Observational studyJournal of the American Academy of Dermatology2019
Melanoma and melanoma in-situ diagnosis after excision of atypical intraepidermal melanocytic proliferation: A retrospective cross-sectional analysis.
Observational study in Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Automated triage of cancer-suspicious skin lesions with 3D total-body photography.NPJ digital medicine · 2025Article
- Margin status in vulvovaginal melanoma: Management and oncologic outcomes of 50 cases.Gynecologic oncology reports · 2023Article
- Melanoma In Situ: A Critical Review and Re-Evaluation of Current Excision Margin Recommendations.Advances in therapy · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThere is little evidence to guide surgical management of biopsies yielding the histologic descriptor atypical intraepidermal melanocytic proliferation (AIMP).
objectiveDetermine frequency of and factors associated with melanoma and melanoma in-situ (MIS) diagnoses after excision of AIMP and evaluate margins used to completely excise AIMP.
methodsRetrospective, cross-sectional study of 1127 biopsies reported as AIMP and subsequently excised within one academic institution.
resultsMelanoma (in situ, stage 1A) was diagnosed after excision in 8.2% (92/1127) of AIMP samples. Characteristics associated with melanoma/MIS diagnosis included age 60-79 years (odds ratio [OR] 8.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2.5-26.2), age ≥80 years (OR 7.2, 95% CI 1.7-31.5), head/neck location (OR 4.9, 95% CI 3.1-7.7), clinical lesion partially biopsied (OR 11.0, 95% CI 6.7-18.1), and lesion extending to deep biopsy margin (OR 15.1, 95% CI 1.7-136.0). Average ± standard deviation surgical margin used to excise AIMP lesions was 4.5 ± 1.8 mm. LIMITATIONS: Single-site, retrospective, observational study; interobserver variability across dermatopathologists.
conclusionDermatologists and pathologists can endeavor to avoid ambiguous melanocytic designations whenever possible through excisional biopsy technique, interdisciplinary communication, and ancillary studies. In the event of AIMP biopsy, physicians should consider the term a histologic description rather than a diagnosis, and, during surgical planning, use clinicopathologic correlation while bearing in mind factors that might predict true melanoma/MIS.
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.