Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2017 Aug 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Am Acad Dermatol. 2016 May 14;75(2):356–363. doi: 10.1016/j.jaad.2016.04.052

Table 1.

Distribution of Participant Responses by MPATH-Dx Class and Treatment Considerationa

Suggested Treatment Consideration Made by Participant for the Case
I: No further
treatment
II: Re-excise
<5mm margins
III: Re-excise ≥5mm
to <1cm margins
IV/V: Re-excise
≥1cm marginsb
Total
MPATH-Dx Classification based on Participants’
Write-in Diagnosis
Presuming Least Severe Diagnosis (when needed)c
Class I: No apparent risk for continued local proliferation
and adverse outcome
89 (67.9) 40 (30.5) 2 (1.5) 0 (0.0) 131
Class II: Low level risk for local proliferation of remaining
cells
2 (3.8) 41 (78.8) 9 (17.3) 0 (0.0) 52
Class III: Higher likelihood of local tumor progression and
greater need for intervention
0 (0.0) 30 (21.1) 96 (67.6) 16 (11.3) 142
Class IV/V: Invasive melanoma stage T1a or ≥T1b 0 (0.0) 3 (1.0) 29 (9.4) 277 (89.6) 309
Total 91 114 136 293 634
Presuming Most Severe Diagnosis (when needed)c
Class I: No apparent risk for continued local proliferation
and adverse outcome
86 (87.8) 12 (12.2) 0 (0.0) 0 (0.0) 98
Class II: Low level risk for local proliferation of remaining
cells
3 (6.4) 43 (91.5) 1 (2.1) 0 (0.0) 47
Class III: Higher likelihood of local tumor progression and
greater need for intervention
2 (1.3) 55 (34.8) 96 (60.8) 5 (3.2) 158
Class IV/V: Invasive melanoma stage T1a or ≥T1b 0 (0.0) 4 (1.2) 39 (11.8) 288 (87.0) 331
Total 91 114 136 293 634
a

Values expressed as count (row percent)

b

Includes sentinel lymph node sampling and/or adjuvant therapy (e.g. interferon) as additional treatment responses

c

Write-in responses that included differential diagnoses were classified using two scenarios, one presuming the least severe diagnosis and the other presuming the most severe diagnosis