ArticleDermatology and therapy2025
Importance of Surgical Margins in Patients with Early-Stage Merkel Cell Carcinoma.
Article in Dermatology and therapy, 2025. 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.
- [Merkel cell carcinoma: current surgical approaches and multidisciplinary treatment].Revista medica del Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionThe National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommends excision of the primary tumor using 1-2-cm surgical margins and sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) as the initial management of early-stage Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC). However, there is no clear consensus on the appropriate size of the surgical margins and/or the use of Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS). Our aim was to demonstrate that, independent of the type of surgery, obtaining negative surgical margins is associated with enhanced overall survival (OS).
methodsA retrospective study was performed using early-stage MCC patients from the National Cancer Database (NCDB) who were diagnosed between 2004 and 2020 and underwent surgical excision (SE) of their primary tumor. Patients were stratified into three groups based on the surgical treatment they received: < 1 cm excision margin, ≥ 1 cm excision margin, or MMS. OS was assessed with Kaplan-Meier curves, log-rank tests, and multivariable risk-adjusted Cox proportional-hazards regression.
resultsOf the 4,607 patients included in this study; 53% underwent SE of ≥ 1 cm (n = 2,474), 41% had SE < 1 cm (n = 1,905), and the remainder had MMS (n = 228). 75% of patients had an SLNB, and 56% received adjuvant radiation to the primary site and/or nodal basin. While no difference in OS was observed between the three surgical treatments, negative surgical margins (hazard ratio (HR) 0.78; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.65-0.94) and receipt of radiation to the primary site (HR 0.82; 95% CI 0.73-0.92) were both independently associated with improved OS.
conclusionAchieving negative surgical margins is associated with improved OS in MCC, suggesting that MMS and conventional excision are both suitable approaches for the treatment of primary MCC.
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.