Author:
Deckers Eric A.,Hoekstra-Weebers Josette E. H. M.,Damude Samantha,Francken Anne Brecht,ter Meulen Sylvia,Bastiaannet Esther,Hoekstra Harald J.
Abstract
Abstract
Background
This study compares well-being, recurrences, and deaths of early-stage cutaneous melanoma patients in follow-up, as recommended in the Dutch guideline, with that of patients in a stage-adjusted reduced follow-up schedule, 3 years after diagnosis, as well as costs.
Methods
Overall, 180 eligible pathological American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage IB–IIC, sentinel node staged, melanoma patients (response rate = 87%, 48% male, median age 57 years), randomized into a conventional (CSG, n = 93) or experimental (ESG, n = 87) follow-up schedule group, completed patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) at diagnosis (T1): State-Trait Anxiety Inventory–State version (STAI-S), Cancer Worry Scale (CWS), Impact of Event Scale (IES), and RAND-36 (Mental and Physical Component scales [PCS/MCS]). Three years later (T3), 110 patients (CSG, n = 56; ESG, n = 54) completed PROMs, while 42 declined (23%).
Results
Repeated measures analyses of variance (ANOVAs) showed a significant group effect on the IES (p = 0.001) in favor of the ESG, and on the RAND-36 PCS (p = 0.02) favoring the CSG. Mean IES and CWS scores decreased significantly over time, while those on the RAND-36 MCS and PCS increased. Effect sizes were small. Twenty-five patients developed a recurrence or second primary melanoma, of whom 13 patients died within 3 years. Cox proportional hazards models showed no differences between groups in recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR] 0.71 [0.32–1.58]; p = 0.400) and disease-free survival (HR 1.24 [0.42–3.71]; p = 0.690). Costs per patient after 3 years (computed for 77.3% of patients) were 39% lower in the ESG.
Conclusion
These results seemingly support the notion that a stage-adjusted reduced follow-up schedule forms an appropriate, safe, and cost-effective alternative for pathological AJCC stage IB–IIC melanoma patients to the follow-up regimen as advised in the current melanoma guideline.
Funder
Groningen Melanoma Sarcoma Foundation
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference33 articles.
1. Hollestein LM, van den Akker SA, Nijsten T, Karim-Kos HE, Coebergh JW, de Vries E. Trends of cutaneous melanoma in the netherlands: increasing incidence rates among all breslow thickness categories and rising mortality rates since 1989. Ann Oncol. 2012;23(2):524–30.
2. Melanoma incidence, dutch cancer registration, IKNL©. Available at:
https://www.cijfersoverkanker.nl
. Updated May 2019.
3. Melanoma mortality, dutch cancer registration, IKNL©. Available at:
https://www.cijfersoverkanker.nl
. Updated May 2019.
4. Livingstone E, Krajewski C, Eigentler TK, et al. Prospective evaluation of follow-up in melanoma patients in Germany: results of a multicentre and longitudinal study. Eur J Cancer. 2015;51(5):653–67.
5. Rychetnik L, McCaffery K, Morton RL, Thompson JF, Menzies SW, Irwig L. Follow-up of early stage melanoma: Specialist clinician perspectives on the functions of follow-up and implications for extending follow-up intervals. J Surg Oncol. 2013;107(5):463–8.