Information about risk, prevention, screening, symptoms, diagnosis, treatment, and support for all cancers Information about cancer treatment, including surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, clinical trials, proton therapy, complementary medicine, and cutting edge technologies.
Ways for cancer patients and caregivers to cope with cancer, side effects, nutrition, general cancer support issues, grief/end of life issues, and shared survivor's experiences.
Frequently Asked Questions / Types of Cancer / Skin Cancers / Melanoma
Last Modified: July 23, 2006
Dear OncoLink "Ask The Experts,"
I recently went to my family practitioner about an odd-looking mole. He said he didn't think it was anything to be concerned about and shaved it off, but then the pathology report identified it as melanoma, Clarks level II and Breslow level 0.49 mm with involved margins. He then sent me to a dermatologist, who performed a wide excision of 2 cm around the margins. This report came back with no cancer. He also obtained panels of the original shave biopsy and had his pathologist read it; they concluded that the first pathologist had actually [incorrectly] read a lot of skin irritation and my melanoma was really a Clarks level I. Can I still have a sentinel node biopsy even though I have had a wide excision?
Christopher J. Miller, MD, Assistant Professor of Dermatology at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania, responds:
For a melanoma of this thickness (0.49 mm, Clark's I/II), a sentinel lymph node biopsy would not be appropriate in the absence of other high risk factors (such as ulceration, extensive regression, or vertical growth phase). The presence or absence of these high risk characteristics should be noted on the pathology report. (See Understanding Your Melanoma Pathology Report) If they are not, it would definitely be worth having the slides reviewed by another dermatopathologist who would document these characteristics.
The reason sentinel lymph node biopsy is not indicated for such a thin melanoma (assuming absence of these high risk factors) is that it is highly unlikely that a node would be positive, i.e. show melanoma, in this situation (<1.7% risk, according to Bleicher RJ et al. J Clin Oncol 2003;21:1326-31). With such a low likelihood of obtaining a positive node, I do not think it is worth subjecting the patient to the risks inherent with the procedure.
After a wide excision (2 cm), some surgeons would argue that lymphatic drainage has been disrupted. Therefore, sentinel lymph node biopsy may no longer target the true sentinel node (i.e. the node to where tumor would have been most likely to travel before wide excision).
In summary, I would not recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy. Consultation with a third party dermatopathologist could increase confidence that the diagnosis is accurate.
Donna Lee shares how it feels to have cancer and what others can do to help. Read more.
Cancer Types
Bone Cancer
Brain Tumors
Breast Cancer
Carcinoid Tumors
Endocrine System Cancers
Gastrointestinal Cancers
Gynecologic Cancers
Head and Neck Cancers
Leukemia
Lung Cancers
Lymphomas
Myelomas
Pediatric Cancers
Penile Cancer
Prostate Cancer
Sarcomas
Skin Cancers
Testicular Cancer
Thyroid Cancer
Urinary Tract Cancers
OncoLink Vet
Cancer Treatment
Biologic Therapy
Bone Marrow Transplants
Chemotherapy
Clinical Trials
Complementary Medicine
Gene Therapy
General Treatment Concerns
Hormone Therapy
PDT Center
Proton Therapy
Radiation Oncology
Surgical Oncology
Targeted Therapies
Vaccine Therapies
Cancer Support
Caregivers
Hospice Care and Bereavement
Nutrition and Cancer
Sexuality & Fertility
Side Effects
Support
Survivorship
Exercise and Cancer
Cancer Resources
Cancer News
OncoLink University
Nurses' Notes
Conferences
Newly Diagnosed Patients
Causes and Prevention
Legal and Financial Information for Patients
LGBT Resources
NCI Resources
Global Resources
Cancer Resource List
Resources for Young Adults
OncoLink Media Library
OncoLink TV
Book, Music and Video Reviews
Ask the Experts
Brown Bag Chat
Tracy's Corner
About OncoLink
About OncoLink
Giving to OncoLink
Contact Information
Usage Policy
Editorial Board
How to Partner with OncoLink
Link to OncoLink
Mission Statement
Calcium Leucovorin, Citrovorum Factor, Folinic Acid
Cladribine (2-CDA, Leustatin®)
Cyclophosphamide (Cytoxan®, Neosar®, Endoxan®)
Cyclosporine (Neoral®, Sandimmune®, Restasis®, Gengraf®)
Cytarabine (Cytosar-U®, Ara-C)
Irinotecan (Camptosar®, CPT-11)
Leucovorin (Calcium Leucovorin, Citrovorum Factor, Folinic Acid)
Calcium Leucovorin, Citrovorum Factor, Folinic Acid
Leucovorin (Calcium Leucovorin, Citrovorum Factor, Folinic Acid)
Leuprolide Acetate (Lupron®, Lupron Depot®, Eligard®, Prostap®, Viadur®) - For Men
Leuprolide Acetate (Lupron®, Lupron Depot®, Eligard®, Prostap®, Viadur®) - For Women
Lupron®, Lupron Depot®, Eligard®, Prostap®, Viadur®
Lupron®, Lupron Depot®, Eligard®, Prostap®, Viadur®
Busulfan (Myleran®, Busulfex®)
Intravesicular Mitomycin (Mutamycin®, Mitomycin-C, given into the bladder)
Mechlorethamine (Mustargen®, Nitrogen Mustard)
mechlorethamine, mustine, Mustargen®
Megestrol (Megace®, Megace-ES®)
Mercaptopurine (Purinethol®, 6-MP)
Methotrexate (Mexate®, Folex®, Rheumatrex®, Amethopterin, MTX)
Mexate®, Folex®, Rheumatrex®, Amethopterin, MTX
Mitomycin (Mutamycin®, Mitomycin-C)
Morphine Sulfate (Given by IV)
Morphine Sulfate (MS Contin®, Avinza®, Kadian®, Oramorph SR®)
MS Contin®, Avinza®, Kadian®, Oramorph SR®
Mutamycin®, Mitomycin-C, given into the bladder
Nitrogen mustard (mechlorethamine, mustine, Mustargen®)
Bendamustine Hydrochloride (Treanda®)
Bexarotene (Targretin®), Oral Formulation
Bexarotene Gel (Targretin® Gel Formulation)
Etoposide (Toposar®, VePesid®, Etopophos®,VP-16)
Thioguanine (6-TG, Thioguanine Tabloid®)
Toposar®, VePesid®, Etopophos®,VP-16
Trelstar LA® and Trelstar Depot®
Tretinoin (Vesanoid®, All-Trans-Retinoic Acid, ATRA)
Triptorelin (Trelstar LA® and Trelstar Depot®)

