ArticleJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology2018
Similar survival of patients with multiple versus single primary melanomas based on Utah Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results data (1973-2011).
Article in Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differentiating breast cancer lung metastasis from primary lung cancer using clinical and computed tomography radiomics features.Translational cancer research · 2026Article
- Survival impact of second primary cutaneous and non-cutaneous melanoma in melanoma survivors.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026Article
- Survival outcome and prognostic factors of remnant gastric cancer: a propensity score-matched analysis.Journal of gastrointestinal oncology · 2024Article
- Article
- Characteristics, Prognosis, and Competing Risk Nomograms of Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma: Evidence for Pigmentary Disorders.Frontiers in oncology · 2022Article
- Unraveling the role of microRNA/isomiR network in multiple primary melanoma pathogenesis.Cell death & disease · 2021Article
- Low accuracy of self-reported family history of melanoma in high-risk patients.Familial cancer · 2021Review
- Article
- Melanoma incidence, recurrence, and mortality in an integrated healthcare system: A retrospective cohort study.Cancer medicine · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
12 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSurvival data are mixed comparing patients with multiple primary melanomas (MPM) to those with single primary melanomas (SPM).
objectivesWe compared MPM versus SPM patient survival using a matching method that avoids potential biases associated with other analytic approaches.
methodsRecords of 14,138 individuals obtained from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registry of all melanomas diagnosed or treated in Utah between 1973 and 2011 were reviewed. A single matched control patient was selected randomly from the SPM cohort for each MPM patient, with the restriction that they survived at least as long as the interval between the first and second diagnoses for the matched MPM patient.
resultsSurvival curves (n = 887 for both MPM and SPM groups) without covariates showed a significant survival disadvantage for MPM patients (chi-squared 39.29, P < .001). However, a multivariate Cox proportional hazards model showed no significant survival difference (hazard ratio 1.07, P = .55). Restricting the multivariate analysis to invasive melanomas also showed no significant survival difference (hazard ratio 0.99, P = .96). LIMITATIONS: Breslow depth, ulceration status, and specific cause of death were not available for all patients.
conclusionsPatients with MPM had similar survival times as patients with SPM.
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.