Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology 9/2018

Open Access 01-09-2018 | Melanomas

1 Versus 2-cm Excision Margins for pT2-pT4 Primary Cutaneous Melanoma (MelMarT): A Feasibility Study

Authors: Marc D. Moncrieff, MD FRCS(Plast.), David Gyorki, FRACS, Robyn Saw, FRACS, Andrew J. Spillane, FRACS, Howard Peach, FRCS(Plast.), Deemesh Oudit, FRCS(Plast.), Jenny Geh, FRCS(Plast.), Peter Dziewulski, FRCS(Plast.), Ewan Wilson, FRCS(Plast.), Paolo Matteucci, FRCS(Plast.), Rowan Pritchard-Jones, FRCS(Plast.), Roger Olofsson Bagge, MD, PhD, Frances C. Wright, MD, M.Ed, Nic Crampton, FRACS, Oliver Cassell, FRCS(Plast.), Navid Jallali, FRCS(Plast.), Adam Berger, MD, John Kelly, MD FACD, Stephen Hamilton, FRCS(Plast.), Amer Durrani, FRCS(Plast.), Serigne Lo, PhD, Elizabeth Paton, MSc, Michael A. Henderson, FRACS

Published in: Annals of Surgical Oncology | Issue 9/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

There is a lack of consensus regarding optimal surgical excision margins for primary cutaneous melanoma > 1 mm in Breslow thickness (BT). A narrower surgical margin is expected to be associated with lower morbidity, improved quality of life (QoL), and reduced cost. We report the results of a pilot international study (MelMarT) comparing a 1 versus 2-cm surgical margin for patients with primary melanoma > 1 mm in BT.

Methods

This phase III, multicentre trial [NCT02385214] administered by the Australia & New Zealand Medical Trials Group (ANZMTG 03.12) randomised patients with a primary cutaneous melanoma > 1 mm in BT to a 1 versus 2-cm wide excision margin to be performed with sentinel lymph node biopsy. Surgical closure technique was at the discretion of the treating surgeon. Patients’ QoL was measured (FACT-M questionnaire) at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months after randomisation.

Results

Between January 2015 and June 2016, 400 patients were randomised from 17 centres in 5 countries. A total of 377 patients were available for analysis. Primary melanomas were located on the trunk (56.9%), extremities (35.6%), and head and neck (7.4%). More patients in the 2-cm margin group required reconstruction (34.9 vs. 13.6%; p < 0.0001). There was an increased wound necrosis rate in the 2-cm arm (0.5 vs. 3.6%; p = 0.036). After 12 months’ follow-up, no differences were noted in QoL between groups.

