It IS way less than that in this day and age. This study was from the 50's and the 60's. The guidelines for removal were different then. There was no Sentinel Node Biopsy (SNB) back then – it wasn't introduced until the 90's. Things are changing so rapidly in the melanoma field that historical survival rates are useless now. New treatments that exist aren't included in them. Same with everything else. You HAVE to look at dates to see how old things are because 60 years ago is not any indication of what you'd see today.
It IS way less than that in this day and age. This study was from the 50's and the 60's. The guidelines for removal were different then. There was no Sentinel Node Biopsy (SNB) back then – it wasn't introduced until the 90's. Things are changing so rapidly in the melanoma field that historical survival rates are useless now. New treatments that exist aren't included in them. Same with everything else. You HAVE to look at dates to see how old things are because 60 years ago is not any indication of what you'd see today.
It IS way less than that in this day and age. This study was from the 50's and the 60's. The guidelines for removal were different then. There was no Sentinel Node Biopsy (SNB) back then – it wasn't introduced until the 90's. Things are changing so rapidly in the melanoma field that historical survival rates are useless now. New treatments that exist aren't included in them. Same with everything else. You HAVE to look at dates to see how old things are because 60 years ago is not any indication of what you'd see today.
but unless the Breslows were incorrect, regardless of when the study was done, it is what it is, right? also, as far as new treatments. . . Breslows that thin don't receive any treatments, so it wouldn't matter right?
but unless the Breslows were incorrect, regardless of when the study was done, it is what it is, right? also, as far as new treatments. . . Breslows that thin don't receive any treatments, so it wouldn't matter right?
but unless the Breslows were incorrect, regardless of when the study was done, it is what it is, right? also, as far as new treatments. . . Breslows that thin don't receive any treatments, so it wouldn't matter right?
They were looking at Clark's Levels which are subjective (and no longer used). And margins are they key. Melanoma was not as prevalent then. What margins were used? Back then, they used to do a total LND as treatment. This is a small study and old and not applicable to today. Compare it against this study from 2004 where stage IA had 22,000+ study participants as opposed to 256.
They were looking at Clark's Levels which are subjective (and no longer used). And margins are they key. Melanoma was not as prevalent then. What margins were used? Back then, they used to do a total LND as treatment. This is a small study and old and not applicable to today. Compare it against this study from 2004 where stage IA had 22,000+ study participants as opposed to 256.
They were looking at Clark's Levels which are subjective (and no longer used). And margins are they key. Melanoma was not as prevalent then. What margins were used? Back then, they used to do a total LND as treatment. This is a small study and old and not applicable to today. Compare it against this study from 2004 where stage IA had 22,000+ study participants as opposed to 256.
are you referring to the WLE margins? in a lot of cases anyway, the biopsy removed all of the tumor with thin lesions, the WLE is just for good measure but rarely finds any additional cancer cells, so I'm not sure how much margins mattered when talking about thin lesions
are you referring to the WLE margins? in a lot of cases anyway, the biopsy removed all of the tumor with thin lesions, the WLE is just for good measure but rarely finds any additional cancer cells, so I'm not sure how much margins mattered when talking about thin lesions
are you referring to the WLE margins? in a lot of cases anyway, the biopsy removed all of the tumor with thin lesions, the WLE is just for good measure but rarely finds any additional cancer cells, so I'm not sure how much margins mattered when talking about thin lesions
WLE tissue is never analyzed to the same degree as biopsy tissue. They look for "gross" cells, not individual ones. So even if the WLE says clean margins or nothing found, that doesn't mean melanoma wasn't in the sample.
WLE tissue is never analyzed to the same degree as biopsy tissue. They look for "gross" cells, not individual ones. So even if the WLE says clean margins or nothing found, that doesn't mean melanoma wasn't in the sample.
WLE tissue is never analyzed to the same degree as biopsy tissue. They look for "gross" cells, not individual ones. So even if the WLE says clean margins or nothing found, that doesn't mean melanoma wasn't in the sample.
The MRF Patient Forum is the oldest and largest online community of people affected by melanoma. It is designed to provide peer support and information to caregivers, patients, family and friends. There is no better place to discuss different parts of your journey with this cancer and find the friends and support resources to make that journey more bearable.
The information on the forum is open and accessible to everyone. To add a new topic or to post a reply, you must be a registered user. Please note that you will be able to post both topics and replies anonymously even though you are logged in. All posts must abide by MRF posting policies.
.
.
