ArticleCancers2015
Treatment of Regional Metastatic Melanoma of Unknown Primary Origin.
Article in Cancers, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Melanoma of unknown primary: a comprehensive review of immune-mediated pathogenesis and therapies.The oncologist · 2025Pooled it
- Comprehensive Literature Review on Melanoma of Unknown Primary Site Triggered by an Intriguing Case Report.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Extracutaneous Melanotic Melanoma with Nervous System Involvement in a Buffalo (Veterinary sciences · 2023Article
- Melanoma With an Unknown Primary in an Asymptomatic Elderly Male With Unilateral Lymphadenopathy.Cureus · 2021Article
- Spontaneously occurring melanoma in animals and their relevance to human melanoma.The Journal of pathology · 2020Review
- Prospective validation of the prognostic 31-gene expression profiling test in primary cutaneous melanoma.Cancer medicine · 2019Observational
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
(1)
backgroundThe purpose of this retrospective study was to evaluate the recurrence and survival rates of metastatic melanoma of unknown primary origin (MUP), in order to further refine current recommendations for the surgical treatment; (2)
methodsMedical data of all MUP patients registered between 2000 and 2011, were analyzed. Seventy-eight patients were categorized in either lymph node (axilla, groin, head-and neck) or subcutaneous MUP. Axillary node MUPs were generally treated with dissections of levels I-III, inguinal node MUPs with combined superficial and deep groin dissections, and head-and-neck node MUPs with neck dissections to various extents, based on lymph drainage patterns. Subcutaneous lesions were excised with 1-2 cm margins. The primary outcome was treatment outcomes in terms of (loco)regional recurrence and survival rates; (3)
resultsLymph node MUP recurred regionally in 11% of patients, with an overall recurrence rate of 45%. In contrast, subcutaneous MUP recurred locally in 65% of patients with an overall recurrence rate of 78%. This latter group had a significantly shorter disease-free interval than patients with lymph node MUP (p = 0.000). In the entire study population, 5-year and 10-year overall survival rates were 56% and 47% respectively, with no differences observed between the various subgroups; (4)
conclusionThe relatively low regional recurrence rate after regional lymph node dissection (11%) supports its current status as standard surgical treatment for lymph node MUP. Subcutaneous MUP, on the contrary, appears to recur both locally (65%) and overall (78%) at a significantly higher rate, suggesting a different biological behavior. However, wide local excision remains the best available option for this specific group.
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.