Browsing The Manchester Institute Cancer Research UK by Authors
Comparative performance of predictors of death from thin (≤1.0 mm) melanomaClaeson, M.; Baade, P.; Marchetti, M.; Brown, S.; Soyer, H. P.; Smithers, B. M.; Green, Adèle C; Whiteman, D. C; Khosrotehrani, K.; Department of Population Health, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, Australia. (2021)Despite overall favourable prognosis,1 thin (≤1.0 mm) cutaneous melanoma account for 23% of melanoma deaths in the high-risk general population of Queensland, Australia (2005-2009), because of the sheer volume of disease.2 The prospect of adjuvant systemic therapy has increased the focus on identifying patients with thin melanoma who are at high risk of death, such as through gene expression profiling (GEP), sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), or prognostic models.3-5.
Survival in patients with multiple primary melanomas: Systematic review and meta-analysisPeek, G.; Olsen, C. M.; Baade, P.; Youlden, D. R.; Aitken, J. F.; Green, Adèle C; Khosrotehrani, K.; Queensland Skin and Cancer Foundation, Queensland Institute of Dermatology, South-Brisbane, Queensland, Australia. (2020)Background: The literature surrounding survival of patients with multiple primary melanomas (MPM) yields variable and opposing findings, constrained by statistical challenges. Objectives: To critically examine the available literature regarding survival of patients with MPM compared with a single primary melanoma and detail statistical methods used. Methods: Electronic searches were performed of PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Scopus, with cross-checking of references, for the period January 1956 to June 2019. Studies published in English examining survival in patients with multiple melanomas were included. Case studies and small case series were excluded. Results: There were 14 studies eligible for inclusion. Conclusions on survival varied markedly depending on the statistical method used. Four studies that accounted for survival bias by partitioning the survival time were included in the quantitative review, with 3 of these reporting a survival disadvantage for MPM, whereas the fourth showed no difference in survival. The pooled hazard ratio was 1.39 (95% confidence interval, 1.07-1.81) but with significant heterogeneity (I2 = 96.8%, Phet < .001). Limitations: Studies showed significant heterogeneity in methodology. Conclusion: When data were analyzed with robust statistical methods, patients with MPM had a survival disadvantage compared with patients with a single primary melanoma.