ReviewOncology2017
Treatment Outcomes for Metastatic Melanoma of Unknown Primary in the New Era: A Single-Institution Study and Review of the Literature.
Review in Oncology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 30 citations in OpenAlex.
- Bridging gaps throughout a patient's journey with melanoma: a systematic review.Melanoma management · 2025Review
- Tumoral Melanosis: A Case Series of a Rare Clinical Entity.Dermatology and therapy · 2025Article
- Comprehensive Literature Review on Melanoma of Unknown Primary Site Triggered by an Intriguing Case Report.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Gender and melanoma subtype-based prognostic implications of MUC16 and TTN co-occurrent mutations in melanoma: A retrospective multi-study analysis.Cancer medicine · 2024Article
- Treatment of Metastatic Melanoma at First Diagnosis: Review of the Literature.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Hypothesised cutaneous sites of origin of stage III melanomas with unknown primary: A multicentre study.International journal of cancer · 2022Article
- Melanoma Brain Metastases in the Era of Targeted Therapy and Checkpoint Inhibitor Therapy.Cancers · 2021Article
- Treatment of melanoma of unknown primary in the era of immunotherapy and targeted therapy: A Dutch population-based study.International journal of cancer · 2020Article
- Article
- Metastatic Melanoma with an Unknown Primary.Indian journal of dermatologyArticle
- 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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundMetastatic melanoma of unknown primary (MUP) is uncommon, biologically ill defined, and clinically understudied. MUP outcomes are seldom reported in clinical trials. In this study, we analyze responses of MUP patients treated with systemic therapy in an attempt to inform treatment guidelines for this unique population.
methodsNew York University (NYU)'s prospective melanoma database was searched for MUP patients treated with systemic therapy. PubMed and Google Scholar were searched for MUP patients treated with immunotherapy or targeted therapy reported in the literature, and their response and survival data were compared to the MUP patient data from NYU. Both groups' response data were compared to those reported for melanoma of known primary (MKP).
resultsThe MUP patients treated at NYU had better outcomes on immunotherapy but worse on targeted therapy than the MUP patients in the literature. The NYU MUP patients and those in the literature had worse outcomes than the majority-MKP populations in 10 clinical trial reports.
conclusionsOur study suggests that MUP patients might have poorer outcomes on systemic therapy as compared to MKP patients. Our cohort was small and limited data were available, highlighting the need for increased reporting of MUP outcomes and multi-institutional efforts to understand the mechanism behind the observed differences.
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.