Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35011822›Full record

ReviewJournal of clinical medicine2021

Survival of Women Previously Diagnosed of Melanoma with Subsequent Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis and a Single-Center Experience.

Nieves Martínez-Campayo, Sabela Paradela de la Morena, Sonia Pértega-Díaz, Luisa Iglesias Pena, Pia Vihinen, Kalle Mattila, Marko B Lens, Antonio Tejera-Vaquerizo, Eduardo Fonseca

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 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. 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

9 authors.

Nieves Martínez-CampayoDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital of A Coruña, 15006 Corunna, Spain.ORCID 0000-0003-2297-2970
Sabela Paradela de la MorenaDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital of A Coruña, 15006 Corunna, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-6779-6459
Sonia Pértega-DíazDepartment of Research, University Hospital of A Coruña, 15006 Corunna, Spain.
Luisa Iglesias PenaDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital of A Coruña, 15006 Corunna, Spain.
Pia VihinenFICAN West Cancer Centre and Department of Oncology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, 20521 Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0003-1763-5363
Kalle MattilaFICAN West Cancer Centre and Department of Oncology, Turku University Hospital and University of Turku, 20521 Turku, Finland.ORCID 0000-0002-9688-9187
Marko B LensGenetic Epidemiology Division, Cancer Research UK, St. James's University Hospital, Beckett St., Leeds LS9 7TF, UK.
Antonio Tejera-VaquerizoDepartment of Dermatology, Dermatologic Institute GlobalDerm, Palma del Río, 14700 Cordova, Spain.
Eduardo FonsecaDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital of A Coruña, 15006 Corunna, Spain.ORCID 0000-0002-8048-2681

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Melanoma incidence has increased over the last few decades. How the prognosis of a previously diagnosed melanoma may be affected by a woman's subsequent pregnancy has been debated in the literature since the 1950s, and the outcomes are essential to women who are melanoma survivors in their childbearing years. The main objective of this systematic review is to improve the understanding of whether the course of melanoma in a woman may be altered by a subsequent pregnancy and to help clinicians' diagnosis. Eligible studies for the systematic review were clinical trials, observational cohort studies and case-control studies that compared prognosis outcomes for non-pregnant patients with melanoma, or pregnant before melanoma diagnosis, versus pregnant patients after a diagnosis of melanoma. The search strategy yielded 1101 articles, of which 4 met the inclusion criteria for the systematic review. All the studies were retrospective non-randomised cohorts with patients with melanomas diagnosed before pregnancy. According to our findings, a subsequent pregnancy was not a significant influence on the outcome of a previous melanoma. However, given the small number of identified studies and the heterogeneous data included, it is recommended to approach these patients with caution, and counselling should be given by known prognostic factors. We also reviewed the medical records of 84 patients of childbearing age (35.8 ± 6.3 years, range 21-45 years) who were diagnosed with cutaneous invasive melanoma in our hospital between 2008 and 2018 (N = 724). Of these, 11 (13.1%) had a pregnancy after melanoma diagnosis (age at pregnancy: 35.6 ± 6.3 years). No statistical differences in outcome were detected.

Indexed as

melanomameta-analysispregnancyprognosissurvivalsystematic review

Identifiers

PMID35011822
PMCPMC8745217

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.