ArticleEuropean journal of epidemiology2026
No robust evidence supporting an association between tattoos and de-novo cutaneous melanoma.
Article in European journal of epidemiology, 2026. 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.
- Authors' reply regarding "Does tattoo exposure increase the risk of cutaneous melanoma: A population based case-control study".European journal of epidemiology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The recent Swedish study by Rietz Liljedahl et al. examining melanoma riskamong tattooed individuals has prompted critical discussion regarding a potential causal linkbetween tattoos and melanoma. While concerns persist that tattoo pigments deposited in thedermis may induce melanoma, several lines of evidence argue against this hypothesis, includingthe rarity of melanomas arising within tattoos, low incidence reported in nationwide studies, andthe absence of cases involving multiple melanomas within a single tattoo. Importantly, mostmelanomas in the Swedish study were not located at tattoo sites, and recent studies from theUnited States and France failed to demonstrate a positive association, with one reporting adecreased melanoma risk among individuals with multiple large tattoos. Experimental data evensuggest a possible protective effect of black ink on UV penetration. The study's interpretation isfurther limited by insufficient consideration of established melanoma risk factors, includingfamilial history, number of nevi, childhood sunburns, and sunbed use, the latter showing a highlysignificant association. Methodological issues also arise from the inclusion of dysplastic nevi withhigh-grade atypia as melanoma in situ, despite the lack of diagnostic consensus and poorinterobserver reliability. Moreover, comparisons between tattoo-related hydrocarbon exposureand occupational exposure in the petroleum industry are inappropriate due to substantialdifferences in magnitude, duration, and route of exposure. Overall, the study appears tooveremphasize hypothetical systemic effects of tattoo pigments while underestimating well-established behavioral and phenotypic risk factors. Current evidence does not support a directcausal link between tattoos and melanoma.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41733775What 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.