Melanoma is a treatable and preventable skin cancer. It is responsible for 75% of deaths among all skin cancers. Previous studies have found that race/ethnicity may play a role in survival among melanoma patients. However, there are no studies that cover 30 years and take race into account for the U.S. population.This study is a secondary analysis of the National Cancer Institute's Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Result (SEER) Program. Adults with primary cutaneous melanoma from 1982 to 2011 were included; the final sample size was 185,219. The outcome was survival; both cause-specific and all-cause mortality were examined. The main exposure was race/ethnicity. Kaplan–Meier survival analysis was used to estimate overall survival. Cox proportional hazards regression was used to estimate unadjusted and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs). A P-value less than 0.05 was considered statistically significant.More than 50% of patients in all races/ethnicities were diagnosed at the in situ or localized stage. Non-Hispanic White patients were more frequently diagnosed at the in situ stage. Overall, more men were diagnosed than women. The majority of cases among all races were men. Non-Hispanic Black females represented the smallest percentage of melanoma cases among all races. The smallest number of diagnoses across all races/ethnicities was made from 1982 to 1991. Median follow-up was 81 months and no collinearity was observed in the adjusted models. When examining cause-specific mortality and controlling for site and stage at diagnosis, gender, age and decade of diagnosis, the HR for non-Hispanic Black patients was lower than that for non-Hispanic White patients (HR 0.7; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.6–0.8). However, when examining all-cause mortality, this difference disappeared (HR 1.1; 95% CI: 1.0–1.2). Stage at diagnosis impacted HR; patients diagnosed with distant metastases had significantly worse survival.When taking cause-specific mortality into consideration and after controlling for stage and site at diagnosis, gender, and age and decade of diagnosis, non-Hispanic Black patients had a lower HR compared to non-Hispanic White patients. However, this difference disappeared when examining all-cause mortality. Further research is needed to explore this finding and to determine what factors may be associated with late-stage melanoma diagnosis.

Background:Health literacy is an essential predictor of health status, disease control and adherence to medications.Objectives:The study goals were to assess the health literacy level of the general population in Saudi Arabia using translated Gulf Arabic version of the short-version of the Test of Functional Health Literacy in Adults (S-TOFHLA) and Single Item Literacy Screener (SILS) tests and to measure the relationship between health literacy and education level.Methods:The study was a cross-sectional with a convenience sample of 123 participants from the general population in Riyadh. Data were collected using the modified (Gulf) Arabic versions of both S-TOFHLA and SILS. Fisher’s Exact test was used to measure the difference of the health literacy scores according to the education degrees and Cronbach’s alpha was used to measure the internal consistency of the S-TOFHLA items.Results:More than half (55.4%) of the participants were male, 50.4% had a middle school or less education level, and we found that 84.4% had adequate health literacy as measured by the S-TOFHLA, compared to 49.6% as measured by SILS. The Fisher’s Exact test showed a significant difference (P<.05) in the S-TOFHLA and SILS scores according to education categories.Conclusions:The level of education has a significant positive association with S-TOFHLA and SILS results. The Gulf Arabic version of S-TOFHLA is a reliable test with a good internal consistency and a significant positive correlation between the two parts of S-TOFHLA. We recommend the use of S-TOFHLA or SILS at the first patient visit.