Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28787433›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2017

Tumour mutation status and sites of metastasis in patients with cutaneous melanoma.

Nikki R Adler, Rory Wolfe, John W Kelly, Andrew Haydon, Grant A McArthur, Catriona A McLean, Victoria J Mar

Open access · hybridAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 33 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
33citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 9% 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

33 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 65 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Molecular Underpinnings of Brain Metastases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Prognostic Roles ofCells · 2021
    Article
  19. Article
  20. BRAF Gene and Melanoma: Back to the Future.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
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 3 institutions in 1 country.

Nikki R AdlerVictorian Melanoma Service, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Rory WolfeSchool of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
John W KellyVictorian Melanoma Service, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Andrew HaydonVictorian Melanoma Service, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Grant A McArthurDivisions of Research and Cancer Medicine, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Victoria 3000, Australia.
Catriona A McLeanVictorian Melanoma Service, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
Victoria J MarVictorian Melanoma Service, Alfred Hospital, Melbourne, Victoria 3004, Australia.
The Alfred Hospital · AUMonash University · AUPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCutaneous melanoma can metastasise haematogenously and/or lymphogenously to form satellite/in-transit, lymph node or distant metastasis. This study aimed to determine if BRAF and NRAS mutant and wild-type tumours differ in their site of first tumour metastasis and anatomical metastatic pathway.

methodsProspective cohort of patients with a histologically confirmed primary cutaneous melanoma at three tertiary referral centres in Melbourne, Australia from 2010 to 2015. Multinomial regression determined clinical, histological and mutational factors associated with the site of first metastasis and metastatic pathway.

resultsOf 1048 patients, 306 (29%) developed metastasis over a median 4.7 year follow-up period. 73 (24%), 192 (63%) and 41 (13%) developed distant, regional lymph node and satellite/in-transit metastasis as the first site of metastasis, respectively. BRAF mutation was associated with lymph node metastasis (adjusted RRR 2.46 95% CI 1.07-5.69, P=0.04) and sentinel lymph node positivity (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.14-2.10, P=0.005). BRAF mutation and NRAS mutation were associated with increased odds of developing liver metastasis (aOR 3.09, 95% CI 1.49-6.42, P=0.003; aOR 3.17, 95% CI 1.32-7.58, P=0.01) and central nervous system (CNS) metastasis (aOR 4.65, 95% CI 2.23-9.69, P<0.001; aOR 4.03, 95% CI 1.72-9.44, P=0.001). NRAS mutation was associated with lung metastasis (aOR 2.44, 95% CI 1.21-4.93, P=0.01).

conclusionsBRAF mutation was found to be associated with lymph node metastasis as first metastasis and sentinel lymph node positivity. BRAF and NRAS mutations were associated with CNS and liver metastasis and NRAS mutation with lung metastasis. If these findings are validated in additional prospective studies, a role for heightened visceral organ surveillance may be warranted in patients with tumours harbouring these somatic mutations.

Indexed as

AdultAgedAged, 80 and overCentral Nervous System NeoplasmsFemaleGTP PhosphohydrolasesHumansLiver NeoplasmsLung NeoplasmsLymphatic MetastasisMaleMelanomaMembrane ProteinsMiddle AgedNeoplastic Cells, CirculatingProspective StudiesBRAF protein, humanGTP PhosphohydrolasesMembrane ProteinsNRAS protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf

Identifiers

PMID28787433
PMCPMC5625668
OpenAlexW2745071446

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.