ArticleBJS open2025
Excision margins and prognosis in cutaneous melanoma: retrospective population-based cohort study.
Article in BJS open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Narrow Excision Margins for Diverse Histological Subtypes of Cutaneous Melanoma in Children and Adults: A Systematic Review.Dermatology and therapy · 2026Pooled it
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe impact of surgical excision margin size on the survival of patients with cutaneous melanoma (CM) is controversial. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of excision margins on patient outcomes.
methodsThis retrospective population-based follow-up study analysed data from patients presenting with CM without extranodal disease. The linear distance of CM from the excision margin was assessed microscopically. Regarding overall and melanoma-specific survival estimates, Kaplan-Meier analysis, the Cox proportional hazards model, and the subdistribution hazard ratio of the Fine-Gray model were applied.
resultsOf 3262 patients, a total of 2698 (82.7%) with pathological (p) T1-2 and 564 (17.3%) with pT3-4 CM underwent wide local excision. Multivariable analyses, adjusting for melanoma incidence cohort, age, sex, anatomical site, ulceration, histotype, mitotic count, and tumour-infiltrating lymphocytes, demonstrated that, in pT1-2 CM, surgical excision > 1.1 cm resulted in significant CM-specific survival benefit. In pT4 disease, a CM distance to the surgical margins of < 1.6 cm significantly lowered CM-specific survival.
conclusionThis population-based study conducted in real-world clinical practice found that the prognosis of patients with pT1-2 CM may benefit from excision margins > 1.1 cm. In pT3-4 CM, margins < 1.6 cm were significantly associated with lower CM-specific survival rates. These findings highlight the need for further prospective studies to evaluate the safety of surgical excision margins in managing primary CM.
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.