OBJECTIVE: To test the basic assumption of campaigns for early diagnosis of melanoma, ie, prognosis is correlated with the delay in the diagnosis. DESIGN: Prospective study of the correlation between delays to diagnosis, assessed using a questionnaire, and the Breslow thickness as a prognosis marker. SETTING: Dermatology departments in France. PATIENTS: Five hundred ninety consecutive patients, referred within 12 weeks after resection of cutaneous melanoma. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessment of 5 successive time intervals from the first time the patients realized that they had a lesion until the resection of the melanoma, and results of the correlation between each time interval and tumor thickness (Breslow). RESULTS: There is a positive but weak correlation between tumor thickness and the delay to identify a lesion as suspicious (r = 0.17; P = .009). However, this delay tends to be short for the thickest tumors. There is a negative correlation between tumor thickness and the delay to seek medical attention (r = -0.20; P<.001). This delay was shorter for nodular melanoma. No correlation is found between melanoma thickness and physicians' delays. CONCLUSIONS: Poor prognosis can be accounted for by aggressive rapidly growing tumors rather than by delays. In well-informed populations, campaigns for early diagnosis of melanoma may thus no longer have a major impact on prognosis, unless they are focused on subgroups less accessible to information and medical care.
OBJECTIVE: To test the basic assumption of campaigns for early diagnosis of melanoma, ie, prognosis is correlated with the delay in the diagnosis. DESIGN: Prospective study of the correlation between delays to diagnosis, assessed using a questionnaire, and the Breslow thickness as a prognosis marker. SETTING: Dermatology departments in France. PATIENTS: Five hundred ninety consecutive patients, referred within 12 weeks after resection of cutaneous melanoma. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessment of 5 successive time intervals from the first time the patients realized that they had a lesion until the resection of the melanoma, and results of the correlation between each time interval and tumor thickness (Breslow). RESULTS: There is a positive but weak correlation between tumor thickness and the delay to identify a lesion as suspicious (r = 0.17; P = .009). However, this delay tends to be short for the thickest tumors. There is a negative correlation between tumor thickness and the delay to seek medical attention (r = -0.20; P<.001). This delay was shorter for nodular melanoma. No correlation is found between melanoma thickness and physicians' delays. CONCLUSIONS: Poor prognosis can be accounted for by aggressive rapidly growing tumors rather than by delays. In well-informed populations, campaigns for early diagnosis of melanoma may thus no longer have a major impact on prognosis, unless they are focused on subgroups less accessible to information and medical care.
Authors: Melody J Eide; Martin A Weinstock; Raymond G Dufresne; Suleka Neelagaru; Patricia Risica; Gary J Burkholder; David Upegui; Katharine A Phillips; Bruce K Armstrong; Leslie Robinson-Bostom Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Jasper I van der Rhee; Femke A de Snoo; Hans F A Vasen; Wolter J Mooi; Hein Putter; Nelleke A Gruis; Nicole A Kukutsch; Wilma Bergman Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2011-05-12 Impact factor: 11.527
Authors: Gang Che; Bingjiang Huang; Zhinan Xie; Jingjing Zhao; Yan Yan; Jinna Wu; Huanhuan Sun; Haiqing Ma Journal: Am J Cancer Res Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: Antonieta Medina-Lara; Bogdan Grigore; Ruth Lewis; Jaime Peters; Sarah Price; Paolo Landa; Sophie Robinson; Richard Neal; William Hamilton; Anne E Spencer Journal: Health Technol Assess Date: 2020-11 Impact factor: 4.014
Authors: Clio Dessinioti; Alan C Geller; Aravella Stergiopoulou; Susan M Swetter; Eszter Baltas; Jonathan E Mayer; Timothy M Johnson; John Talaganis; Myrto Trakatelli; Dimitrios Tsoutsos; Gerasimos Tsourouflis; Alexander J Stratigos Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2018-05-01 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: R D Neal; P Tharmanathan; B France; N U Din; S Cotton; J Fallon-Ferguson; W Hamilton; A Hendry; M Hendry; R Lewis; U Macleod; E D Mitchell; M Pickett; T Rai; K Shaw; N Stuart; M L Tørring; C Wilkinson; B Williams; N Williams; J Emery Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-03-31 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Richard G Kyle; Iona Macmillan; Liz Forbat; Richard D Neal; Ronan E O'Carroll; Sally Haw; Gill Hubbard Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2014-05-02 Impact factor: 2.692