Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27286787›Full record

ArticleThe oncologist2016

Prognosis of Mucosal, Uveal, Acral, Nonacral Cutaneous, and Unknown Primary Melanoma From the Time of First Metastasis.

Deborah Kuk, Alexander N Shoushtari, Christopher A Barker, Katherine S Panageas, Rodrigo R Munhoz, Parisa Momtaz, Charlotte E Ariyan, Mary Sue Brady, Daniel G Coit, Kita Bogatch and 4 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in The oncologist, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 105 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
105citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

105 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Guideline
  2. Trial
  3. Atezolizumab plus Bevacizumab in Patients with Unresectable or Metastatic Mucosal Melanoma: A Multicenter, Open-Label, Single-Arm Phase II Study.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2022
    Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Allele-specific depletion ofMolecular therapy. Oncology · 2025
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Adoptive Cell Transfer of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes for Metastatic Acral Lentiginous Melanoma.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

45 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

14 authors.

Deborah KukDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Alexander N ShoushtariDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
Christopher A BarkerDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Katherine S PanageasDepartment of Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Rodrigo R MunhozDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Parisa MomtazDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
Charlotte E AriyanDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Mary Sue BradyDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Daniel G CoitDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Kita BogatchDepartment of Surgery, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
Margaret K CallahanDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
Jedd D WolchokDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA.
Richard D CarvajalColumbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York, USA.
Michael A PostowDepartment of Medicine, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA Weill Cornell Medical College, New York, New York, USA postowm@mskcc.org.

Funding

X-RAY CRYSTALLOGRAPHYP30CA008748 · NCI · SLOAN-KETTERING INSTITUTE FOR CANCER RES · PI Nicholas D Socci · 1985 to 2026
$347.4M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA008748
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSubtypes of melanoma, such as mucosal, uveal, and acral, are believed to result in worse prognoses than nonacral cutaneous melanoma. After a diagnosis of distant metastatic disease, however, the overall survival of patients with mucosal, uveal, acral, nonacral cutaneous, and unknown primary melanoma has not been directly compared. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a single-center, retrospective analysis of 3,454 patients with melanoma diagnosed with distant metastases from 2000 to 2013, identified from a prospectively maintained database. We examined melanoma subtype, date of diagnosis of distant metastases, age at diagnosis of metastasis, gender, and site of melanoma metastases.

resultsOf the 3,454 patients (237 with mucosal, 286 with uveal, 2,292 with nonacral cutaneous, 105 with acral cutaneous, and 534 with unknown primary melanoma), 2,594 died. The median follow-up was 46.1 months. The median overall survival for those with mucosal, uveal, acral, nonacral cutaneous, and unknown primary melanoma was 9.1, 13.4, 11.4, 11.7, and 10.4 months, respectively. Patients with uveal melanoma, cutaneous melanoma (acral and nonacral), and unknown primary melanoma had similar survival, but patients with mucosal melanoma had worse survival. Patients diagnosed with metastatic melanoma in 2006-2010 and 2011-2013 had better overall survival than patients diagnosed in 2000-2005. In a multivariate model, patients with mucosal melanoma had inferior overall survival compared with patients with the other four subtypes.

conclusionAdditional research and advocacy are needed for patients with mucosal melanoma because of their shorter overall survival in the metastatic setting. Despite distinct tumor biology, the survival was similar for those with metastatic uveal melanoma, acral, nonacral cutaneous, and unknown primary melanoma. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Uveal, acral, and mucosal melanoma are assumed to result in a worse prognosis than nonacral cutaneous melanoma or unknown primary melanoma. No studies, however, have been conducted assessing the overall survival of patients with these melanoma subtypes starting at the time of distant metastatic disease. The present study found that patients with uveal, acral, nonacral cutaneous, and unknown primary melanoma have similar overall survival after distant metastases have been diagnosed. These findings provide information for oncologists to reconsider previously held assumptions and appropriately counsel patients. Patients with mucosal melanoma have worse overall survival and are thus a group in need of specific research and advocacy.

Indexed as

AdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleMelanomaMiddle AgedNeoplasms, Unknown PrimaryPrognosisRetrospective StudiesSkin NeoplasmsUveal MelanomaAcral cutaneous melanomaMucosal melanomaNonacral cutaneous melanomaPrognosisUnknown primary melanomaUveal melanoma

Identifiers

PMID27286787
PMCPMC4943393

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.