ArticleHistopathology2025
Proof of concept that melanoma nuclear count compares favourably with the benchmark histological prognostic feature, Breslow thickness.
Article in Histopathology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
aimsBreslow thickness (BT) is the most important histological prognostic feature for melanoma prognosis, but it only captures tumour size in one dimension. Adding a further measurement in a different axis has been shown to improve prognostic value. It seems reasonable that further prognostic value could be obtained by estimating the number of invasive melanoma cells using nuclear count. The aim of this study was to show proof of concept that nuclear count has prognostic value independent of BT. METHODS AND
resultsMelanoma cell nuclei were labelled with SRY-related HMG-box 10 (SOX10) protein, the sections scanned and StarDist machine-learning algorithm used to count nuclei in 102 cases of primary cutaneous melanoma. Prognostic value was assessed using survival analyses. Nuclear count correlated strongly with T category, BT and calculated tumour area (each P < 0.001), suggesting that it was a valid marker of melanoma burden. Nuclear count was a predictor for overall survival in univariable analysis [hazard ratio (HR) = 2.25, confidence interval (CI) = 1.66-3.06, P < 0.001] and multivariable analysis (HR = 2.60, CI = 1.59-4.24, P < 0.001). BT and ulceration were significant in univariable analyses, but not in multivariable models with nuclear count. Models containing nuclear count showed the best fit. Similar results were seen for melanoma-specific and metastasis-free survival. Nuclear count was able to stratify melanomas within a given T stage.
conclusionsThis study demonstrated proof of concept that counting melanoma nuclei may be an improved measure of invasive tumour burden compared to BT. Future studies will need to refine methods of nuclear detection and also to confirm its prognostic value.
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.