Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster display session

347P - Relationship between modified surgical margin and prognosis of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

Date

23 Nov 2019

Session

Poster display session

Topics

Tumour Site

Melanoma

Presenters

Yukiko Teramoto

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2019) 30 (suppl_9): ix115-ix117. 10.1093/annonc/mdz429

Authors

Y. Teramoto, N. Baba, S. Saito, K. Sasaki, Y. Asami, T. Matsuya, A. Yamamoto, Y. Nakamura

Author affiliations

  • Department Of Skin Oncology/dermatology, Saitama Medical University Internatl Medical Centre, 350-1298 - Saitama/JP

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 347P

Background

Controversy exists regarding the optimal margin of surgical excision for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). Japanese clinical practice guidelines for skin cancer (second edition) recommend an excision with a 4–6-mm clinical margin for low-risk cSCC and >6-mm clinical margin for high-risk cSCC. However, it is difficult to follow this guideline for all cSCCs because high-risk cSCCs frequently occur on the face or in older patients. The purpose of this study was to investigate the correlation between surgical margin and prognosis in patients with cSCC.

Methods

Patients with cSCC who underwent surgical excision of the primary site between 2011 and 2019 at Saitama Medical University International Medical Center were included in this retrospective observational study. Patients were divided into two groups: group A (standard surgery with guideline-recommended margin) and group B (modified surgery with narrow margin). Overall survival (OS), relapse-free survival (RFS), local recurrence-free survival (LRFS), regional metastasis-free survival (RMFS), and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) were compared between the two groups.

Results

A total of 107 patients with cSCC were included in this study: 39 in group A and 68 in group B. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics such as sex, tumor border, and risk factors; age and tumor size differed between groups. There were no statistically significant differences in OS (p=.470), LRFS (p=.631), RMFS (p=.502), and DMFS (p=.475) between the two groups. However, RFS was significantly lower in group A than in group B (p=.049).

Conclusions

This study did not reveal a significant impact of clinical margin on OS in patients with cSCC. Although this conclusion may have been limited by selection bias, excision with narrower margins than those suggested by current guidelines may be appropriate.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.