Carr, David R.

BACKGROUND The use of Mohs micrographic surgery as a treatment for melanoma is rising, but the reliability of Mohs surgeons in assessing MART-1 melanoma en-face margins has not been evaluated. OBJECTIVE To evaluate interrater and intrarater reliability of Mohs surgeons in interpreting margins of early-stage melanoma. METHODS Twenty Mohs surgeons were asked to independently review images of frozen section MART-1 en-face peripheral margins of in situ or early-stage melanoma. Surgeons determined margins as positive or negative at initial evaluation and 6 weeks later. Primary outcomes were interrater and intrarater reliability. RESULTS Interrater agreement was 84.1% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 75.5%–92.8%) for assessment 1 and 87.5% (95% CI: 78.4%–96.4%) for assessment 2, with kappa values 0.68 (95% CI: 0.50–0.82) and 0.75 (95% CI: 0.57–0.88). Average intrarater percent agreement was 95.0% (95% CI: 70.6%–100.0%) with average kappa 0.90 (95% CI: 0.50–1.00). CONCLUSION Substantial interrater and nearly perfect intrarater agreement was identified among surgeons assessing melanoma margins utilizing MART-1 immunostaining, demonstrating consistent and reproducible assessment of melanoma margins during Mohs cases.

ABSTRACT Importance Risk stratification of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) is central to effective management. Despite advancements in the 8th edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC8) staging system, the distinctiveness of T‐stages remains limited. Objective To evaluate the effectiveness of the Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) and the AJCC8 staging systems in predicting poor outcomes in head and neck (HN) CSCC. Design A retrospective, multinational cohort study of CSCCs diagnosed between January 10, 1991, and December 31, 2023. Setting Twelve centers across the United States (10), Spain (1), and Brazil (1). Participants Patients with invasive CSCC who underwent curative‐intent surgical treatment. Exclusions included cases of lip CSCC, cases with prior HN cancer with associated regional disease, patients with a history of chemotherapy/radiotherapy for other HN neoplasms, and recurrent primary tumors. Exposure Tumors were staged according to both the AJCC8 TNM staging system and the BWH tumor classification. Main Outcomes and Measures Local recurrence (LR), nodal recurrence (NR), distant recurrence (DR), and disease‐specific death (DSD). Results A total of 9852 excised tumors from 3168 patients were included. The 2 systems had comparable monotonicity and homogeneity. Significant differences could be observed in 5‐year cumulative incidence for DSD in both BWH and AJCC8, and also for LR in BWH. Higher T‐stages exhibited similar curves regarding NR and DR for both AJCC8 and BWH staging systems. Overall, we observed high specificity and NPV, low sensitivity and PPV, and moderately high c‐indices for both the BWH and AJCC8 staging systems in predicting the main outcomes for HNCSCC. Conclusion and Relevance Current AJCC8 and BWH staging systems can accurately predict survival in HNCSCC, although there are still important characteristics to be addressed in future staging systems for better stratification according to the other main outcomes.

Background: Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is a promising treatment modality for melanoma in situ (MIS). However, variations in surgical technique limit the generalizability of existing data and may impede future study of MMS in clinical trials. Methods: A modified Delphi method was selected to establish consensus on optimal MMS techniques for treating MIS in future clinical trials. The Delphi method was selected due to the limited current data, the wide range of techniques used in the field, and the intention to establish a standardized technique for future clinical trials. A literature review and interviews with experienced MMS surgeons were performed to identify dimensions of the MMS technique for MIS that (1) likely impacted costs or outcomes of the procedure, and (2) showed significant variability between surgeons. A total of 8 dimensions of technical variation were selected. The Delphi process consisted of 2 rounds of voting and commentary, during which 44 expert Mohs surgeons across the United States rated their agreement with specific recommendations using a Likert scale. Results: Five of eight recommendations achieved consensus in Round 1. All 3 of the remaining recommendations achieved consensus in Round 2. Techniques achieving consensus in Round 1 included the use of a starting peripheral margin of ≤5 mm, application of immunohistochemistry, frozen tissue processing, and resecting to the depth of subcutaneous fat. Consensus on the use of Wood’s lamp, dermatoscope, and negative tissue controls was established in Round 2. Conclusions: This study generated 8 consensus recommendations intended to offer guidance for Mohs surgeons treating MIS. The adoption of these recommendations will promote standardization to facilitate comparisons of aggregate data in multicenter clinical trials.

ImportanceCutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) is the second most common malignant disease in the US. Although it typically carries a good prognosis, a subset of CSCCs are highly aggressive, carrying regional and distant metastatic potential. Due to its high incidence, this aggressive subset is responsible for considerable mortality, with an overall annual mortality estimated to equal or even surpass melanoma. Despite this morbidity, CSCC is excluded from national cancer registries, making it difficult to study its epidemiology and outcomes. Therefore, the bulk of the CSCC literature is composed of single-center and multi-institutional retrospective cohort analyses. Given variations in reporting measures and analyses in these studies, interpretability between studies and the ability to pool results are limited.ObjectiveTo define standardized reporting measures for retrospective CSCC studies.FindingsAn expert panel was convened to determine standardized guidelines for recording and analyzing retrospective CSCC data. A total of 13 dermatologists and dermatologic surgeons with more than 5 years of posttraining experience and considerable experience with performing CSCC outcomes research were recruited to the panel. Consensus recommendations were achieved for CSCC retrospective study reporting measures, definitions, and analyses.Conclusions and RelevanceThe recommendations in this report present the potential to standardize future CSCC retrospective studies. With such standardization, future work may have greater interstudy interpretability and allow for pooled analyses.