ArticleJournal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV2026
Survival impact of second primary cutaneous and non-cutaneous melanoma in melanoma survivors.
Article in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV, 2026. 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
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundMelanoma survivors have a high risk of developing second primary neoplasms, both cutaneous melanoma (SPCM) and non-cutaneous melanoma (SPNCM), but little is known about the survival impact of the diagnosis of SPCM and SPNCM.
objectivesTo compare overall survival between melanoma survivors with first primary melanoma and SPCM/SPNCM by stage at diagnosis of second primary neoplasms.
methodsAmong cutaneous (CM) and non-cutaneous melanoma (NCM) survivors of all ages, SPCM (N = 7314) or SPNCM (N = 157) between 2004 and 2020 were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results 17 Research Plus database. Flexible parametric modelling was conducted to evaluate the time-varying effect of SPCM and SPNCM, compared to single melanoma, on survival.
resultsOver the study period, 3.4% of patients had a SPCM (12.9% regional/distant-stage) and 0.1% had a SPNCM (36.3% regional/distant or unknown-stage). Compared with single CM, patients with SPCM (regional/distant-stage hazard ratio [HR] = 1.71, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.55-1.89; localized-stage HR = 1.09, CI = 1.01-1.18) and regional/distant-stage SPNCM (Year 1: HR = 1.56, CI = 0.81-3.03) had worse overall survival. Among NCM survivors, regional/distant-stage SPCM (HR = 2.67, CI = 1.73-4.13) had a more pronounced impact on decreased overall survival than localized-stage SPCM (HR = 1.19, CI = 0.71-1.99) when compared with single NCM, with similar trends seen for regional/distant-stage SPNCM (Year 2: HR = 1.39, CI = 0.76-2.54) relative to localized-stage SPNCM (Year 2: HR = 0.96, CI = 0.61-1.50).
conclusionsThe reduction in survival among melanoma survivors with SPCM and SPNCM suggests the potential need for prevention and early detection of SPCM and SPNCM.
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.