Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35188271›Full record

ArticleThe Australasian journal of dermatology2022

Clinicopathological characteristics of new primary melanomas in patients receiving immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy for metastatic melanoma.

Thomas E Pennington, Cathy Yunjia Zhao, Andrew J Colebatch, Pablo Fernandez-Peñas, Pascale Guitera, Hazel Burke, Richard A Scolyer, Alexander M Menzies, Matteo S Carlino, Serigne Lo and 2 more

Open access · hybridAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in The Australasian journal of dermatology, 2022. 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
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  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

12 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Thomas E PenningtonMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0210-057X
Cathy Yunjia ZhaoWestmead Hospital, Westmead, New South Wales, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4722-9673
Andrew J ColebatchMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Pablo Fernandez-PeñasFaculty of Medicine and Health, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Pascale GuiteraMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Hazel BurkeMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Richard A ScolyerMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Alexander M MenziesMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Matteo S CarlinoMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Serigne LoMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Georgina V LongMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Robyn Pm SawMelanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
The University of Sydney · AUWestmead Hospital · AU

Funding

Ainsworth FoundationCancer Institute NSW FellowshipMelanoma Institute AustraliaNational Health and Medical Research Council of AustraliaOpen access publishing facilitated by The University of Sydney, as part of the Wiley - The University of Sydney agreement via the Council of Australian University Librarians.University of Sydney Medical Foundation
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundImmune checkpoint inhibitors have improved survival in advanced stage melanoma patients. Rates of new primary melanomas (NPM) in patients with prior melanoma have been reported to be as high as 12%. Little is currently known regarding the frequency or characteristics of NPMs occurring in melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors.

aimTo determine the frequency and describe clinicopathologic characteristics of NPMs diagnosed in patients during or after treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors for metastatic melanoma.

methodsA retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Melanoma Institute Australia and Westmead Hospital Dermatology databases. Clinicopathological data for the initial primary melanoma (IPM) and NPM were compared.

resultsBetween 2013-2017, 14 NPMs in 13 patients (out of a total of 1047) treated with checkpoint inhibitors were identified. NPMs were significantly thinner than the IPM (median Breslow thickness 0.35 mm vs 2.0 mm, P = 0.0003), less likely to be ulcerated (0/14 vs 6/13, P = 0.004) and less likely to have nodal metastases (0/14 vs 6/13, P = 0.004). NPMs were significantly more likely to be detected in the in-situ stage (6/14 vs 0/13, P = 0.0016).

conclusionNPMs are infrequent in patients treated with checkpoint inhibitors. When they occur, they are usually detected at an early stage and have features associated with a favourable prognosis, most likely reflecting close surveillance. Further study is required to determine long-term risk in patients achieving a durable response to immune checkpoint inhibitors, and to determine whether the immunotherapy itself influences both their development and biology.

Indexed as

MelanomaNeoplasms, Second PrimarySkin NeoplasmsHumansImmune Checkpoint InhibitorsRetrospective StudiesImmune Checkpoint Inhibitorscheckpoint inhibitorsimmunotherapymelanomanew primary melanoma

Identifiers

PMID35188271
PMCPMC9303670
OpenAlexW4212888329

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.