ArticleDiagnostic pathology2019
Melanoma arising in a Giant congenital melanocytic nevus: two case reports.
Article in Diagnostic pathology, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 28 citations in OpenAlex.
- Congenital Melanocytic Nevus with Neurocristic Cutaneous Hamartoma: A Case Report.Dermatopathology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Melanoma in a congenital melanocytic nevus.CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2024Article
- Neonatal Paratesticular Scrotal Mass: A Rare Case of Atypical Neurofibromatous Neoplasm with Uncertain Biologic Potential.African journal of paediatric surgery : AJPS · 2024Article
- Treatment of giant congenital melanocytic nevi with cultured epithelial autografts: Clinical and histopathological analysis.Regenerative therapy · 2021Article
- Melanoma arising in a giant congenital melanocytic nevus with neuroblastoma RAS mutation.Indian journal of dermatology, venereology and leprologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundA giant congenital melanocytic nevus (GCMN) is found in 0.1% of live-born infants. If present, the lesion has a chance of about 6% to develop into malignant melanoma. Both children and adults can be affected by malignant melanoma arising in a giant congenital nevus. Up to 95% of GCMNs harbor NRAS mutations, and mutations in the BRAF, MC1R, TP53, and GNAQ genes have also been described. The individualization of therapy is required, but diagnostic and prognostic criteria remain controversial. CASE PRESENTATIONS: We report two cases: 1) melanoma arising in a giant congenital nevus during the first month of life complicated with neurocutaneous melanosis (NCM), and 2) melanoma arising in a giant congenital nevus during the first 6 months of life. Pathology, immunohistochemistry, and genetic analyses of tumor tissue were performed. The first case revealed only a non-pathogenic P72R polymorphism of the TP53 gene in the homozygote condition. For the second case, a Q61K mutation was detected in the NRAS gene.
conclusionMalignant melanoma associated with GCMN is rare and therefore poorly understood. Outcomes have been linked to the stage at diagnosis, but no additional pathological prognostic factors have been identified. The most frequent genetic event in giant CMNs is NRAS mutations, which was discovered in one of our cases. To accumulate evidence to improve disease prognosis and outcomes, children with congenital melanocytic nevus should be included in a systemic follow-up study from birth.
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.