Rachel M Cymerman1, Yongzhao Shao1, Kun Wang1, Yilong Zhang1, Era C Murzaku1, Lauren A Penn1, Iman Osman1, David Polsky1. 1. Affiliations of authors: The Ronald O. Perelman Department of Dermatology (RMC, ECM, LAP, IO, DP) and Department of Population Health (YS, KW, YZ), New York University School of Medicine; Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, NYU Langone Medical Center, New York, NY (YS, IO, DP).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Although 20% to 30% of melanomas are histopathologically 'nevus associated,' the majority of melanomas arise de novo, ie, in clinically normal skin with no associated nevus. We examined whether these forms of melanoma differed in their associations with clinical and histopathologic features and patient survival. METHODS: We analyzed two prospective cohorts from our institution with protocol-driven follow-up information (NYU1, n = 1024; NYU2, n = 1125). We used univariate and multivariable analyses to examine associations between de novo vs nevus-associated melanoma classification and age, anatomic site, tumor thickness, tumor ulceration, mitotic index, histological subtype, clinical stage, and survival. We tested the associations identified in NYU1 using NYU2 as a replication cohort. All tests of statistical significance were two-sided. RESULTS: In NYU1, de novo melanomas were associated with tumor thickness greater than 1.0 mm (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.43 to 2.70, P < .001), ulceration (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.10 to 2.54, P = .02), nodular subtype (OR = 3.26, 95% CI = 1.70 to 7.11, P = .001), greater than stage I (OR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.65 to 3.40, P < .001), older age (OR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.18 to 2.30, P = .004), and shorter overall survival (HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.22 to 2.18, P < .001). In NYU2, de novo melanoma was again statistically significantly associated with thickness greater than 1.0 mm (OR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.72 to 2.93, P < .001), ulceration (OR = 2.88, 95% CI = 1.95 to 4.37, P < .001), nodular subtype (OR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.75 to 3.37, P < .001), greater than stage I (OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.80 to 3.29, P < .001), older age (OR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.31 to 2.17, P < .001), and shorter overall survival (HR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.78 to 3.56, P < .001). In multivariable analysis, de novo classification was an independent, poor prognostic indicator in NYU2 (HR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.19 to 2.44, P = .004). Male patients had a statistically significantly worse survival than female patients if their melanoma was de novo (NYU1, P < .001; NYU2, P < .001); unexpectedly, there was no sex difference in survival among patients with nevus-associated tumors. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that de novo melanomas are more aggressive than nevus-associated melanomas. This classification scheme may also provide a useful framework for investigations into sex differences in melanoma outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Although 20% to 30% of melanomas are histopathologically 'nevus associated,' the majority of melanomas arise de novo, ie, in clinically normal skin with no associated nevus. We examined whether these forms of melanoma differed in their associations with clinical and histopathologic features and patient survival. METHODS: We analyzed two prospective cohorts from our institution with protocol-driven follow-up information (NYU1, n = 1024; NYU2, n = 1125). We used univariate and multivariable analyses to examine associations between de novo vs nevus-associated melanoma classification and age, anatomic site, tumor thickness, tumor ulceration, mitotic index, histological subtype, clinical stage, and survival. We tested the associations identified in NYU1 using NYU2 as a replication cohort. All tests of statistical significance were two-sided. RESULTS: In NYU1, de novo melanomas were associated with tumor thickness greater than 1.0 mm (odds ratio [OR] = 1.96, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.43 to 2.70, P < .001), ulceration (OR = 1.65, 95% CI = 1.10 to 2.54, P = .02), nodular subtype (OR = 3.26, 95% CI = 1.70 to 7.11, P = .001), greater than stage I (OR = 2.35, 95% CI = 1.65 to 3.40, P < .001), older age (OR = 1.64, 95% CI = 1.18 to 2.30, P = .004), and shorter overall survival (HR = 1.63, 95% CI = 1.22 to 2.18, P < .001). In NYU2, de novo melanoma was again statistically significantly associated with thickness greater than 1.0 mm (OR = 2.24, 95% CI = 1.72 to 2.93, P < .001), ulceration (OR = 2.88, 95% CI = 1.95 to 4.37, P < .001), nodular subtype (OR = 2.41, 95% CI = 1.75 to 3.37, P < .001), greater than stage I (OR = 2.42, 95% CI = 1.80 to 3.29, P < .001), older age (OR = 1.68, 95% CI = 1.31 to 2.17, P < .001), and shorter overall survival (HR = 2.52, 95% CI = 1.78 to 3.56, P < .001). In multivariable analysis, de novo classification was an independent, poor prognostic indicator in NYU2 (HR = 1.70, 95% CI = 1.19 to 2.44, P = .004). Male patients had a statistically significantly worse survival than female patients if their melanoma was de novo (NYU1, P < .001; NYU2, P < .001); unexpectedly, there was no sex difference in survival among patients with nevus-associated tumors. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that de novo melanomas are more aggressive than nevus-associated melanomas. This classification scheme may also provide a useful framework for investigations into sex differences in melanoma outcomes.
