Abstract
Merkel cell carcinomas (MCCs) are rare cutaneous neuroendocrine neoplasms that are clinically aggressive due to a relatively high local, regional, and distant metastatic recurrence potential. They are found most commonly in Caucasian (94 %), elderly patients, with an average age at presentation being approximately 72 years. The most common sites of involvement include the head and neck (46–48 %), followed by the extremities (35–38 %), and trunk (11–17 %). Given their relatively non-specific clinical presentation, diagnosis is often delayed leading to advanced disease at the time of diagnosis. Management involves surgical excision with consideration of adjuvant therapy (radiation and/or chemotherapy) for regional or distant metastatic disease.
Access provided by Autonomous University of Puebla. Download chapter PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Keywords
Introduction
Merkel cell carcinomas (MCCs) are rare cutaneous neuroendocrine neoplasms that are clinically aggressive due to a relatively high local, regional, and distant metastatic recurrence potential [1]. These tumours behave in a more lethal fashion than melanoma and are associated with an overall 5-year survival rate between 30 and 64 % [2–5]. They are found most commonly in Caucasian (94 %), elderly patients, with the average age at presentation being 72 years [6–8]. The most common sites of involvement include the head and neck (46–48 %), followed by the extremities (35–38 %), and trunk (11–17 %) [6, 7]. Risk factors include extensive sun exposure, immunosuppression, and/or infection with the polyomavirus virus [7, 9–11].
MCCs usually present as non-tender, rapidly growing, painless, red to violaceous intradermal papules or nodules that can reach considerable size. Given their relatively non-specific clinical presentation, diagnosis is often delayed leading to advanced disease at the time of diagnosis. The “AEIOU” acronym can be used to assist with diagnosis: A—asymptomatic, E—expanding, I—immunosuppressed, O—age >50 years, and U—ultraviolet-exposed fair skin [1]. Ultimately, diagnosis is established by excisional or punch biopsy demonstrating the characteristic small, round, blue cells with large prominent nuclei. Immunohistochemical analysis has been instrumental in identifying markers characteristic of MCC, facilitating its differentiation from other small round, blue cell tumours. Whereas cytokeratin-20 (CK-20) staining is positive in 89–100 % of MCCs, thyroid transcription factor-1 (TTF-1) is generally absent [1].
The American Joint Committee on Cancer AJCC 7th edition is the current recommended staging system for MCCs. Prognostically, patients who have pathologically proven node-negative disease have improved survival compared to those who are only evaluated clinically. As such, the current AJCC guidelines divide stages I and II into A and B substages based upon the method of nodal evaluation [12].
Management
Localized Merkel Cell Carcinoma [3, 13–15]
Work-up | Surgical excision (margins) | Lymph node assessment | Adjuvant therapy | Follow-up |
---|---|---|---|---|
• History and physical examination • Complete skin and lymph node examination • Biopsy (H + E, IHC) • No labs • Imaging studies at physician discretion | • Wide local excision (1–2 cm margins) to investing fascia • Mohs micrographic surgical excision with negative margins and then re-excision (0.5–1.0 cm margins) | • Discuss and offer SLNB | • Refer to radiation oncology for consideration of adjuvant RTX to the primary site • No role for systemic chemotherapy in the adjuvant or neoadjuvant setting | • History and physical exam every 3–6 months for 3 years and then every 6–12 months thereafter |
Regional Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma [15–17]
Clinical scenario | Work-upa | Surgical approach |
---|---|---|
SLNB positive | • Imaging: − CT chest, abdomen, and pelvis − PET-CT − MRIb | • Completion lymphadenectomy (CLND) should be offered and discussed • Level I–III axillary lymph node dissection • Superficial and deep groin dissection • Observation (if patient refuses further surgery or not surgical candidate) • Refer to radiation oncology for treatment to primary site and nodal basin and medical oncology for assessment of adjuvant therapy/clinical trial; there may be a role for radiation to the nodal basin instead of CLND in some patients |
Clinically positive lymph nodes | • FNA or core biopsy • Imaging: − CT chest, abdomen, and pelvis − PET-CT − MRIb | • Therapeutic lymphadenectomy should be offered and discussed • Refer to radiation and medical oncology for assessment of adjuvant therapy/clinical trial |
Sentinel Lymph Node Biopsy
The single most important prognostic characteristic of clinically localized MCC is the presence or absence of occult nodal metastases [18, 19]. The incidence of sentinel node metastases in MCC ranges anywhere between 11 and 47 % and approximately 30 % of clinically node-negative patients will harbor micrometastatic disease [20–23]. Unfortunately, SLNB is associated with a high false-negative rate (~15 %) likely secondary to lymphatic dysfunction and/or the relatively high number of MCCs on the head and neck leading to multiplicity of nodes compared to other sites. Several factors have been associated with SLN positivity including (a) primary tumour size (25 % for tumours ≤2 cm vs. 45 % for tumours >2 cm), and (b) the presence of lymphovascular invasion (55 % for tumours with lymphovascular invasion vs. 4 % for tumours with no evidence of lymphovascular invasion) [24]. SLNB also has therapeutic implications as patients with a positive sentinel lymph node appear to be at significantly higher risk of distant metastasis and death from MCC and thus may benefit from additional treatment [3, 4, 20, 22, 25–31]. Although SLNB is associated with a significant improvement in MCC-specific survival when compared to wide-local excision alone, well-designed, prospective studies are required to clarify its role particularly given the availability of alternative treatment in the form of chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy [32].
Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma
Distant Metastatic Merkel Cell Carcinoma [15]
Work-up | Surgical approach | Systemic therapy |
---|---|---|
• Imaging: − CT chest, abdomen, and pelvis − PET-CT − MRI • No specific labs | May be considered for patients with oligometastasis after multidisciplinary tumour board consultation [33] For palliation of symptoms such as bleeding, pain, intestinal obstruction, or perforation of intestinal metastases | • Refer to radiation and medical oncology for assessment of combination therapy ± clinical trial enrollment • Multi-agent chemotherapy: − Cyclophosphamide/doxorubicin/vincristine − Carboplatin/etoposide − Cisplatin/etoposide |
Adjuvant Therapy for Merkel Cell Carcinoma
Radiation Therapy for Merkel Cell Carcinoma
Study | Treatment | Conclusions | Comment |
---|---|---|---|
Mojica P et al. [34] | • Surgery ± adjuvant RTX to the primary site • N = 1187 | • OS was significantly increased with adjuvant RTX vs. surgery alone | • SEER registry data; no information on RFS or DSS • RTX-treated patients significantly younger than surgery-alone patients |
Clark et al. [35] | • Surgery + adjuvant RTX to the primary site and regional nodal basin vs. surgery alone or RTX alone • N = 110 | • Combined therapy improved both local regional control and DFS but not DSS | • Retrospective review of head and neck cases only; a high percentage of cases with positive surgical margins (38 %) • No differentiation between surgical and RTX monotherapies |
Lewis et al. [36] | • Surgery ± adjuvant RTX to the primary site and regional nodal basin • N = 1254 | • Reduction in local and regional recurrence associated with combination therapy vs. surgery alone • Rates of distant metastasis and OS were not significantly different | • Meta-analysis • Rates of local (40 %) and nodal (56 %) recurrence in the surgery-alone cohort notably high, calling into question the relevance of the conclusions |
Jouary T et al. [37] | • Surgery + RTX to the primary site and regional nodal basin vs. surgery + observation • N = 83 | • Adjuvant RTX associated with improvement in regional recurrence compared to observation (10 % vs. 16.7 %); no improvement in OS | • RCT of patients with stage I disease • Prematurely closed due to a drop in recruitment with the advent of SLNB |
Indications for Post-operative Radiation Therapy [15]
-
Radiation to the Primary Site
-
Primary tumour >1 cm in diameter
-
Salvage operation for recurrent disease
-
Positive margins that cannot be surgically re-excised
-
-
Radiation to the Nodal Basin
-
Absence of surgical assessment of lymph node basin
-
Positive sentinel node without completion of node dissection
-
Bulky nodal disease with multiple (4+ axillary and 10+ inguinal) lymph node metastases
-
Extracapsular spread
-
Systemic Chemotherapy for Merkel Cell Carcinoma
Although there is sparse literature on chemotherapeutic options for MCC, at most institutions chemotherapy is used with or without surgery and/or radiation for stage III (regional nodal disease) or stage IV (distant metastatic disease) [15, 38]. Available date from retrospective studies, however, does not suggest a prolonged survival benefit for adjuvant chemotherapy [39, 40]. Enrollment in clinical trials is encouraged whenever available and appropriate.
