ArticleCancer medicine2025
Real-World Outcomes of Adjuvant Therapy in Stage III Melanoma and the Impact of Somatic Mutations.
Article in Cancer medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
- Ultra-High-Frequency Ultrasound of Melanoma Excision Scars for Detection of Clinically Occult Local Recurrence: A Single-Center Retrospective Study.Clinical, cosmetic and investigational dermatology · 2026Article
- Real-World Outcomes of Adjuvant Therapy in Stage III Melanoma and the Impact of Somatic Mutations.Cancer medicine · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeA significant proportion of patients with locoregional (stage III) cutaneous melanoma recur despite adjuvant systemic therapy. Staging criteria and surgical nodal management have changed since the trials were completed. Data assessing the effect of systemic therapy compared to surveillance are limited, and factors associated with recurrence are unclear. We assessed the efficacy of adjuvant systemic therapy in real-world patients and assessed whether baseline genomic characteristics could prognosticate or predict benefit from therapy.
methodsWe collected demographic, histopathologic, clinical, and genomic data for patients diagnosed with stage III cutaneous melanoma. Outcomes of interest were recurrence-free survival (RFS) and distant-metastasis-free survival (DMFS). Survival analysis was performed using the Kaplan-Meier method with log-rank analysis. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed using a Cox regression analysis.
resultsTwo hundred and fifteen patients were included, of which 65 and 76 were treated with BRAF/MEK inhibitors (BRAFi/MEKi) and anti-PD1 adjuvant systemic therapy respectively. Seventy four underwent active surveillance. Both adjuvant therapies reduced the hazard of recurrence when compared to patients undergoing active surveillance: anti-PD1 HR: 0.32 (p < 0.01) and BRAFi/MEKi HR: 0.39 (p = 0.03). Anti-PD1-treated patients with a BRAF V600 mutation had a shorter RFS than patients with BRAF WT melanoma (p < 0.01); this was validated in external data where the presence of a BRAF V600 mutation was associated with an increased hazard recurrence (HR: 2.1, p = 0.025).
conclusionAdjuvant systemic therapy improved RFS in our cohort. We found that BRAF V600 mutation was associated with a worse RFS for adjuvant anti-PD1 monotherapy. The effect of BRAF mutation on the response to anti-PD1 therefore may be considered when choosing between adjuvant anti-PD1 and BRAFi/MEKi for patients with BRAF V600 mutant melanoma.
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.