4.6 Article

Melanomas in children and adolescents: Clinicopathologic features and survival outcomes

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN ACADEMY OF DERMATOLOGY
Volume 88, Issue 3, Pages 609-616

Publisher

MOSBY-ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.jaad.2022.08.067

Keywords

Key words; adolescence; age; children; melanoma; survival

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study evaluated the clinicopathological features and survival of children and adolescents diagnosed with melanoma. The study found that the 10-year recurrence-free survival rates for children and adolescents were 91.5% and 86.4% respectively, with no significant difference. Ulceration status and anatomic site were associated with recurrence-free survival and overall survival.
Background: Melanomas in the first 2 decades of life are uncommon and poorly understood.Objective: To assess clinicopathologic features and survival of children (#11 years) and adolescents (12-19 years) diagnosed with melanoma.Methods: A pooled cohort of 514 patients was analyzed (397 Dutch, 117 Australian; 62 children, 452 adolescents). Pathology reports were reevaluated to determine melanoma subtypes. Multivariable Cox models were generated for recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS).Results: Melanoma subtypes were conventional melanoma (superficial spreading, nodular, desmoplastic, and acral lentiginous), spitzoid melanoma, and melanoma associated with a congenital nevus in 428, 78, and 8 patients, respectively. Ten-year RFS was 91.5% (95% confidence interval [CI], 82.4%-100%) in children and 86.4% (95% CI, 82.7%-90.3%) in adolescents (P = .32). Ten-year OS was 100% in children and 92.7% (95% CI, 89.8%-95.8%) in adolescents (P = .09). On multivariable analysis possible only for the adolescent cohort due to the small number of children, ulceration status, and anatomic site were associated with RFS and OS, whereas age, sex, mitotic index, sentinel node status and melanoma subtype were not. Breslow thickness [4 mm was associated with worse RFS.Limitations: Retrospective study.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available