Advertisement

Imaging in Melanoma

Chapter
  • 183 Downloads

Abstract

Imaging plays an important role in the management of patients with melanoma at presentation, staging, follow up and in monitoring the effects of new adjuvant therapies. Pre-operative lymphoscintigraphy accurately identifies sentinel nodes and radiolabels them for surgical removal aided by a gamma probe in sentinel node biopsy. Combined with targeted histopathology this has lifted regional lymph node staging to new levels of accuracy.

Ultrasound using high frequency probes can detect early nodal metastasis before any lump is palpable clinically and guides fine needle biopsy. It also can define the nature of any soft tissue lump that may appear on follow up in node fields or elsewhere.

Cross sectional imaging adds additional precision to the localisation of sentinel nodes aiding their surgical removal. It also plays an important role in upstaging melanoma patients with more advanced disease and in monitoring the effect of adjuvant therapy using anatomical and metabolic criteria.

Keywords

Lymphoscintigraphy Sentinel node biopsy Ultrasound Metastasis Cross sectional imaging Upstaging Monitoring therapy 

References

  1. 1.
    Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, Economou JS, Cagle LA, Storm FK, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 1992;127(4):392–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Uren RF, Howman-Giles RB, Shaw HM, Thompson JF, McCarthy WH. Lymphoscintigraphy in high-risk melanoma of the trunk: predicting draining node groups, defining lymphatic channels and locating the sentinel node. J Nucl Med. 1993;34(9):1435–40.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Faries MB, Morton DL. Surgery and sentinel lymph node biopsy. Semin Oncol. 2007;34(6):498–508.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    van der Ploeg IM, Valdes Olmos RA, Nieweg OE, Rutgers EJ, Kroon BB, Hoefnagel CA. The additional value of SPECT/CT in lymphatic mapping in breast cancer and melanoma. J Nucl Med. 2007;48(11):1756–60.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Uren RF, Howman-Giles R, Thompson JF, McCarthy WH, Quinn MJ, Roberts JM, et al. Interval nodes: the forgotten sentinel nodes in patients with melanoma. Arch Surg. 2000;135(10):1168–72.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Uren RF, Howman-Giles R, Thompson JF. Lymphatic drainage of the skin and breast: locating the sentinel nodes. Amsterdam: Harwood Academic Publishers; 1999.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    McMasters KM, Reintgen DS, Ross MI, Wong SL, Gershenwald JE, Krag DN, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for melanoma: how many radioactive nodes should be removed? Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8(3):192–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Uren RF, Howman-Giles R, Chung DK, Morton RL, Thompson JF. The reproducibility in routine clinical practice of sentinel lymph node identification by pre-operative lymphoscintigraphy in patients with cutaneous melanoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2007;14(2):899–905.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Wortsman X. Sonography of the primary cutaneous melanoma: a review. Radiol Res Pract. 2012;2012:814396.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mescher AL. The immune system & lymphoid organs. In: Junqueira’s basic histology: text and atlas. 15th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill Education; 2018.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Vassallo P, Wernecke K, Roos N, Peters PE. Differentiation of benign from malignant superficial lymphadenopathy: the role of high-resolution US. Radiology. 1992;183(1):215–20.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vassallo P, Edel G, Roos N, Naguib A, Peters PE. In-vitro high-resolution ultrasonography of benign and malignant lymph nodes: a sonographic-pathologic correlation. Investig Radiol. 1993;28(8):698–705.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Voit C, Akkooi ACJV, Schäfer-Hesterberg G, Schoengen A, Kowalczyk K, Roewert JC, et al. Ultrasound morphology criteria predict metastatic disease of the sentinel nodes in patients with melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010;28(5):847–52.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Karaman S, Detmar M. Mechanisms of lymphatic metastasis. J Clin Invest. 2014;124(3):922–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nathanson SD, Shah R, Rosso K. Sentinel lymph node metastases in cancer: causes, detection and their role in disease progression. Semin Cell Dev Biol. 2015;38:106–16.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sanki A, Uren RF, Moncrieff M, Tran KL, Scolyer RA, Lin HY, et al. Targeted high-resolution ultrasound is not an effective substitute for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(33):5614–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bafounta M-L, Beauchet A, Chagnon S, Saiag P. Ultrasonography or palpation for detection of melanoma nodal invasion: a meta-analysis [see comment]. Lancet Oncol. 2004;5(11):673–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Voit CA, Gooskens SLM, Siegel P, Schaefer G, Schoengen A, Röwert J, et al. Ultrasound-guided fine needle aspiration cytology as an addendum to sentinel lymph node biopsy can perfect the staging strategy in melanoma patients. Eur J Cancer. 2014;50(13):2280–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, Andtbacka RH, Mozzillo N, Zager JS, et al. Completion dissection or observation for sentinel-node metastasis in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;376(23):2211–22.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Cui X, Ignee A, Nielsen MB, Schreiber-Dietrich D, De Molo C, Pirri C, et al. Contrast enhanced ultrasound of sentinel lymph nodes. J Ultrasonogr. 2013;13(52):73–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Grootendorst DJ, Steenbergen W, Manohar S, Ruers TJ. Optical techniques for the intraoperative assessment of nodal status. Future Oncol. 