Referring to Medical Oncology
-
All patients with histologically confirmed MCCs, other than those with localized disease, should be referred to medical oncology to (1) evaluate the risk of tumour recurrence; and (2) to establish the role of systemic chemotherapy. If any doubt exists regarding patient risk stratification, referral to medical oncology is warranted.
Referring to Radiation Oncology
-
All patients with histologically confirmed MCCs should be referred to radiation oncology for consideration of adjuvant, neoadjuvant, or primary therapy.
Referring to Multidisciplinary Cancer Conference (MCC)
-
All patients with a diagnosis of MCC should be discussed to confirm pathologic diagnosis, and evaluate the indications for adjuvant or therapy.
Toronto Pearls
-
The multidisciplinary management of MCCs is the cornerstone of evidence-based treatment.
References
Senchenkov A, Moran SL. Merkel cell carcinoma: diagnosis, management, and outcomes. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;5:771e–8.
The Rockwell Merkel Cell Carcinoma Group. Merkel cell carcinoma: recent progress and current priorities on etiology, pathogenesis, and clinical management. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:4021–6.
Allen PJ, Bowne WB, Jaques DP, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma: prognosis and treatment of patients from a single institution. J Clin Oncol. 2005;23:2300–9.
Bichakjian CK, Lowe L, Lao CD, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma: critical review with guidelines for multidisciplinary management. Cancer. 2007;110:1–12.
Lemos BD, Storer BE, Iyer JG, et al. Pathological nodal evaluation improves prognostic accuracy in Merkel cell carcinoma: analysis of 5823 cases as the basis of the first consensus staging system. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2010;63:751–61.
Albores-Saavedra J, Batich K, Chable-Montero F, Sagy N, Schwartz AM, Henson DE. Merkel cell carcinoma demographics, morphology, and survival based on 3870 cases: a population based study. J Cutan Pathol. 2010;37:20–7.
Agelli M, Clegg LX. Epidemiology of primary Merkel cell carcinoma in the United States. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2003;49:832–41.
Miller RW, Rabkin CS. Merkel cell carcinoma and melanoma: etiological similarities and differences. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 1999;8:153–8.
Heath M, Jaimes N, Lemos B, et al. Clinical characteristics of Merkel cell carcinoma at diagnosis in 195 patients: the AEIOU features. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008;58:375–81.
Engels EA, Frisch M, Goedert JJ, Biggar RJ, Miller RW. Merkel cell carcinoma and HIV infection. Lancet. 2002;359:497–8.
Penn I, First MR. Merkel’s cell carcinoma in organ recipients: reports of 41 cases. Transplantation. 1999;68:1717–21.
Edge SB, Byrd DR, Darducci M, et al. Chap 30: Merkel cell carcinoma. In: Edge SB, Byrd DR, Darducci M, et al., editors. AJCC cancer staging manual. New York, NY: Springer; 2009.
Medina-Franco H, Urist MM, Fiveash J, et al. Multimodality treatment of Merkel cell carcinoma: case series and literature review of 1024 cases. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;8:204–8.
Gillenwater AM, Hessel AC, Morrison WH, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma of the head and neck: effect of surgical excision and radiation on recurrence and survival. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2001;127:149–54.
Merkel cell carcinoma. In: National Comprehensive Cancer Network, editors. NCCN Guidelines. Vol I. Fort Washington, PA: National Comprehensive Cancer Network; 2012.
Siva S, Byrne K, Seel M, et al. 18F-FDG PET provides high-impact and powerful prognostic stratification in the staging of Merkel cell carcinoma: a 15-year institutional experience. J Nucl Med. 2013;54(8):1223–9.
Hawryluk EG, O-Regan KN, Sheehy N, et al. Positron emission tomography/computed tomography imaging in Merkel cell carcinoma: a study of 270 scans in 97 patients at the Dana-Farber/Brigham and Women’s Cancer Center. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;68:592–9.
Munoz IP, Pardo Masferrer J, Olivera Vegas J, Medina Montalvo MS, Jover Diaz R, Perez Casas AM. Merkel cell carcinoma from 2008 to 2012: reaching a new level of understanding. Cancer Treat Rev. 2013;39(5):421–9.
Tarantola TI, Vallow LA, Halyard MY, Weenig RH, Warschaw KE, Grotz TE, et al. Prognostic factors in Merkel cell carcinoma: analysis of 240 cases. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2013;68(3):425–32.
