eMedicine Specialties > Oncology > Carcinomas of the Skin

Malignant Melanoma: Differential Diagnoses & Workup

Author: Winston W Tan, MD, Assistant Professor of Medicine, Mayo Medical School; Consulting Staff, Mayo Group Practices
Contributor Information and Disclosures

Updated: Nov 23, 2009

Differential Diagnoses

Basal Cell Carcinoma
Lentigo Maligna Melanoma
Mycosis Fungoides

Other Problems to Be Considered

Benign melanocytic lesions
Dysplastic nevus
Squamous cell carcinoma
Metastatic tumors to the skin
Blue nevus
Epithelioid (Spitz) tumor
Pigmented spindle cell tumor
Halo nevus
Atypical fibroxanthoma
Pigmented actinic keratosis
Sebaceous carcinoma
Histiocytoid hemangioma

Workup

Laboratory Studies

  • CBC count
  • Chemistry panel (complete)
    • The chemistry panel may give a clue to possible metastatic disease. For example, an elevated alkaline phosphatase level may signal metastatic disease to the bone or liver, while elevation of liver function tests (aspartate aminotransferase [AST], alanine aminotransferase [ALT]) may represent metastatic disease to the liver.
    • Total protein and albumin provide information concerning the overall health and nutritional status of the patient and may afford prognostic information.
    • Many chemotherapy regimens may be toxic to the kidneys; therefore, a creatinine level is necessary prior to initiation of any treatment.
  • Lactate dehydrogenase
    • Lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) level is elevated with many conditions, including many malignancies. Although LDH is not specific for melanoma, it may be useful at diagnosis and also in the follow-up care of patients with melanoma. A markedly elevated LDH at diagnosis or at a follow-up visit may indicate distant metastases, especially in the lung and liver.
    • Although the specificity and sensitivity of this test are low, multiple studies show an elevated LDH level to be an independent predictive factor for poor prognosis. LDH level now is considered part of the staging system for melanoma.

Imaging Studies

Imaging studies are often obtained in patients with newly diagnosed melanoma, to rule out clinically occult distant disease. Nevertheless, available evidence suggests that preoperative imaging studies have significant costs and offer minimal benefit in most patients with melanoma.3

  • Chest radiograph
    • For patients with stage I or II disease, a chest radiograph is often obtained, although its result will likely be negative. To date, no studies support obtaining a radiograph in these patients, but a normal chest radiograph finding at diagnosis provides a baseline for future comparison.
    • Patients with stage III disease, in transit disease, or local recurrence should have a chest radiograph or CT scan of the chest because the lungs often are the first site of metastatic disease.
  • CT scan or MRI of the brain
    • MRI of the brain should be obtained during the workup of a patient with known distant metastases to detect additional asymptomatic metastatic disease. This is especially true for patients being considered for high-dose interleukin-2 treatment.
    • MRI of the brain in patients without known metastatic disease should be reserved for those patients who are symptomatic.
  • Chest CT scan
    • A chest CT scan should be included in the staging workup of a patient with stage IV disease (ie, the patient with known distant metastases) to detect asymptomatic metastatic lesions.
    • In patients with stage I, II, or III disease, a chest CT scan should be performed only if clinically indicated.
  • CT scan of the abdomen: A CT scan of the abdomen often is obtained when evaluating a patient with stage III, locally recurrent, or in transit disease. Although the yield is low, a negative CT scan provides a baseline study for future comparison.
  • CT scan of the pelvis: This study is indicated only if a patient has local regional recurrence below the waist, is symptomatic, or has known metastatic disease with a history of primary tumors below the waist.
  • PET scan:
    • A positron emission tomography (PET) scan may aid in staging patients with known node disease or in transit or satellite lesions. Many studies report a greater sensitivity with PET scans compared with conventional radiographic studies for the detection of metastatic disease.
    • PET scans often are useful in evaluating the response of metastatic disease to therapy.
    • PET scans are not indicated in early-stage disease (Stage I or II).

