ArticlePloS one2013
Melanoma patients with unknown primary site or nodal recurrence after initial diagnosis have a favourable survival compared to those with synchronous lymph node metastasis and primary tumour.
Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Impact of Drug-Drug Interactions on Clinical Outcomes in Metastatic Melanoma Patients Treated With Combined BRAF/MEK Inhibitors: A Real-World Study.Pigment cell & melanoma research · 2025Observational
- Clinicopathological Features, Staging, and Current Approaches to Treatment in High-Risk Resectable Melanoma.Journal of the National Cancer Institute · 2020Review
- Regression and Sentinel Lymph Node Status in Melanoma Progression.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2018Article
- Metastases of Melanoma to Head and Neck Mucosa: A Report of Short Series.Clinical and experimental otorhinolaryngology · 2016Article
- Utility of sentinel lymph node biopsy for solitary dermal melanomas.Journal of surgical oncology · 2015Article
- Metastatic malignant melanoma of the inguinal lymph node with unknown primary lesion.Case reports in medicine · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundA direct comparison of prognosis between patients with regional lymph node metastases (LNM) detected synchronously with the primary melanoma (primary LNM), patients who developed their first LNM subsequently (secondary LNM) and those with initial LNM in melanoma with unknown primary site (MUP) is missing thus far. PATIENTS AND
methodsSurvival of 498 patients was calculated from the time point of the first macroscopic LNM using Kaplan Meier and multivariate Cox hazard regression analysis.
resultsPatients with secondary LNM (HR = 0.67; p = 0.009) and those with initial LNM in MUP (HR = 0.45; p = 0.008) had a better prognosis compared to patients with primary LNM (median survival time 52 and 65 vs. 24 months, respectively). A high number of involved nodes, the presence of in-transit/satellite metastases and male gender had an additional independent unfavourable effect.
conclusionsSurvival of patients with LNM in MUP and with secondary LNM is similar and considerably more favourable compared to those with primary LNM. This difference needs to be considered during patient counselling and for stratification purposes in clinical trials. The assumption of an immune privilege of patients with MUP which is responsible for rejection of the primary melanoma, and results in a favourable prognosis is not supported by our data.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.