Subtyping Cutaneous Melanoma Matters

Mary-Ann El Sharouni; Paul Johannes van Diest; Arjen Joost Witkamp; Vigfús Sigurdsson; Carla Henrica van Gils

doi:10.1093/jncics/pkaa097

Subtyping Cutaneous Melanoma Matters

JNCI Cancer Spectr. 2020 Oct 23;4(6):pkaa097. doi: 10.1093/jncics/pkaa097. eCollection 2020 Dec.

Authors

Mary-Ann El Sharouni¹, Paul Johannes van Diest², Arjen Joost Witkamp³, Vigfús Sigurdsson¹, Carla Henrica van Gils⁴

Affiliations

¹ Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
² Department of Pathology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
³ Department of Surgery, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
⁴ Department of Epidemiology, Julius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht University, Utrecht, the Netherlands.

Abstract

Background: Our aim was to investigate the role of melanoma subtype on survival and focus on the effects stratified by Breslow thickness and ulceration status.

Methods: Patients with cutaneous melanoma stage I, II, or III diagnosed between 2000 and 2014 were derived from the Dutch Nationwide Pathology Registry and overall survival data from the Netherlands Cancer Registry. Patients were followed until 2018. Using multivariable Cox proportional hazards models, hazard ratios were calculated for each melanoma subtype, per Breslow thickness category and ulceration status, and adjusted for age, sex, stage, and localization.

Results: A total of 48 361 patients were included: 79.3% had superficial spreading melanoma (SSM), 14.6% nodular melanoma (NM), 5.2% lentigo maligna melanoma, and 0.9% acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM). In the total patient group, using SSM as the reference category, adjusted hazard ratios were 1.06 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.01 to 1.12) for NM, 1.02 (95% CI = 0.93 to 1.13) for lentigo maligna melanoma, and 1.26 (95% = CI 1.06 to 1.50) for ALM. Among patients with 1.0 mm or less Breslow thickness and no ulceration, NM showed a twofold increased risk (hazard ratio = 1.96, 95% CI = 1.58 to 2.45) compared with SSM. Compared with 1.0 mm or less SSM without ulceration, the hazard ratio for 1.0 mm or less SSM with ulceration was 1.94 (95% CI = 1.55 to 2.44), and the hazard ratio for 1.0 mm or less NM with ulceration was 3.46 (95% CI = 2.17 to 5.50). NM patients with tumors greater than 1.0 mm did not show worse survival than SSM patients with tumors greater than 1.0 mm.

Conclusions: In this large nationwide study, ALM patients showed worse survival than SSM patients. Among patients with melanomas that were thin (1.0 mm or less), NM subtype patients also showed worse survival than SSM patients.