Procedures

  • Biopsy of a suggestive lesion
    • A complete excisional biopsy is preferred and should include a 1-2 mm margin of healthy skin, to include all layers of skin and some subcutaneous fat.
    • If the suggestive lesion is large or situated in a cosmetically sensitive area, an incisional or punch biopsy may be appropriate. The incisional biopsy should be taken from the most abnormal area of the lesion.
    • Because all layers of the skin must be included in the biopsy, a shave biopsy is contraindicated.
    • In some cases where a shave biopsy was done on a lesion, a complete excisional biopsy should be performed if possible to determine the depth and extent of the lesion.
  • Surgical excision or reexcision after biopsy
    • Because failure to perform a reexcision after biopsy of a melanoma is associated with a local recurrence rate as high as 40%, a reexcision must be performed.
    • Current recommendations for margins of excision are as follows:
      • Lesions less than 1 mm in thickness - 1 cm margin
      • Lesions 1-4 mm in thickness - 2 cm margin
      • Lesions greater than 4 mm in thickness - at least 2 cm margin
  • Elective lymph node dissection
    • Patients with clinically enlarged lymph nodes and no evidence of distant disease should undergo a complete regional lymph node dissection (LND).
    • For years, patients without clinically enlarged nodes underwent LND. Recent studies show that, in patients with melanomas that are 1-4 mm thick, LND may not yield a significant survival advantage.
    • The only patients who seem to benefit from LND are those with lesions 1.1–2 mm thick and who are younger than 60 years.
    • Patients with lesions greater than 4 mm in thickness are widely considered not to benefit from removal of clinically negative nodes.
  • Sentinel lymph node dissection
    • Lymphatics from any given region on the skin drain to a single lymph node. This node is called the sentinel lymph node and almost always is the first site of nodal involvement when melanoma spreads to regional nodes.
    • To determine which node is the sentinel node, the following 2 techniques, often in combination, are used. The combination of the 2 techniques allows detection of the sentinel node in as many as 98% of cases.
      • The first technique involves injecting a blue dye at the site of the primary and, through a small incision over the nodal basin, determining the location of the sentinel node. The node is then removed for pathologic evaluation.
      • The second technique involves a radiolabeled solution injected into the site of the primary and the use of a hand-held gamma detector to determine the location of the sentinel node.
    • Sentinel node biopsy is now known to offer important prognostic, diagnostic, and therapeutic information.4
      • Guidelines from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) suggest that it is reasonable to offer sentinel lymph node biopsy to patients with thick melanoma (4 mm or greater), in whom the probability of a positive sentinel node is 30-40% and in whom sentinel lymph node status is a strong independent predictor of outcome.5 Sentinel node biopsy may be offered either as standard care or in the context of a clinical trial.
      • The NCCN does not recommend sentinel lymph node biopsy for patients with in situ melanoma (stage 0) or stage IA melanoma that is 1 mm or less with no adverse features. Although there appears to be a subset of patients with thin melanoma who are at sufficient risk for a positive sentinel lymph node to justify a biopsy, there is not yet clear consensus regarding which factors best predict this risk; possible factors include  thickness over 0.75 mm, high mitotic rate, and young patient age; other possible factors include positive deep margins and lymphovascular invasion.6

Histologic Findings

Although no single histologic feature is pathognomonic for melanoma, many characteristic features exist.

  • Cytologic atypia virtually always is noted, with enlarged cells containing large pleomorphic hyperchromic nuclei with prominent nucleoli.
  • Numerous mitotic figures often are noted.
  • A pagetoid growth pattern with upward growth of the melanocytes, so they are no longer confined to the basal layer, is considered pathognomonic for melanoma by some pathologists.
  • Although immunohistochemical stains usually are not necessary for diagnosis, they are generally performed for completeness. Both S-100 and homatropine methylbromide (HMB45) stains are positive in melanoma. The S-100 is highly sensitive, although not specific, for melanoma, while the HMB45 is highly specific and moderately sensitive for melanoma. The 2 stains, in concert, can be useful in diagnosing poorly differentiated melanomas.

