Bordeaux, Jeremy S.

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.

Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) is a rare cutaneous soft tissue sarcoma and affects an estimated 1,500 people annually in the United States. DFSP frequently exhibits extensive local infiltration. Initial treatment is through surgical excision, and care should be taken to ensure that negative margins are achieved to minimize recurrence. Although DFSP has a reported high rate of recurrence, metastasis is more uncommon. Fibrosarcomatous DFSP is an aggressive variant with an increased risk for local recurrence and metastasis. If achieving negative margins or resection is not feasible, radiation therapy or systemic treatment are options that may be considered by a multidisciplinary team. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) outline recommended treatment options available for DFSP.

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.

The NCCN Guidelines for Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical stage, and treatment options for patients. The panel meets annually to discuss updates to the guidelines based on comments from expert review from panel members, institutional review, as well as submissions from within NCCN and external organizations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the introduction of a new page for locally advanced disease in the setting of clinical node negative status, entitled “Clinical N0 Disease, Locally Advanced MCC.” This new algorithm page addresses locally advanced disease, and the panel clarifies the meaning behind the term “nonsurgical” by further defining locally advanced disease. In addition, the guideline includes the management of in-transit disease and updates to the systemic therapy options.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common form of skin cancer in the United States. Due to the high frequency, BCC occurrences are not typically recorded, and annual rates of incidence can only be estimated. Current estimated rates are 2 million Americans affected annually, and this continues to rise. Exposure to radiation, from either sunlight or previous medical therapy, is a key player in BCC development. BCC is not as aggressive as other skin cancers because it is less likely to metastasize. However, surgery and radiation are prevalent treatment options, therefore disfigurement and limitation of function are significant considerations. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) outline an updated risk stratification and treatment options available for BCC.

The NCCN Guidelines for Squamous Cell Skin Cancer provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical stage, and treatment options for patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. The NCCN panel meets annually to discuss updates to the guidelines based on comments from panel members and the Institutional Review, as well as submissions from within NCCN and external organizations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the introduction of a new surgical recommendation terminology (peripheral and deep en face margin assessment), as well as recent updates on topical prophylaxis, immunotherapy for regional and metastatic disease, and radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) for cutaneous melanoma is becoming more prevalent, but surgical technique varies. OBJECTIVE To define variations in published techniques for MMS for melanoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS A systematic review was performed of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases to identify all articles describing surgical techniques for MMS for melanoma. Technical details were recorded for the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of MMS. RESULTS Twenty-four articles were included. Mohs surgeons vary in how they assess clinical margins, how wide a margin they excise on the first MMS layer, and how they process tissue to determine tumor stage and margin clearance during MMS for melanoma. CONCLUSION Mohs micrographic surgery for melanoma is performed with varied surgical techniques. To establish best practices, additional research is necessary to determine how different techniques affect outcomes.