ArticleEcancermedicalscience2024
Clinicopathological features, response patterns, outcomes and BRAF status in patients with advanced acral melanoma: a preliminary Peruvian study.
Article in Ecancermedicalscience, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Globally, acral melanoma (AM) is underrepresented in most clinical trials, being predominant in Caucasian populations. Latin America is a niche that needs to be explored. Therefore, this study aimed to determine the clinical features, response patterns, outcomes and v-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1 (BRAF) status in Peruvian patients with advanced AM. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed the medical records of 19 patients with advanced AM who received immunotherapy (IO) in first- or subsequent-line therapy. The samples were analysed, and their mutational state was performed by deoxyribonucleic acid sequencing, focusing primarily on the most frequently mutated gene, BRAF. Descriptive statistics were used to assess the baseline characteristics. Overall survival was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The median age was 64 years and 63.2% were men. Plantar was the site most frequently affected (84.2%). The most frequent stage was stage III (68.4%), with 26.4% receiving adjuvant therapy. The majority of cases exhibited a Breslow thickness of >4 mm (52%), a Clark level of IV/V (89.4%), and all patients presented ulceration and a high range of mitosis. During follow-up, all patients experienced recurrent advanced disease, with 52.6% developing visceral metastasis. Patients who received IO as first or subsequent line had an overall response rate (ORR) of 33.3%, and those who received it as first-line therapy had an ORR of 40%. Twenty-one percent of the patients harbored BRAF V6000E mutation and, showing an ORR of 50% compared to wild-type individuals (44.4%) after the first line of treatment. Conclusion: Our preliminary study reported that AM has poor clinico-pathological features and response rates to IO in Peruvian patients. However, those who received IO as a first-line treatment or harbored the BRAF mutation appeared to have a slightly better response than wild-type patients.
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.