ReviewInternational journal of clinical oncology2026
Analysis of therapeutic strategy changes for patients with melanoma using a national dataset in Japan.
Review in International journal of clinical oncology, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundPreviously, surgical intervention, particularly completion lymph node dissection (CLND), was the standard treatment for sentinel lymph node (SLN)-positive melanoma. However, following the development of adjuvant immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and targeted therapies (TTs), treatment strategies have shifted toward non-surgical approaches. This shift is also supported by the findings from the Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group-SLN Trial and the Multicenter Selective Lymphadenectomy Trial Ⅱ. In this study, using a national dataset in Japan, we investigated trends in melanoma management including CLND and medical cost.
methodsWe analyzed data from the Japanese Diagnosis Procedure Combination database (2008-2023) to evaluate national trends in melanoma treatment. We identified patients with cutaneous melanoma, and assessed treatment modalities, including SLN biopsy (SLNB), CLND, and adjuvant therapies. The annual proportion of CLND and first-year medical costs after SLNB were also examined.
resultsAmong 14,642 patients with melanoma, 874 underwent SLNB. Of these, 170 received ICIs or TTs without undergoing immediate CLND after 2018, and 95 (55.9%) were monitored with ultrasonography. The use of CLND declined steadily after 2017, whereas the average cost during the first year after SLNB increased annually, with a marked rise observed after 2019.
conclusionThe approval of adjuvant therapies and findings from clinical trials may have contributed to the reduction in CLND and rising treatment costs in Japan. As management strategies shift toward non-surgical approaches, more appropriate follow-up strategies will be required. Further research is needed to assess the cost-effectiveness of adjuvant therapies and to optimize follow-up strategies in the Japanese healthcare setting.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42209932What 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.