Staging

The staging system for cutaneous melanoma was revised by the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) in early 2002.7,8

  • Clark staging
    • Level I - All tumor cells above basement membrane (in situ)
    • Level II - Tumor extends into papillary dermis
    • Level III - Tumor extends to interface between papillary and reticular dermis
    • Level IV - Tumor extends between bundles of collagen of reticular dermis (extends into reticular dermis)
    • Level V - Tumor invasion of subcutaneous tissue
  • Breslow classification (thickness)
    • Less than or equal to 0.75 mm
    • 0.76-1.5 mm
    • 1.51-4 mm
    • Greater than or equal to 4 mm
  • AJCC groupings based on TNM classification
    • Stage 0 - Tis, N0, M0
    • Stage 1A - T1a, N0, M0
    • Stage 1B
      • T1b, N0, M0
      • T2b, N0, M0
    • Stage IIA
      • T2b, N0, M0
      • T3a, N0, M0
    • Stage IIB
      • T3b, N0, M0
      • T4a, N0, M0
    • Stage IIC - T4b, N0, M0
    • Stage III - Any T, N 1-3, M0
    • Stage IIIA
      • pT1-4a, N1a, M0
      • pT1-4a, N2a, M0
    • Stage IIIB
      • pT1-4b, N1a, M0
      • pT1-4b, N2a, M0
      • pT1-4a, N1b, M0
      • pT1-4a, N2b, M0
      • pT1-4a/b, N2c, M0
    • Stage IIIC
      • pT1-4b, N1b, M0
      • pT1-4b, N2b, M0
      • Any T, N3, M0
    • Stage IV - Any T, Any N, Any M
  • T classification (thickness)
    • TX - Primary tumor cannot be assessed ( shave biopsy, regressed primary)
    • Tis Melanoma in situ
    • T1 -£ 1.0 mm (a: without ulceration, b: with ulceration)
    • T2 - 1.01-2.0 mm (a: without ulceration, b: with ulceration)
    • T3 - 2.01-4.0 mm (a: without ulceration, b: with ulceration)
    • T4 - <4.0 mm (a: without ulceration, b: with ulceration)
  • N classification
    • N1 - 1 lymph node; a: micrometastasis (clinically occult), b: macrometastasis (clinically apparent)
    • N2 - 2-3 lymph nodes; a: micrometastasis, b: macrometastasis, c: in transit met(s), satellite(s), without metastatic lymph nodes
      • N2a - 2-3 nodes positive for micrometastasis
      • N2b - 2-3 nodes positive for macrometastasis
      • N2c - In transit met(s) or satellite(s) without metastatic nodes
    • N3 - 4 or more metastatic nodes or matted nodes or in-transit metastases or satellite(s) with metastatic node(s).
    • Note: Micrometastases are diagnosed after elective or sentinel lymphadenectomy. Macrometastases are defined as clinically detectable nodal metastases confirmed by therapeutic lymphadenectomy or when nodal metastasis exhibits gross extracapsular extension.
  • M classification
    • M1a - Distant skin, subcutaneous, or nodal metastases, normal LDH level
    • M1b - Lung metastases, normal LDH level
    • M1c - All other visceral metastases or any distant metastases with an elevated LDH level

More on Malignant Melanoma

Overview: Malignant Melanoma
Differential Diagnoses & Workup: Malignant Melanoma
Treatment & Medication: Malignant Melanoma
Follow-up: Malignant Melanoma
Multimedia: Malignant Melanoma
References
Further Reading

References

  1. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts & Figures 2009. Available at http://www.cancer.org/downloads/STT/500809web.pdf. Accessed August 25, 2009.

  2. Kantor J, Kantor DE. Routine dermatologist-performed full-body skin examination and early melanoma detection. Arch Dermatol. Aug 2009;145(8):873-6. [Medline].