McAfee WJ, Morris CG, Mendenhall CM, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma: treatment and outcomes. Cancer. 2005;104(8):1761–4.
Goessling W, McKee PH, Mayer RJ. Merkel cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2002;20(2):588–98.
Hill AD, Brady MS, Coit DG. Intraoperative lymphatic mapping and sentinel lymph node biopsy for Merkel cell carcinoma. Br J Surg. 1999;86(4):518–21.
Morton DL, Thompson JF, Cochran AJ, et al. Sentinel-node biopsy or nodal observation in melanoma. N Engl J Med. 2006;355(13):1307–17.
Fields RC, Busam KJ, Chou JF, et al. Recurrence and survival in patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy for Merkel cell carcinoma: analysis of 153 patients from a single institution. Ann Surg Oncol. 2001;18:2529–37.
Mehrany K, Otley CC, Weenig RH, et al. A meta-analysis of the prognostic significant of sentinel lymph node status in Merkel cell carcinoma. Dermatol Surg. 2002;28(2):113–7.
Lewis JM, Zager JS, Yu D, et al. Full-thickness grafts procured from skin overlying the sentinel lymph node basin: reconstruction of primary cutaneous malignancy excision defects. Ann Surg Oncol. 2008;15(6):1733–40.
Scoggins CR, Martin RC, Ross MI, et al. Factors associated with false-negative sentinel lymph node biopsy in melanoma patients: results from a prospective randomized trial. Ann Surg Oncol. 2009;16 Suppl 1:3.
Gupta SG, Wang LC, Penas PF, et al. Sentinel lymph node biopsy for evaluation and treatment of patients with Merkel cell carcinoma: the Dana-Farber experience and meta-analysis of the literature. Arch Dermatol. 2006;142(6):685–90.
Pectasides D, Pectasides M, Economopoulos T. Merkel cell cancer of the skin. Ann Oncol. 2006;17(10):1489–95.
Sandel HD, Day T, Ricahrdson MS, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma: does tumour size or depth of invasion correlate with recurrence, metastasis, or patient survival? Laryngoscope. 2006;116(5):791–5.
Wagner JD, Evdokimow DZ, Weisberger E, et al. Sentinel node biopsy for high-risk nonmelanoma cutaneous malignancy. Arch Dermatol. 2004;140(1):75–9.
Kachare SD, Wong JH, Vohra NA, Zervos EE, Fitzgerald TL. Sentinel lymph node biopsy is associated with improved survival in Merkel cell carcinoma. Ann Surg Oncol. 2014;21:1624–30.
Gonzalez RJ, Padhya TA, Cherpelis BS, et al. The surgical management of primary and metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma. Curr Probl Cancer. 2010;34(1):77–96.
Mojica P, Smith D, Ellenhorn JD. Adjuvant radiation therapy is associated with improved survival in Merkel cell carcinoma of the skin. J Clin Oncol. 2007;25:1043–7.
Clark JR, Veness MJ, Gilbert R, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma of the head and neck: is adjuvant radiotherapy necessary? Head Neck. 2007;29(3):249–57.
Lewis KG, Weinstock MA, Weaver AL, Otley CC. Adjuvant local irradiation for Merkel cell carcinoma. Arch Dermatol. 2006;142:693–700.
Jouary T, Leyral C, Dreno B, et al. Adjuvant prophylactic regional radiotherapy versus observation in stage I Merkel cell carcinoma: a multicentric prospective randomized study. Ann Oncol. 2012;23:1074–80.
Desch L, Kunstfeld R. Merkel cell carcinoma: chemotherapy and emerging new therapeutic options. J Skin Cancer. 2013;2013:327150.
Gameski KM, Nghiem P. Merkel cell carcinoma adjuvant therapy: current data support radiation but not chemotherapy. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2007;57:166–9.
Tai P. Merkel cell cancer: update on biology and treatment. Curr Opin Oncol. 2008;20:196–200.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2016 University of Toronto General Surgery Oncology Program
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Racz, J., Joshua, A.M., Lipa, J.E., Sun, A., Wright, F.C. (2016). Merkel Cell Carcinoma. In: Wright, F., Escallon, J., Cukier, M., Tsang, M., Hameed, U. (eds) Surgical Oncology Manual. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26276-5_14
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-26276-5_14
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-26274-1
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-26276-5
eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)