IMPORTANCE: Little is known about survival after a diagnosis of a second or higher-order (multiple) primary melanoma, and no study has explored survival in a population-based sample that included patients with single primary melanomas (SPMs) and multiple primary melanomas (MPMs) of any stage. Because people with a first primary melanoma are known to have an increased risk of being diagnosed with another, evidence for prognosis is needed. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether survival after diagnosis was better in patients with MPMs than with SPMs, as suggested in a recent study. DESIGN Survival analysis with median follow-up of 7.6 (range, 0.4-10.6) years. SETTING: The Genes, Environment, and Melanoma Study enrolled incident cases of melanoma from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Italy, and the United States. Multiple primary melanomas were ascertained during a longer period than SPM. PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand three hundred seventy-two patients with SPM and 1206 with MPM. EXPOSURE: Diagnosis with melanoma. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Melanoma-specific fatality hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals associated with clinical and pathological characteristics of SPM, MPM, and both in Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS: Melanoma thickness was the main determinant of fatality (HR for >4 mm, 7.68 [95% CI, 4.46-13.23]); other independent predictors were ulceration, mitoses, and scalp location. After adjustment for these other predictors, we found little difference in fatality between MPM and SPM (HR for MPM relative to SPM, 1.24 [95% CI, 0.91-1.69; P = .18]). Thicker SPM, however, had higher fatality (HR for >4 mm, 13.56 [95% CI, 6.47-28.40]) than thicker MPM (2.93 [1.17-7.30]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although overall fatalities due to SPM and MPM were similar, relative fatality for thicker SPM was greater than that for thicker MPM. This finding may offer support for a difference in outcome between patients with SPM and MPM related to factors other than closer surveillance and earlier diagnosis. The better outcomes are worth further exploration.
IMPORTANCE: Little is known about survival after a diagnosis of a second or higher-order (multiple) primary melanoma, and no study has explored survival in a population-based sample that included patients with single primary melanomas (SPMs) and multiple primary melanomas (MPMs) of any stage. Because people with a first primary melanoma are known to have an increased risk of being diagnosed with another, evidence for prognosis is needed. OBJECTIVE: To determine whether survival after diagnosis was better in patients with MPMs than with SPMs, as suggested in a recent study. DESIGN Survival analysis with median follow-up of 7.6 (range, 0.4-10.6) years. SETTING: The Genes, Environment, and Melanoma Study enrolled incident cases of melanoma from population-based cancer registries in Australia, Canada, Italy, and the United States. Multiple primary melanomas were ascertained during a longer period than SPM. PARTICIPANTS: Two thousand three hundred seventy-two patients with SPM and 1206 with MPM. EXPOSURE: Diagnosis with melanoma. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Melanoma-specific fatality hazard ratios (HR) and 95% confidence intervals associated with clinical and pathological characteristics of SPM, MPM, and both in Cox proportional hazards regression models. RESULTS:Melanoma thickness was the main determinant of fatality (HR for >4 mm, 7.68 [95% CI, 4.46-13.23]); other independent predictors were ulceration, mitoses, and scalp location. After adjustment for these other predictors, we found little difference in fatality between MPM and SPM (HR for MPM relative to SPM, 1.24 [95% CI, 0.91-1.69; P = .18]). Thicker SPM, however, had higher fatality (HR for >4 mm, 13.56 [95% CI, 6.47-28.40]) than thicker MPM (2.93 [1.17-7.30]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Although overall fatalities due to SPM and MPM were similar, relative fatality for thicker SPM was greater than that for thicker MPM. This finding may offer support for a difference in outcome between patients with SPM and MPM related to factors other than closer surveillance and earlier diagnosis. The better outcomes are worth further exploration.
