4.6 Article

Population-based incidence of conjunctival melanoma in various races and ethnic groups and comparison with other melanomas

Journal

AMERICAN JOURNAL OF OPHTHALMOLOGY
Volume 145, Issue 3, Pages 418-423

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajo.2007.10.022

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

PURPOSE: To investigate racial and ethnic differences in the incidence of conjunctival melanoma in a large population-based study. DESIGN: Observational cross-sectional study. METHODS: Using data from 1992 through 2003 provided by the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) program, we calculated age,adjusted incidence rates of conjunctival melanoma in various racial and ethnic groups (Black, American Indian, Asian and Pacific Islander, Hispanic, and non-Hispanic White). In addition, we calculated the standard incidence ratios (risk ratios) and 95% confidence intervals to describe the differences within these racial and ethnic groups. RESULTS: From 1992 through 2003, there were a total of 168 conjunctival melanomas diagnosed in 13 SEER registries with known racial and ethnic groups. The annual age-adjusted incidence rates (per million population) of conjunctival melanoma was 0.18 (Blacks), 0.17 (American Indians), 0.15 (Asians), 0.33 (Hispanics), and 0.49 (non-Hispanic Whites). The difference in the incidence of conjunctival melanoma between Whites and Blacks or Asians was statistically significant, but was not significant between Blacks and Asians. CONCLUSIONS: The overall White-to,Black incidence ratio in conjunctival melanoma was 2.6:1, which is much less than that of uveal melanoma (18:1) and cutaneous melanoma (13:1 to 26:1), but is similar to that of mucosal melanoma (2.2:1 to 2.3:1). The cause and significance of this difference of racial and ethnic incidence in various melanomas are discussed.

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