Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30548543›Full record

ReviewJournal of surgical oncology2019

Identification of risk in cutaneous melanoma patients: Prognostic and predictive markers.

David M Hyams, Robert W Cook, Antonio C Buzaid

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of surgical oncology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 8% 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

25 citing papers in PubMed, 43 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Expression ofCancers · 2021
    Article
  14. BRAF Gene and Melanoma: Back to the Future.International journal of molecular sciences · 2021
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

David M HyamsDesert Surgical Oncology, Eisenhower Medical Center, Rancho Mirage, California.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5680-9488
Robert W CookR&D and Medical Affairs, Castle Biosciences, Inc, Friendswood, Texas.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1166-4796
Antonio C BuzaidOncology Center, Hospital Israelita Albert Einstein, São Paulo, Brazil.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1674-4579
Eisenhower Medical Center · USHospital Israelita Albert Einstein · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

New therapeutic modalities for melanoma promise benefit in selected individuals. Efficacy appears greater in patients with lower tumor burden, suggesting an important role for risk-stratified surveillance. Robust predictive markers might permit optimization of agent to patient, while low-risk prognostic markers might guide more conservative management. This review evaluates protein, gene, and multiplexed marker panels that may contribute to better risk assessment and improved management of patients with cutaneous melanoma.

Indexed as

Biomarkers, TumorCutaneous Malignant MelanomaHumansMelanomaPrognosisRisk AssessmentSkin NeoplasmsBiomarkers, Tumorgene expression profilegene signaturemelanomapredictive biomarkersprognostic biomarkersprotein biomarkers

Identifiers

PMID30548543
PMCPMC6590387
OpenAlexW2904712819

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.