H W Higgins1, E Cho1,2,3, M A Weinstock1,2,3, T Y Li4, A Qureshi1,2, W Q Li1,2. 1. Department of Dermatology, Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA. 2. Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, Brown University, Providence, RI, USA. 3. Center for Dermatoepidemiology, VA Medical Center, Providence, RI, USA. 4. Channing Division of Network Medicine, Department of Medicine, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Our understanding of the relationship between ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure and lentigo maligna (LM) has been largely derived from epidemiologic/clinical studies based on invasive melanoma. Recent studies have shown gender differences in melanocytic tumours incidence. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of UV light with LM by gender remains unclear. METHODS: Two prospective cohort study [Nurses' Health Study (1980-2012)] and [Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986-2010)] were analysed. All participants with LM or MIS, non-LM type were included in analysis. UV index at birth, age 15, and age 30 were calculated by gender. Lifetime UV flux was calculated. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 110 485 women from NHS and 41 015 men from HPFS were examined. A total of 281 LM and 776 melanoma in situ (MIS), non-LM cases were reported. Risk of LM increased with increasing UV flux exposure in multivariate-adjusted models for men (P for trend = 0.04), but not for women (P for trend = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: UV flux may be associated with LM in men but not in women.
BACKGROUND: Our understanding of the relationship between ultraviolet (UV) radiation exposure and lentigo maligna (LM) has been largely derived from epidemiologic/clinical studies based on invasive melanoma. Recent studies have shown gender differences in melanocytic tumours incidence. OBJECTIVE: To examine the association of UV light with LM by gender remains unclear. METHODS: Two prospective cohort study [Nurses' Health Study (1980-2012)] and [Health Professionals Follow-up Study (1986-2010)] were analysed. All participants with LM or MIS, non-LM type were included in analysis. UV index at birth, age 15, and age 30 were calculated by gender. Lifetime UV flux was calculated. Hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated. RESULTS: A total of 110 485 women from NHS and 41 015 men from HPFS were examined. A total of 281 LM and 776 melanoma in situ (MIS), non-LM cases were reported. Risk of LM increased with increasing UV flux exposure in multivariate-adjusted models for men (P for trend = 0.04), but not for women (P for trend = 0.91). CONCLUSIONS: UV flux may be associated with LM in men but not in women.
Authors: Susan M Swetter; Jennifer C Boldrick; Sandy Y Jung; Barbara M Egbert; Jeff D Harvell Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2005-10 Impact factor: 8.551
Authors: Diona L Damian; Clare R S Patterson; Michael Stapelberg; Joohong Park; Ross St C Barnetson; Gary M Halliday Journal: J Invest Dermatol Date: 2007-09-20 Impact factor: 8.551
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