  3. Sabel MS, Wong SL. Review of evidence-based support for pretreatment imaging in melanoma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. Mar 2009;7(3):281-9. [Medline].

  4. Bachter D, Michl C, Buchels H; et al. The predictive value of the sentinel lymph node in malignant melanomas. Recent Results Cancer Res. 2001;158:129-36. [Medline].

  5. {Guideline} National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Melanoma v.2. Available at http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/PDF/melanoma.pdf. Accessed August 25, 2009.

  6. Andtbacka RH, Gershenwald JE. Role of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with thin melanoma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. Mar 2009;7(3):308-17. [Medline].

  7. Balch CM, Buzaid AC, Soong SJ, et al. Final version of the American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system for cutaneous melanoma. J Clin Oncol. Aug 15 2001;19(16):3635-48. [Medline].

  8. American Joint Committee on Cancer. AJCC Staging Manual. 2002;6th edition.

  9. Kirkwood JM, Strawderman MH, Ernstoff MS, Smith TJ, Borden EC, Blum RH. Interferon alfa-2b adjuvant therapy of high-risk resected cutaneous melanoma: the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Trial EST 1684. J Clin Oncol. Jan 1996;14(1):7-17. [Medline].

  10. [Best Evidence] Kirkwood JM, Manola J, Ibrahim J, Sondak V, Ernstoff MS, Rao U. Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group. A pooled analysis of Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group and intergroup trials of adjuvant high dose alpha interferon for melanoma. Clin Cancer Res. 2004;10:1670-77.

  11. [Best Evidence] Pectasides D, Dafni U, Bafaloukos D, Skarlos D, Polyzos A, Tsoutsos D, et al. Randomized phase III study of 1 month versus 1 year of adjuvant high-dose interferon alfa-2b in patients with resected high-risk melanoma. J Clin Oncol. Feb 20 2009;27(6):939-44. [Medline].

  12. [Best Evidence] Hauschild A, Weichenthal M, Rass K, Linse R, Ulrich J, Stadler R, et al. Prospective randomized multicenter adjuvant dermatologic cooperative oncology group trial of low-dose interferon alfa-2b with or without a modified high-dose interferon alfa-2b induction phase in patients with lymph node-negative melanoma. J Clin Oncol. Jul 20 2009;27(21):3496-502. [Medline].

  13. Spitler LE, Grossbard ML, Ernstoff MS, Silver G, Jacobs M, Hayes FA, et al. Adjuvant therapy of stage III and IV malignant melanoma using granulocyte-macrophage colony-stimulating factor. J Clin Oncol. Apr 2000;18(8):1614-21. [Medline].

  14. Fecher LA, Flaherty KT. Where are we with adjuvant therapy of stage III and IV melanoma in 2009?. J Natl Compr Canc Netw. Mar 2009;7(3):295-304. [Medline].

  15. Lens MB, Reiman T, Husain AF. Use of tamoxifen in the treatment of malignant melanoma. Cancer. Oct 1 2003;98(7):1355-61. [Medline][Full Text].

  16. Middleton MR, Grob JJ, Aaronson N, Fierlbeck G, Tilgen W, Seiter S, et al. Randomized phase III study of temozolomide versus dacarbazine in the treatment of patients with advanced metastatic malignant melanoma. J Clin Oncol. Jan 2000;18(1):158-66. [Medline].

  17. Atkins MB, Lotze MT, Dutcher JP, Fisher RI, Weiss G, Margolin K, et al. High-dose recombinant interleukin 2 therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma: analysis of 270 patients treated between 1985 and 1993. J Clin Oncol. Jul 1999;17(7):2105-16. [Medline].

  18. Hauschild A, Agarwala SS, Trefzer U, Hogg D, Robert C, Hersey P, et al. Results of a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled study of sorafenib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel as second-line treatment in patients with unresectable stage III or stage IV melanoma. J Clin Oncol. Jun 10 2009;27(17):2823-30. [Medline].