Authors: John F Thompson; Seng-Jaw Soong; Charles M Balch; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Shouluan Ding; Daniel G Coit; Keith T Flaherty; Phyllis A Gimotty; Timothy Johnson; Marcella M Johnson; Stanley P Leong; Merrick I Ross; David R Byrd; Natale Cascinelli; Alistair J Cochran; Alexander M Eggermont; Kelly M McMasters; Martin C Mihm; Donald L Morton; Vernon K Sondak Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-04-25 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael B Cook; Katherine A McGlynn; Susan S Devesa; Neal D Freedman; William F Anderson Journal: Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 4.254
Authors: David C Whiteman; Mark Stickley; Peter Watt; Maria Celia Hughes; Marcia B Davis; Adèle C Green Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: William M Lin; Su Luo; Alona Muzikansky; Alice Z C Lobo; Kenneth K Tanabe; Arthur J Sober; A Benedict Cosimi; Hensin Tsao; Lyn M Duncan Journal: J Am Acad Dermatol Date: 2014-10-18 Impact factor: 11.527
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: W H Clark; D E Elder; D Guerry; L E Braitman; B J Trock; D Schultz; M Synnestvedt; A C Halpern Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1989-12-20 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Arjen Joosse; Sandra Collette; Stefan Suciu; Tamar Nijsten; Poulam M Patel; Ulrich Keilholz; Alexander M M Eggermont; Jan Willem W Coebergh; Esther de Vries Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-05-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joanne M Jeter; Tawnya L Bowles; Clara Curiel-Lewandrowski; Susan M Swetter; Fabian V Filipp; Zalfa A Abdel-Malek; Larisa J Geskin; Jerry D Brewer; Jack L Arbiser; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Emily Y Chu; John M Kirkwood; Neil F Box; Pauline Funchain; David E Fisher; Kari L Kendra; Ashfaq A Marghoob; Suephy C Chen; Michael E Ming; Mark R Albertini; John T Vetto; Kim A Margolin; Sherry L Pagoto; Jennifer L Hay; Douglas Grossman; Darrel L Ellis; Mohammed Kashani-Sabet; Aaron R Mangold; Svetomir N Markovic; Frank L Meyskens; Kelly C Nelson; Jennifer G Powers; June K Robinson; Debjani Sahni; Aleksandar Sekulic; Vernon K Sondak; Maria L Wei; Jonathan S Zager; Robert P Dellavalle; John A Thompson; Martin A Weinstock; Sancy A Leachman; Pamela B Cassidy Journal: Cancer Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Clio Dessinioti; Niki Dimou; Alan C Geller; Aravella Stergiopoulou; Serigne Lo; Ulrike Keim; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Lauren E Haydu; Simone Ribero; Pietro Quaglino; Susana Puig; Josep Malvehy; Lidija Kandolf-Sekulovic; Tatjana Radevic; Roland Kaufmann; Laura Meister; Eduardo Nagore; Victor Traves; Grigorios G Champsas; Mihaela Plaka; Brigitte Dreno; Emilie Varey; David Moreno Ramirez; Reinhard Dummer; Joanna Mangana; Axel Hauschild; Friederike Egberts; Ketty Peris; Laura Del Regno; Ana-Maria Forsea; Sabina A Zurac; Ricardo Vieira; Ana Brinca; Iris Zalaudek; Teresa Deinlein; Eleni Linos; Evangelos Evangelou; John F Thompson; Richard A Scolyer; Claus Garbe; Alexander J Stratigos Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2019-12-01 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Luz D Gutiérrez-Castañeda; Mauricio Gamboa; John A Nova; Leonardo Pulido; Jose D Tovar-Parra Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2020-07-22 Impact factor: 3.411