Discussion

This pilot study demonstrates the feasibility of a large international RCT to provide a definitive answer to the optimal excision margin for patients with intermediate- to high-risk primary cutaneous melanoma.
Literature
3.
go back to reference Cancer Council Australia, New Zealand, Ministry of Health, Melanoma Network (N.S.W.), Cancer Institute NSW, New Zealand Guidelines Group. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Melanoma in Australia and New Zealand: Evidence-Based Best Practice Guidelines. Sydney, N.S.W.; New Zealand: Cancer Council Australia: Australia Cancer Network; Ministry of Health; 2008. Cancer Council Australia, New Zealand, Ministry of Health, Melanoma Network (N.S.W.), Cancer Institute NSW, New Zealand Guidelines Group. Clinical Practice Guidelines for the Management of Melanoma in Australia and New Zealand: Evidence-Based Best Practice Guidelines. Sydney, N.S.W.; New Zealand: Cancer Council Australia: Australia Cancer Network; Ministry of Health; 2008.
5.
go back to reference Gillgren P, Drzewiecki KT, Niin M, et al. 2-cm versus 4-cm surgical excision margins for primary cutaneous melanoma thicker than 2 mm: a randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9803):1635–42.CrossRefPubMed Gillgren P, Drzewiecki KT, Niin M, et al. 2-cm versus 4-cm surgical excision margins for primary cutaneous melanoma thicker than 2 mm: a randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9803):1635–42.CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Balch CM, Urist MM, Karakousis CP, et al. Efficacy of 2-cm surgical margins for intermediate-thickness melanomas (1 to 4 mm). Results of a multi-institutional randomized surgical trial. Ann Surg. 1993;218(3):262.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Balch CM, Urist MM, Karakousis CP, et al. Efficacy of 2-cm surgical margins for intermediate-thickness melanomas (1 to 4 mm). Results of a multi-institutional randomized surgical trial. Ann Surg. 1993;218(3):262.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
11.
go back to reference Thomas JM, Newton-Bishop J, A’Hern R, et al. Excision margins in high-risk malignant melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(8):757–66.CrossRefPubMed Thomas JM, Newton-Bishop J, A’Hern R, et al. Excision margins in high-risk malignant melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(8):757–66.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Veronesi U, Cascinelli N. Narrow excision (1-cm margin). A safe procedure for thin cutaneous melanoma. Arch Surg Chic Ill 1960. 1991;126(4):438–41. Veronesi U, Cascinelli N. Narrow excision (1-cm margin). A safe procedure for thin cutaneous melanoma. Arch Surg Chic Ill 1960. 1991;126(4):438–41.
21.
go back to reference Cohn-Cedermark G, Rutqvist LE, Andersson R, et al. Long-term results of a randomized study by the Swedish Melanoma Study Group on 2-cm versus 5-cm resection margins for patients with cutaneous melanoma with a tumor thickness of 0.8-2.0 mm. Cancer. 2000;89(7):1495–501.CrossRefPubMed Cohn-Cedermark G, Rutqvist LE, Andersson R, et al. Long-term results of a randomized study by the Swedish Melanoma Study Group on 2-cm versus 5-cm resection margins for patients with cutaneous melanoma with a tumor thickness of 0.8-2.0 mm. Cancer. 2000;89(7):1495–501.CrossRefPubMed
25.
go back to reference Haigh PI, DiFronzo LA, McCready DR. Optimal excision margins for primary cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Surg. 2003;46(6):419.PubMedPubMedCentral Haigh PI, DiFronzo LA, McCready DR. Optimal excision margins for primary cutaneous melanoma: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Surg. 2003;46(6):419.PubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
1 Versus 2-cm Excision Margins for pT2-pT4 Primary Cutaneous Melanoma (MelMarT): A Feasibility Study
Authors
Marc D. Moncrieff, MD FRCS(Plast.)
David Gyorki, FRACS
Robyn Saw, FRACS
Andrew J. Spillane, FRACS
Howard Peach, FRCS(Plast.)
Deemesh Oudit, FRCS(Plast.)
Jenny Geh, FRCS(Plast.)
Peter Dziewulski, FRCS(Plast.)
Ewan Wilson, FRCS(Plast.)
Paolo Matteucci, FRCS(Plast.)
Rowan Pritchard-Jones, FRCS(Plast.)
Roger Olofsson Bagge, MD, PhD
Frances C. Wright, MD, M.Ed
Nic Crampton, FRACS
Oliver Cassell, FRCS(Plast.)
Navid Jallali, FRCS(Plast.)
Adam Berger, MD
John Kelly, MD FACD
Stephen Hamilton, FRCS(Plast.)
Amer Durrani, FRCS(Plast.)
Serigne Lo, PhD
Elizabeth Paton, MSc
Michael A. Henderson, FRACS
Publication date
01-09-2018
Publisher
Springer International Publishing
Published in
Annals of Surgical Oncology / Issue 9/2018
Print ISSN: 1068-9265
Electronic ISSN: 1534-4681
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-018-6470-1

Other articles of this Issue 9/2018

Annals of Surgical Oncology 9/2018 Go to the issue