Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34884176›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Clinical Significance of Distant Metastasis-Free Survival (DMFS) in Melanoma: A Narrative Review from Adjuvant Clinical Trials.

Simone Amabile, Gabriele Roccuzzo, Valentina Pala, Luca Tonella, Marco Rubatto, Martina Merli, Paolo Fava, Simone Ribero, Maria Teresa Fierro, Paola Queirolo and 1 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of clinical medicine, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

7 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. 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

11 authors.

Simone AmabileSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Gabriele RoccuzzoSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Valentina PalaSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Luca TonellaSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0001-6790-554X
Marco RubattoSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0003-1706-656X
Martina MerliSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-7224-6507
Paolo FavaSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Simone RiberoSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Maria Teresa FierroSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.
Paola QueiroloDivision of Medical Oncology for Melanoma, Sarcoma, and Rare Tumors, European Institute of Oncology (IEO), European Istituto di Ricovero e Cura a Carattere Scientifico (IRCCS), 20141 Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-9917-6633
Pietro QuaglinoSection of Dermatology, Department of Medical Sciences, University of Turin, 10126 Torino, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cutaneous melanoma is the most dangerous skin cancer, with high death rates in advanced stages. To assess the impact of each treatment on patient outcomes, most studies use relapse-free survival (RFS) as a primary endpoint and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) as a secondary endpoint. The aim of this narrative review of the main adjuvant studies for resected stage III/IV melanoma, with a specific focus on DMFS, is to evaluate DMFS trends and their potential association with RFS, identify which treatments are possibly associated with better outcomes in terms of DMFS and their potential predictive factors, and discuss DMFS trends in terms of patient management in daily practice. We outline the impact of each available treatment option on DMFS and RFS according to the years of follow-up and compare data from different studies. Overall, the trends of DMFS closely follow those of RFS, with most patients relapsing at visceral rather than regional sites. As it captures the burden of patients who develop distant relapse, DMFS could be considered a primary endpoint, in addition to RFS, in adjuvant trials, identifying patients whose relapse is associated with a worse prognosis and who may need further systemic treatment.

Indexed as

adjuvantdistant metastasis-free survivalDMFSmelanomametastatic melanomarelapse-free survival

Identifiers

PMID34884176
PMCPMC8658595

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.