ArticleEye (London, England)2025
Long-term follow-up of circumscribed iris melanomas treated by proton beam therapy.
Article in Eye (London, England), 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.
- Proton therapy in Spain: SEOR-SPROMP multidisciplinary recommendations developed through a RAND/UCLA consensus process.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionIris melanomas are a rare entity accounting for 2-5% of uveal melanomas. The most frequent primary treatment for circumscribed iris melanomas is irradiation, particularly by proton beam therapy (PBT). Short-term efficacy is encouraging but there is little data on long-term tumour control and side effects.
objectivesTo describe the long-term results in terms of local and systemic control, eye preservation and side-effects after PBT for circumscribed iris melanomas.
methodsRetrospective chart review of patients treated by PBT between 1998 and 2022. Diffuse iris melanomas, ciliary body melanomas with iris involvement or tumours with extrascleral invasion were excluded.
resultsOf 143 patients treated by PBT, n = 91 were treated five years or more before data update and were included. Median follow-up was 10.7 years (range 1.7-22.7 years). Documented growth was present for 74% of patients. The median clinical largest diameter was 5 mm, and the median ultrasound thickness was 2.1 mm. The tumour invaded the iridocorneal angle in 68% of patients. Overall survival was 94%. Three patients presented with metastatic disease, of which one died of metastasis. Seven deaths were unrelated to iris melanoma. Five (3.5%) patients experienced ocular relapse. The most frequent complications were cataract and raised intraocular pressure (no neovascular glaucoma). Four patients (4.3%) required secondary enucleation.
conclusionLong-term follow-up confirms that PBT is an excellent treatment option for localized iris melanomas, with very favourable local tumour control, eye preservation, and overall survival. Relapses are very rare but can occur several years after treatment, warranting a prolonged follow-up.
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.