  19. Sarnaik AA, Weber JS. Recent advances using anti-CTLA-4 for the treatment of melanoma. Cancer J. May-Jun 2009;15(3):169-73. [Medline].

  20. Kirkwood JM, Ibrahim JG, Sosman JA, Sondak VK, Agarwala SS, Ernstoff MS, et al. High-dose interferon alfa-2b significantly prolongs relapse-free and overall survival compared with the GM2-KLH/QS-21 vaccine in patients with resected stage IIB-III melanoma: results of intergroup trial E1694/S9512/C509801. J Clin Oncol. May 1 2001;19(9):2370-80. [Medline].

  21. Sasse AD, Sasse EC, Clark LG, Ulloa L, Clark OA. Chemoimmunotherapy versus chemotherapy for metastatic malignant melanoma. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. Jan 24 2007;CD005413. [Medline].

  22. McWilliams RR, Rao RD, Buckner JC, Link MJ, Markovic S, Brown PD. Melanoma-induced brain metastases. Expert Rev Anticancer Ther. May 2008;8(5):743-55. [Medline].

  23. Huncharek M, Kupelnick B. Use of topical sunscreen and the risk of malignant melanoma. Results of a meta-analysis of 9,067 patients. Ann Epidemiol. Oct 1 2000;10(7):467. [Medline].

  24. Autier P, Boniol M, Doré JF. Sunscreen use and increased duration of intentional sun exposure: still a burning issue. Int J Cancer. Jul 1 2007;121(1):1-5. [Medline].

  25. Balch CM, Houghton AN, Sober AJ, Soong S, eds. Cutaneous Melanoma. 1998. 3rd ed.

  26. Buzaid AC, Anderson CM. The changing prognosis of melanoma. Curr Oncol Rep. Jul 2000;2(4):322-8. [Medline].

  27. Lawson DH. Update on the systemic treatment of malignant melanoma. Semin Oncol. Apr 2004;31(2 Suppl 4):33-7. [Medline].

  28. Lawton GP, Ariyan S. Regional lymph node dissections in malignant melanoma. Clin Plast Surg. Jul 2000;27(3):431-40, ix. [Medline].

  29. Lens MB, Reiman T, Husain AF. Use of tamoxifen in the treatment of malignant melanoma. Cancer. Oct 1 2003;98(7):1355-61. [Medline].

  30. Margolin KA, Sondak VK. Melanoma and other skin cancers. In: Cancer Management: A Multidisciplinary Approach. 4th ed. 2000:431-59.

  31. Morton DL, Essner R, Kirkwood JM, Wollman RC. Malignant Melanoma. In: Kufe DW, Bast RC, Hait WN, Hong WK, Pollock RE, Weichselbaum RR,. Cancer Medicine. 7th ed. Philadelphia: BC Decker Inc; 2006:chapter 108.

  32. Morton DL, Wen Dr, Wong JD. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 1992;127:392-399.

  33. Mota A, Deisseroth A. Systemic treatment of malignant melanoma. Clin Plast Surg. Jul 2000;27(3):463-74, x. [Medline].

  34. Perez DG, Suman VJ, Fitch TR, Amatruda T III, Morton RF, Jilani SZ, et al. Phase II trial of carboplatin, weekly paclitaxel, and weekly bevacizumab in patients with unresectable stage IV melanoma: a North Central Cancer Treatment Group study, N047A. Cancer. Jan 2009;115(1):119-27.

  35. Rao RD, Holtan SG, ingel JN, Croghan GA, Kottschade LA, Creagan ET, et al. Combination of paclitaxel and carboplatin as second line therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma. Cancer. Jan 2006;106(2):375-82.

  36. Ribas A, Camacho LH, Lopez-Bernstein G et al. Antitumor activity in melanoma and anti-self responses in a phase I trial with the anti-cytotoxic T lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 monoclonal antibody CP-675,206. J Clin Oncol. Dec 2005;23:8968-8977.

