Predicting ten-year survival of patients with primary cutaneous melanoma

Şahin, Sedef; Rao, Babar; Kopf, Alfred W.; Lee, Eric; Rigel, Darrell S.; Nossa, Robert; Rahman, Irfan J.; Wortzel, Hal S.; Marghoob, Ashfaq A.; Bart, Robert S.

doi:10.1002/(sici)1097-0142(19971015)80:8<1426::aid-cncr9>3.0.co;2-c

Cited by 82 publications

(46 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…17 In the current study, the most powerful predictive factor for both RFS and OS was the lymph node status, a finding confirming multiple previous studies. 18,19 Patients with Stage IIB disease [T4N0M0] had a 5-year OS rate of 61% compared with only 30% in patients with Stage III disease [T4N1-2M0] (P Ͻ 0.00005).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Prognostic factors in patients with thick cutaneous melanoma (> 4 mm)

Zettersten

Sagebiel

Miller

et al. 2002

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUNDThe current study was conducted to examine the role of multiple clinical and histologic factors in the prognostic assessment of patients with thick primary melanoma (> 4 mm, classified as T4).METHODSA retrospective analysis was performed in 329 patients with T4 cutaneous melanomas who were seen at the University of California at San Francisco Melanoma Center between 1978 and 2000. Fourteen histopathologic features were recorded prospectively by a single dermatopathologist. In addition, 9 clinical factors were analyzed.RESULTSSeveral histologic factors were found to have a significant impact on the survival of patients with T4 melanoma. On univariate analysis, tumor thickness, ulceration, mitotic rate, microsatellites, vascular involvement, and histogenetic type of the primary tumor all were found to have a significant impact on the overall survival rate. Regional lymph node involvement reduced the overall survival of T4 patients dramatically. The 5‐year overall survival of patients with lymph node‐negative T4 disease was 61%, compared with 30% for those with lymph node‐positive disease. When lymph node status was taken into account, tumor thickness, vascular involvement, and ulceration all remained independent predictors of overall survival on multivariate Cox regression analysis. Neither age, gender, nor anatomic location appeared to affect the recurrence‐free or overall survival rates.CONCLUSIONSPatients with thick primary cutaneous melanomas (> 4 mm) comprise a heterogeneous group. The presence or absence of lymph node involvement, vascular involvement, and ulceration appears to result in significantly divergent overall survival rates in this patient cohort. Consideration of these factors has important implications in the management of patients with T4 melanoma. Cancer 2002;94:1049–56. © 2002 American Cancer Society.DOI 10.1002/cncr.10326

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 90%

Prognostic factors in patients with thick cutaneous melanoma (> 4 mm)

Zettersten

Sagebiel

Miller

et al. 2002

Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…28,29 In this current study, Breslow thickness again appears to be a strong prognosticator. Obviously, patients with a thinner melanoma have a greater chance of remaining disease free for at least 3 years than those with a thick melanoma (Ͼ 4.0 mm).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

The sentinel lymph node status is an important factor for predicting clinical outcome in patients with Stage I or II cutaneous melanoma

Muller

Leeuwen

Klerk

et al. 2001

Cancer

156

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Tumour sites were divided into three groups (head/neck, trunk and extremities). Upper-and lower extremities were combined 5 because there was no significant difference between the two groups. In the SNB data set with fewer observations, age was reduced into two categories based on the median value.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(1) Mervic suggests that adding sex, age and tumour site to the AJCCclassification could improve the prediction of an individual patient's prognosis compared to the AJCC staging system currently in use (1,2). A few prognostic instruments have been presented but some are based on a limited number of patients and others are based on selected groups of patients referred to major institutions treating CMM (3)(4)(5)(6)(7)(8)(9). Hence, former instruments have not been as generalizable as expected.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%