Authors: Rajmohan Murali; Philip T Brown; Richard F Kefford; Richard A Scolyer; John F Thompson; Michael B Atkins; Georgina V Long Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-06-26 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Charlotte Hwa; Leah S Price; Ilana Belitskaya-Levy; Michelle W Ma; Richard L Shapiro; Russell S Berman; Hideko Kamino; Farbod Darvishian; Iman Osman; Jennifer A Stein Journal: Cancer Date: 2012-01-13 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Manuela F Azzola; Helen M Shaw; John F Thompson; Seng-Jaw Soong; Richard A Scolyer; Geoffrey F Watson; Marjorie H Colman; Yuting Zhang Journal: Cancer Date: 2003-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: C M Balch; S J Soong; J E Gershenwald; J F Thompson; D S Reintgen; N Cascinelli; M Urist; K M McMasters; M I Ross; J M Kirkwood; M B Atkins; J A Thompson; D G Coit; D Byrd; R Desmond; Y Zhang; P Y Liu; G H Lyman; A Morabito Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-08-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: C M Balch; A C Buzaid; S J Soong; M B Atkins; N Cascinelli; D G Coit; I D Fleming; J E Gershenwald; A Houghton; J M Kirkwood; K M McMasters; M F Mihm; D L Morton; D S Reintgen; M I Ross; A Sober; J A Thompson; J F Thompson Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-08-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Anne Brecht Francken; Helen M Shaw; John F Thompson; Seng-jaw Soong; Neil A Accortt; Manuela F Azzola; Richard A Scolyer; Gerald W Milton; William H McCarthy; Marjorie H Colman; Vincent J McGovern Journal: Ann Surg Oncol Date: 2004-03-15 Impact factor: 5.344
Authors: Charles M Balch; Seng-Jaw Soong; Michael B Atkins; Antonio C Buzaid; Natale Cascinelli; Daniel G Coit; Irvin D Fleming; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Alan Houghton; John M Kirkwood; Kelly M McMasters; Martin F Mihm; Donald L Morton; Douglas S Reintgen; Merrick I Ross; Arthur Sober; John A Thompson; John F Thompson Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2004 May-Jun Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: Marianne Berwick; Anne S Reiner; Susan Paine; Bruce K Armstrong; Anne Kricker; Chris Goumas; Anne E Cust; Nancy E Thomas; Pamela A Groben; Lynn From; Klaus Busam; Irene Orlow; Loraine D Marrett; Richard P Gallagher; Stephen B Gruber; Hoda Anton-Culver; Stefano Rosso; Roberto Zanetti; Peter A Kanetsky; Terry Dwyer; Alison Venn; Julia Lee-Taylor; Colin B Begg Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2014-07-28 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: Maris S Jones; Hitoe Torisu-Itakura; Devin C Flaherty; Hans F Schoellhammer; Jihey Lee; Myung-Shim Sim; Mark B Faries Journal: Am Surg Date: 2016-10 Impact factor: 0.688
Authors: Nicholas J Taylor; Anne S Reiner; Colin B Begg; Anne E Cust; Klaus J Busam; Hoda Anton-Culver; Terence Dwyer; Lynn From; Richard P Gallagher; Stephen B Gruber; Stefano Rosso; Kirsten A White; Roberto Zanetti; Irene Orlow; Nancy E Thomas; Timothy R Rebbeck; Marianne Berwick; Peter A Kanetsky Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2014-11-26 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Nancy E Thomas; Anne Kricker; Weston T Waxweiler; Patrick M Dillon; Klaus J Busman; Lynn From; Pamela A Groben; Bruce K Armstrong; Hoda Anton-Culver; Stephen B Gruber; Loraine D Marrett; Richard P Gallagher; Roberto Zanetti; Stefano Rosso; Terence Dwyer; Alison Venn; Peter A Kanetsky; Irene Orlow; Susan Paine; David W Ollila; Anne S Reiner; Li Luo; Honglin Hao; Jill S Frank; Colin B Begg; Marianne Berwick Journal: JAMA Dermatol Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 10.282
Authors: Jonathan A Miles; Irene Orlow; Peter A Kanetsky; Li Luo; Anne E Cust; Bruce K Armstrong; Anne Kricker; Hoda Anton-Culver; Stephen B Gruber; Richard P Gallagher; Roberto Zanetti; Stefano Rosso; Lidia Sacchetto; Terence Dwyer; David C Gibbs; Klaus J Busam; Vikram Mavinkurve; David W Ollila; Colin B Begg; Marianne Berwick; Nancy E Thomas Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2018-12-17 Impact factor: 7.590
Authors: Adi Nosrati; Wesley Y Yu; Joseph McGuire; Ann Griffin; Juliana Rocha de Souza; Rasnik Singh; Eleni Linos; Mary Margaret Chren; Barbara Grimes; Nicholas P Jewell; Maria L Wei Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2018-07-19 Impact factor: 7.590