  37. Rigel DS, Carucci JA. Malignant melanoma: prevention, early detection, and treatment in the 21st century. CA Cancer J Clin. Jul-Aug 2000;50(4):215-36; quiz 237-40. [Medline].

  38. Schuchter LM, Haluska F, Fraker D. Skin: malignant melanoma. In: Abeloff MD, et al, eds. Clinical Oncology. 2nd ed. New York: Churchill Livingstone;. 2000:1317-50.

  39. Shurin MR, Kirkwood JM, Esche C. Cytokine-based therapy for melanoma: pre-clinical studies. Forum (Genova). Jul-Sep 2000;10(3):204-26. [Medline].

  40. Tsao H, Atkins MB, Sober AJ. Management of cutaneous melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:998-1012.

  41. Williams L. Melanoma and Hawaii''s youth. Hawaii Med J. Mar 2004;63(3):87-8. [Medline].

Keywords

malignant melanoma, melanoma skin cancer, lentigo maligna melanoma, atypical nevus, atypical nevi, dysplastic nevus, dysplastic nevi, ultraviolet radiation, sentinel lymph node dissection, sentinel node dissection

Contributor Information and Disclosures

Author

Winston W Tan, MD, Assistant Professor of Medicine, Mayo Medical School; Consulting Staff, Mayo Group Practices
Winston W Tan, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American College of Physicians, American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Hematology, Philippine Medical Association, and Texas Medical Association
Disclosure: Roche Grant/research funds Other; Sanofi Aventis Grant/research funds Other; Genentech Grant/research funds Other; Bristol Myers Squibb Grant/research funds Other

Medical Editor

Philip Schulman, MD, Chief, Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center; Clinical Professor, Department of Medicine, New York University School of Medicine
Philip Schulman, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for Cancer Research, American College of Physicians, American Society of Hematology, and Medical Society of the State of New York
Disclosure: celgene Honoraria Speaking and teaching; Amgen Honoraria Speaking and teaching; genetech/idec Honoraria Speaking and teaching

Pharmacy Editor

Francisco Talavera, PharmD, PhD, Senior Pharmacy Editor, eMedicine
Disclosure: eMedicine Salary Employment

Managing Editor

Wendy Hu, MD, Consulting Staff, Department of Hematology/Oncology and Bone Marrow Transplantation, Huntington Memorial Medical Center
Wendy Hu, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for the Advancement of Science, American College of Physicians, American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation, American Society of Hematology, and Physicians for Social Responsibility
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

CME Editor

Rajalaxmi McKenna, MD, FACP, Southwest Medical Consultants, SC, Department of Medicine, Good Samaritan Hospital, Advocate Health Systems
Rajalaxmi McKenna, MD, FACP is a member of the following medical societies: American Society of Clinical Oncology, American Society of Hematology, and International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis
Disclosure: Nothing to disclose.

Chief Editor

Jules E Harris, MD, Clinical Professor of Medicine, Division of Hematology/Medical Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Arizona College of Medicine at Tucson; Consulting Staff, Arizona Cancer Center
Jules E Harris, MD is a member of the following medical societies: American Association for Cancer Research, American Association for the Advancement of Science, American Association of Immunologists, American Society of Hematology, and Central Society for Clinical Research
Disclosure: GlobeImmune Salary Consulting; Amplimed Consulting fee Consulting; FibroGen Consulting fee Consulting

 
 
HONcode

We subscribe to the
HONcode principles of the
Health On the Net Foundation

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright© 1994- by Medscape.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

DISCLAIMER: The content of this Website is not influenced by sponsors. The site is designed primarily for use by qualified physicians and other medical professionals. The information contained herein should NOT be used as a substitute for the advice of an appropriately qualified and licensed physician or other health care provider. The information provided here is for educational and informational purposes only. In no way should it be considered as offering medical advice. Please check with a physician if you suspect you are ill.