  Cancer. 1985;55(11):2638-26443995475PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
26.
Skene AI, Bulman AS, Williams TR, Thomas JM, Westbury G. Hyperthermic isolated perfusion with melphalan in the treatment of advanced malignant melanoma of the lower limb.  Br J Surg. 1990;77(7):765-7672383752PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
27.
Sharma K, Beasely G, Turley R,  et al.  Patterns of Recurrence Following Complete Response to Regional Chemotherapy for In-Transit Melanoma.  Ann Surg Oncol. 2012;19(8):2563-257122476748PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
28.
Lindnér P, Doubrovsky A, Kam PC, Thompson JF. Prognostic factors after isolated limb infusion with cytotoxic agents for melanoma.  Ann Surg Oncol. 2002;9(2):127-13611888868PubMedGoogle Scholar
29.
Sanki A, Kam PC, Thompson JF. Long-term results of hyperthermic, isolated limb perfusion for melanoma: a reflection of tumor biology.  Ann Surg. 2007;245(4):591-59617414608PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
30.
Thompson JF, Kam PC, Waugh RC, Harman CR. Isolated limb infusion with cytotoxic agents: a simple alternative to isolated limb perfusion.  Semin Surg Oncol. 1998;14(3):238-2479548607PubMedGoogle ScholarCrossref
Original Article
June 2013

Predicting Disease Progression After Regional Therapy for In-Transit Melanoma

Author Affiliations

Author Affiliations: Department of Surgery, Duke University Medical Center, Durham, North Carolina.

JAMA Surg. 2013;148(6):493-498. doi:10.1001/jamasurg.2013.695
Abstract

Importance Although approximately 30% to 50% of patients experience a complete response after regional chemotherapy for in-transit melanoma, a subset of patients will develop rapidly progressive disease. In the current era of an expanding armamentarium, including both regional and systemic options for treating advanced melanoma, identifying perioperative factors that predict disease progression may obviate unnecessary morbidity associated with regional therapy and avoid delays in systemic therapy.

Objective To identify patient-related clinical and pathological variables, as well as procedural factors, that correlate with disease progression.

Design Using a prospectively maintained database, we identified patients who either underwent first-time melphalan-based isolated limb infusion (ILI) or first-time hyperthermic isolated limb perfusion (HILP) for in-transit melanoma. Response was defined using modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors for cutaneous disease at 3 months after treatment. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, with the differences in survival curves compared using a log-rank test. Potential preoperative and procedural predictors of in-field progressive disease were analyzed using logistic regression.

Participants Of the 258 patients included in the database, 215 were identified as having undergone first-time regional therapy. Of these 215 patients, 134 underwent ILI, and 81 underwent HILP.

Exposure Regional therapy (ILI or HILP).

Main Outcomes and Measures Complete response or progressive disease.

Results Of 134 patients who underwent ILI, 43 (32.1%) experienced in-field progressive disease. Of 81 patients who underwent HILP, 9 (11.1%) experienced in-field progressive disease. The median survival for patients with in-field progressive disease was 20.3 months for the ILI cohort and 15.0 months for the HILP cohort. In general, patients with progressive disease were younger, with advanced-stage melanoma and increased tumor burden. Compared with patients who experienced a complete response, patients with in-field progressive disease after ILI were younger (odds ratio, 1.06 [95% CI, 0.90-0.98]; P = .002). For patients who underwent HILP, no clinically relevant preoperative predictors of in-field progressive disease were identified. Procedural variables, including chemotherapeutic dosing, degree of acidosis or base deficit achieved, and peak temperature attained, were not predictors of in-field progressive disease after ILI or HILP.

Conclusions and Relevance Patient, clinical, and procedural factors are unreliable predictors of in-field progressive disease after regional therapy in patients with in-transit melanoma. Defining the potential utility of molecular markers in predicting response or failure of regional therapy should be the focus of future research efforts.

×