Literature DB >> 29462090

Breslow Density Is a Novel Prognostic Feature That Adds Value to Melanoma Staging.

Gerald Saldanha1, Jeremy Yarrow1, Jay Pancholi1, Katarina Flatman1, Kah Wee Teo1, Somaia Elsheik2, Rebecca Harrison3, Marie O'Riordan3, Mark Bamford3.   

Abstract

Histomorphologic prognostic biomarkers that can be measured using only an hematoxylin and eosin stain are very attractive because they are simple and cheap. We conceived an entirely novel biomarker of this type, the Breslow density (BD), which measures invasive melanoma cell density at the site where Breslow thickness (BT) is measured. This study assessed BD's prognostic value. In this study, BD was measured in 1329 melanoma patients. Measurement accuracy and precision was assessed using intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Survival was assessed with a primary end-point of melanoma-specific survival (MSS) and also overall survival and metastasis-free survival. We found that BD measurement was accurate compared with gold standard image analysis (ICC, 0.84). Precision was excellent for 3 observers with different experience (ICC, 0.93) and for an observer using only written instructions (ICC, 0.93). BD was a highly significant predictor in multivariable analysis for overall survival, MSS, and metastasis-free survival (each, P<0.001) and it explained MSS better than BT, but BT and BD together had best explanatory capability. A BD cut point of ≥65% was trained in 970 melanomas and validated in 359. This cut point showed promise as a novel way to upstage melanoma from T stage "a" to "b." BD was combined with BT to create a targeted burden score. This was a validated as an adjunct to American Joint Committee on Cancer stage. In summary, BD can be measured accurately and precisely. It demonstrated independent prognostic value and explained MSS better than BT alone. Notably, we demonstrated ways that BD could be used with American Joint Committee on Cancer version 8 staging.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29462090      PMCID: PMC6176905          DOI: 10.1097/PAS.0000000000001034

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Am J Surg Pathol        ISSN: 0147-5185            Impact factor:   6.394


  20 in total

1.  What you see may not be what you get: a brief, nontechnical introduction to overfitting in regression-type models.

Authors:  Michael A Babyak
Journal:  Psychosom Med       Date:  2004 May-Jun       Impact factor: 4.312

Review 2.  Intraclass correlations: uses in assessing rater reliability.

Authors:  P E Shrout; J L Fleiss
Journal:  Psychol Bull       Date:  1979-03       Impact factor: 17.737

Review 3.  The new paradigm of systemic therapies for metastatic melanoma.

Authors:  Virginia O Volpe; Daniel M Klufas; Upendra Hegde; Jane M Grant-Kels
Journal:  J Am Acad Dermatol       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 11.527

Review 4.  The melanoma revolution: from UV carcinogenesis to a new era in therapeutics.

Authors:  Jennifer A Lo; David E Fisher
Journal:  Science       Date:  2014-11-21       Impact factor: 47.728

5.  Volume of malignant melanoma is superior to thickness as a prognostic indicator. Preliminary observation.

Authors:  R J Friedman; D S Rigel; A W Kopf; C M Grin; E Heilman; R S Bart; H Kamino; M N Harris; D F Roses; A H Postel
Journal:  Dermatol Clin       Date:  1991-10       Impact factor: 3.478

6.  A study of tumor progression: the precursor lesions of superficial spreading and nodular melanoma.

Authors:  W H Clark; D E Elder; D Guerry; M N Epstein; M H Greene; M Van Horn
Journal:  Hum Pathol       Date:  1984-12       Impact factor: 3.466

7.  Rapid and unbiased estimation of the volume of cutaneous malignant melanoma using Cavalieri's principle.

Authors:  F A Bahmer; S Hantirah; H P Baum
Journal:  Am J Dermatopathol       Date:  1996-04       Impact factor: 1.533

8.  Review and evaluation of performance measures for survival prediction models in external validation settings.

Authors:  M Shafiqur Rahman; Gareth Ambler; Babak Choodari-Oskooei; Rumana Z Omar
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2017-04-18       Impact factor: 4.615

9.  External validation of a Cox prognostic model: principles and methods.

Authors:  Patrick Royston; Douglas G Altman
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 4.615

10.  REporting recommendations for tumour MARKer prognostic studies (REMARK).

Authors:  L M McShane; D G Altman; W Sauerbrei; S E Taube; M Gion; G M Clark
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2005-08-22       Impact factor: 7.640

View more
  2 in total

1.  Comparison of the prognostic value of microscopically measured invasive width versus macroscopic width in cutaneous melanoma shows the superiority of microscopic invasive width measurement.

Authors:  Mark Bamford; Louisa Udensi; Arushi Khanna; Marie O'Riordan; Gerald Saldanha
Journal:  J Cutan Pathol       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 1.458

2.  Nomogram Incorporating the WNT/β-Catenin Signaling Pathway for Predicting the Survival of Cutaneous Melanoma.

Authors:  Yu-Xin Zhou; Xin Wang; De-Quan Pang; Ying-Man Wang; Jing Bai; Fei Tian; Duo Han; Shuwei Shi; Lei Hu
Journal:  Int J Gen Med       Date:  2021-06-23
  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.