Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26334521›Full record

ArticleInsights into imaging2015

Extracutaneous melanomas: a primer for the radiologist.

Abhishek R Keraliya, Katherine M Krajewski, Marta Braschi-Amirfarzan, Sree Harsha Tirumani, Atul B Shinagare, Jyothi P Jagannathan, Nikhil H Ramaiya

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Insights into imaging, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
0.9field-weighted citation impact, top 25% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

16 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Current update on vaginal malignancies.Abdominal radiology (New York) · 2021
    Review
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Abhishek R KeraliyaDepartment of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 and Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA. akeraliya@partners.org.
Katherine M KrajewskiDepartment of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 and Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Marta Braschi-AmirfarzanDepartment of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 and Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Sree Harsha TirumaniDepartment of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 and Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Atul B ShinagareDepartment of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 and Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Jyothi P JagannathanDepartment of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 and Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Nikhil H RamaiyaDepartment of Imaging, Dana Farber Cancer Institute, Harvard Medical School, 450 Brookline Avenue, Boston, MA 02215 and Department of Radiology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA, 02115, USA.
Brigham and Women's Hospital · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe purpose of this article is to provide a comprehensive review of the imaging features of extracutaneous melanomas.

conclusionExtracutaneous melanomas are clinically and biologically distinct from their more common cutaneous counterpart with higher frequency of metastatic disease and poorer overall prognosis. Complete surgical excision is the treatment of choice whenever possible; systemic therapy in the form of conventional chemotherapeutic agents as well as novel targeted agents is used for advanced/ metastatic disease. Multiple imaging modalities including US, CT, MRI and FDG-PET/CT play important roles in the evaluation of the primary tumour, assessment of metastatic disease and monitoring response to treatment. Radiologists should be aware of the typical imaging manifestations of extracutaneous melanoma, the distinct patterns of metastatic involvement as well as treatment response and toxicities associated with newer molecular targeted and immunotherapies to optimally contribute to patient management. TEACHING POINTS: • Mucosal melanoma is clinically and biologically distinct from cutaneous melanoma. • Mucosal melanoma has a higher rate of metastatic disease than the cutaneous subtype. • Imaging is helpful in assessment of disease and response to treatment.

Indexed as

FDG-PET/CTImmunotherapyMRIMucosal melanomaOcular melanoma

Identifiers

PMID26334521
PMCPMC4656230
OpenAlexW1812895462

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.