Nelson H, Hunt KK, Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology. Operative standards for cancer surgery: volume 1. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2015.

Google Scholar 

Katz MH, American College of Surgeons Clinical Research Program. Operative standards for cancer surgery: volume 2. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2018.

Google Scholar 

Katz MHG, Francescatti AB, Hunt KK, Cancer Surgery Standards Program of the American College of Surgeons. Technical standards for cancer surgery: commission on cancer standards 5.3–5.8. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022;29(11):6549–58. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-022-11375-w.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer. Optimal resources for cancer care (2020 standards). American College of Surgeons Commission on Cancer: Chicago, IL, USA. 2020.

Balch CM, Urist MM, Karakousis CP, et al. Efficacy of 2-cm surgical margins for intermediate-thickness melanomas (1 to 4 mm). Results of a multi-institutional randomized surgical trial. Ann Surg. 1993;218(3):262–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199309000-00005. (discussion 267-9).

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Gillgren P, Drzewiecki KT, Niin M, et al. 2-cm versus 4-cm surgical excision margins for primary cutaneous melanoma thicker than 2 mm: a randomised, multicentre trial. Lancet. 2011;378(9803):1635–42. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61546-8.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Khayat D, Rixe O, Martin G, et al. Surgical margins in cutaneous melanoma (2 cm versus 5 cm for lesions measuring less than 2.1-mm thick). Cancer. 2003;97(8):1941–6. https://doi.org/10.1002/cncr.11272.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Ringborg U, Andersson R, Eldh J, et al. Resection margins of 2 versus 5 cm for cutaneous malignant melanoma with a tumor thickness of 0.8 to 2.0 mm: randomized study by the Swedish Melanoma Study Group. Cancer. 1996;77(9):1809–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0142(19960501)77:9%3c1809::AID-CNCR8%3e3.0.CO;2-6.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Thomas JM, Newton-Bishop J, A’Hern R, et al. Excision margins in high-risk malignant melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2004;350(8):757–66. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa030681.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Veronesi U, Cascinelli N. Narrow excision (1-cm margin). A safe procedure for thin cutaneous melanoma. Arch Surg. 1991;126(4):438–41. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.1991.01410280036004.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bao T, Davidson NE. Gene expression profiling of breast cancer. Adv Surg. 2008;42:249–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yasu.2008.03.002.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, et al. Strengthening the Reporting of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. BMJ. 2007;335(7624):806–8. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.39335.541782.AD.

Article  Google Scholar 

Boffa DJ, Rosen JE, Mallin K, et al. Using the National Cancer Database for outcomes research: a review. JAMA Oncol. 2017;3(12):1722–8. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.6905.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bilimoria KY, Bentrem DJ, Stewart AK, Winchester DP, Ko CY. Comparison of commission on cancer-approved and -nonapproved hospitals in the United States: implications for studies that use the National Cancer Data Base. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27(25):4177–81. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2008.21.7018.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Bilimoria KY, Stewart AK, Winchester DP, Ko CY. The National Cancer Data Base: a powerful initiative to improve cancer care in the United States. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(3):683–90. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-007-9747-3.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Palis BE, Janczewski LM, Browner AE, et al. The National Cancer Database conforms to the standardized framework for registry and data quality. Ann Surg Oncol. 2024;31(9):5546–59. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-024-15393-8.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Taylor CD, Wang T, Baskin AS, et al. American College of Surgeons Operative Standards and breast cancer outcomes. JAMA Netw Open. 2024;7(11):e2446345. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2024.46345.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Dimick JB, Ghaferi AA, Osborne NH, Ko CY, Hall BL. Reliability adjustment for reporting hospital outcomes with surgery. Ann Surg. 2012;255(4):703–7. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31824b46ff.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Spearman C. The proof and measurement of association between two things. By C. Spearman, 1904. Am J Psychol. 1987;100(3–4):441–71.

CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Moncrieff MD, Lo SN, Scolyer RA, et al. Clinical outcomes and risk stratification of early-stage melanoma micrometastases from an international multicenter study: implications for the management of American Joint Committee on Cancer IIIA Disease. J Clin Oncol. 2022;40(34):3940–51. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.21.02488.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. Final trial report of sentinel-node biopsy versus nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2014;370(7):599–609. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1310460.

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Morton DL, Thompson JF, Essner R, et al. Validation of the accuracy of intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymphadenectomy for early-stage melanoma: a multicenter trial. Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial Group. Ann Surg. 1999;230(4):453–63. https://doi.org/10.1097/00000658-199910000-00001. (discussion 463-5).

Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Morton DL, Wen DR, Wong JH, et al. Technical details of intraoperative lymphatic mapping for early stage melanoma. Arch Surg. 1992;127(4):392–9. https://doi.org/10.1001/archsurg.1992.01420040034005.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Crystal JS, Thompson JF, Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trials Study G, et al. Therapeutic value of sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Surg. 2022;157(9):835–42. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamasurg.2022.2055.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Lizalek JM, Dougherty CE, Santamaria-Barria JA, Reames BN, Foster J, Mammen JM. Impact of clinicopathologic factors on the number of lymph nodes examined in patients with melanoma. Surg Oncol Insight. 2025;2(1):100123.

Google Scholar 

Miller JR III, Lo SN, Nosrati M, et al. Improving selection for sentinel lymph node biopsy among patients with melanoma. JAMA Netw Open. 2023;6(4):e236356. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2023.6356.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Jeremic J, Radenovic K, Jurisic M, et al. Primary melanoma histopathologic predictors of sentinel lymph node positivity: a proposed scoring system for risk assessment and patient selection in a clinical setting. Medicina (Kaunas). 2023. https://doi.org/10.3390/medicina59111921.

Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Kinnier CV, Paruch JL, Dahlke AR, et al. Adjusted hospital sentinel lymph node positivity rates in melanoma: a novel potential measure of quality. Ann Surg. 2016;263(2):392–8. https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0000000000001052.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Gershenwald JE, Colome MI, Lee JE, et al. Patterns of recurrence following a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy in 243 patients with stage I or II melanoma. J Clin Oncol. 1998;16(6):2253–60. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.1998.16.6.2253.

Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Roberts AA, Cochran AJ. Pathologic analysis of sentinel lymph nodes in melanoma patients: current and future trends. J Surg Oncol. 2004;85(3):152–61. https://doi.org/10.1002/jso.20028.

Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Spanknebel K, Coit DG, Bieligk SC, Gonen M, Rosai J, Klimstra DS. Characterization of micrometastatic disease in melanoma sentinel lymph nodes by enhanced pathology: recommendations for standardizing pathologic analysis. Am J Surg Pathol. 2005;29(3):305–17. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.pas.0000152134.36030.b7.

Article  PubMed