2013;9(11):1741–55.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Xing Y, Bronstein Y, Ross MI, Askew RL, Lee JE, Gershenwald JE, et al. Contemporary diagnostic imaging modalities for the staging and surveillance of melanoma patients: a meta-analysis. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011;103(2):129–42.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Gershenwald JE, Scolyer RA. Melanoma staging: American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 8th edition and beyond. Ann Surg Oncol. 2018;25(8):2105–10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gershenwald JE, Scolyer RA, Hess KR, Sondak VK, Long GV, Ross MI, et al. Melanoma staging: evidence-based changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual. CA Cancer J Clin. 2017;67(6):472–92.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ho Shon IA, Chung DK, Saw RP, Thompson JF. Imaging in cutaneous melanoma. Nucl Med Commun. 2008;29(10):847–76.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yancovitz M, Finelt N, Warycha MA, Christos PJ, Mazumdar M, Shapiro RL, et al. Role of radiologic imaging at the time of initial diagnosis of stage T1b-T3b melanoma. Cancer. 2007;110(5):1107–14.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Wagner JD, Schauwecker DS, Davidson D, Wenck S, Jung SH, Hutchins G. FDG-PET sensitivity for melanoma lymph node metastases is dependent on tumor volume. J Surg Oncol. 2001;77(4):237–42.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Petersen H, Holdgaard PC, Madsen PH, Knudsen LM, Gad D, Gravergaard AE, et al. FDG PET/CT in cancer: comparison of actual use with literature-based recommendations. Eur J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2016;43(4):695–706.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Harris MT, Berlangieri SU, Cebon JS, Davis ID, Scott AM. Impact of 2-deoxy-2[F-18]fluoro-D-glucose Positron Emission Tomography on the management of patients with advanced melanoma. Mol Imaging Biol. 2005;7(4):304–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Yang HL, Liu T, Wang XM, Xu Y, Deng SM. Diagnosis of bone metastases: a meta-analysis comparing 18FDG PET, CT, MRI and bone scintigraphy. Eur Radiol. 2011;21(12):2604–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Swetter S, Carroll L, Johnson D, Segall G. 9:45-10:00. Positron emission tomography (PET) is superior to computerized tomography (CT) for metastatic staging in melanoma patients. Clin Positron Imaging. 2000;3(4):154.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Iwano S, Ito S, Tsuchiya K, Kato K, Naganawa S. What causes false-negative PET findings for solid-type lung cancer? Lung Cancer. 2013;79(2):132–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, Schwartz LH, Sargent D, Ford R, et al. New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer. 2009;45(2):228–47.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Litiere S, Isaac G, De Vries EGE, Bogaerts J, Chen A, Dancey J, et al. RECIST 1.1 for response evaluation apply not only to chemotherapy-treated patients but also to targeted cancer agents: a pooled database analysis. J Clin Oncol. 2019;37:1102–10.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Seymour L, Bogaerts J, Perrone A, Ford R, Schwartz LH, Mandrekar S, et al. iRECIST: guidelines for response criteria for use in trials testing immunotherapeutics. Lancet Oncol. 2017;18(3):e143–e52.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    McArthur GA, Puzanov I, Amaravadi R, Ribas A, Chapman P, Kim KB, et al. Marked, homogeneous, and early [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography responses to vemurafenib in BRAF-mutant advanced melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(14):1628–34.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Kong BY, Menzies AM, Saunders CA, Liniker E, Ramanujam S, Guminski A, et al. Residual FDG-PET metabolic activity in metastatic melanoma patients with prolonged response to anti-PD-1 therapy. Pigment Cell Melanoma Res. 2016;29(5):572–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Trotter SC, Sroa N, Winkelmann RR, Olencki T, Bechtel M. A global review of melanoma follow-up guidelines. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2013;6(9):18–26.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Salama AK, de Rosa N, Scheri RP, Pruitt SK, Herndon JE 2nd, Marcello J, et al. Hazard-rate analysis and patterns of recurrence in early stage melanoma: moving towards a rationally designed surveillance strategy. PLoS One. 2013;8(3):e57665.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Benvenuto-Andrade C, Oseitutu A, Agero AL, Marghoob AA. Cutaneous melanoma: surveillance of patients for recurrence and new primary melanomas. Dermatol Ther. 2005;18(6):423–35.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Xing Y, Cromwell KD, Cormier JN. Review of diagnostic imaging modalities for the surveillance of melanoma patients. Dermatol Res Pract. 2012;2012:941921.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Faries MB, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, Andtbacka RH, Mozzillo N, Zager JS, et al. Completion dissection or observation for sentinel-node metastasis in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2017;1(23):2211–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Danielsen M, Hojgaard L, Kjaer A, Fischer BM. Positron emission tomography in the follow-up of cutaneous malignant melanoma patients: a systematic review. Am J Nucl Med Mol Imaging. 2013;4(1):17–28.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    DeRose ER, Pleet A, Wang W, Seery VJ, Lee MY, Renzi S, et al. Utility of 3-year torso computed tomography and head imaging in asymptomatic patients with high-risk melanoma. Melanoma Res. 2011;21(4):364–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alfred Nuclear Medicine and UltrasoundRPAH Medical CenterNewtownAustralia
  2. 2.Melanoma Institute AustraliaNorth SydneyAustralia
  3. 3.Sydney Medical SchoolThe University of SydneySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations