An updated review of mucosal melanoma: Survival meta‑analysis

Hahn, Hyung Min; Lee, Kyoung Geun; Choi, Won Joon; Cheong, Seung Hyun; Myung, Ki Bum; Hahn, Hyung Jin

doi:10.3892/mco.2019.1870

Cited by 28 publications

(35 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…15 Male gender, tumour thickness, age, ulceration and advanced tumour stage at initial diagnosis are linked to a less favourable prognosis for mucosal melanoma. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] In the current study, age ≥60, anorectal localization, thickness and advanced tumour stage were identified as significant negative prognostic factors for survival according to the univariate analysis. In the multivariate analysis, older age and advanced tumour stage remained independent significant influence factors for survival.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prognostic factors in 161 patients with mucosal melanoma: a study of German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry

Saraç

Amaral

Keim

et al. 2020

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Mucosal melanoma is a rare malignancy which represents approximately 1% of all melanomas. It is shown that mucosal melanomas have a different biology and less favourable prognosis than its cutaneous counterpart. Objectives Predictive and prognostic factors of survival for mucosal melanoma have not yet been elucidated. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors affecting the course of mucosal melanoma patients followed in our clinic. Methods One hundred and sixty‐one patients with mucosal melanoma prospectively documented in the German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry (CMMR) were included in this study. Gender, age, localization, stage at first medical examination, tumour thickness and mutational status were documented. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), 7th edition was used to define tumour stage. Kaplan–Meier survival curves were evaluated compared with the log‐rank test. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify significant independent prognostic factors. Results According to the localization, patients were categorized in 44.7% oral–nasal, 28.6% genital, 20.5% anorectal and 6.2% visceral. Genital mucosal melanomas had the most favourable 5‐year OS rate (58.6%) followed by visceral (58.3%) and oral–nasal (39.3%). Anorectal melanomas had the worst OS time (median: 21 ± 4.8 months) and 5‐year survival rate (22.7%). Patients <60 years had a better survival than the older group (P = 0.013). Tumour stage at the time of the first medical examination was also a significant factor for survival (P = 0.001). Gender and mutational status were found to have no effect on survival. Age (<60 years vs. ≥60 years; HR = 2.1) and stage at first medical examination (Stage I vs. Stage IV; HR = 8.2) are shown to be significant independent prognostic factors on multivariate Cox regression analysis, but not localization. Conclusion In this study, we observed that older age and advanced stage have significant negative effects on the survival of mucosal melanoma. Thus, the AJCC staging system is applicable for mucosal melanoma.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 60%

“…[11][12][13] In a recent meta-analysis, mucosal melanomas are shown to be 2.25 times more lethal than cutaneous melanomas. 14 The reported survival rates for mucosal melanoma vary depending on the anatomical localization. The overall 5-year survival rate for mucosal melanoma is calculated to be 0-45%.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic factors in 161 patients with mucosal melanoma: a study of German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry

Saraç

Amaral

Keim

et al. 2020

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For similar reasons, patient survival is higher in this type of melanoma than in the non-cutaneous counterparts because of earlier diagnosis. For instance, a recent meta-analysis showed a 2.25-fold higher lethality in mucosal than in cutaneous melanoma [31]. The overall survival (OS) and disease-specific survival (DSS) in melanoma patients depends on many factors including tumor stage, histology, type of treatment the patient is receiving, as well as age [32].…”

Section: Staging Of Melanoma and Patient Survivalmentioning

confidence: 99%

RAGE Signaling in Melanoma Tumors

Olaoba

Kadasah

Vetter

et al. 2020

IJMS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite recent progresses in its treatment, malignant cutaneous melanoma remains a cancer with very poor prognosis. Emerging evidences suggest that the receptor for advance glycation end products (RAGE) plays a key role in melanoma progression through its activation in both cancer and stromal cells. In tumors, RAGE activation is fueled by numerous ligands, S100B and HMGB1 being the most notable, but the role of many other ligands is not well understood and should not be underappreciated. Here, we provide a review of the current role of RAGE in melanoma and conclude that targeting RAGE in melanoma could be an approach to improve the outcomes of melanoma patients.

show abstract

“…Due to the difficulties with diagnosis, the complicated anatomical location and the infrequency, there have been no large randomized control trials to evaluate for the best treatment approach (although in development) [5]. The five-year survival rate is 25% [6].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nivolumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that blocks PD-1; cell check point inhibitor, also results in increased T-cell function. Due to the novel and differing mechanism of actions, both of these immunotherapies work in concert and independently to attack the tumor cells [ 4 - 5 ].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Mucosal Melanoma: A Rare Entity and Review of the Literature

Sohal¹,

Sohal²,

Wazir³

et al. 2020

Cureus

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Mucosal melanoma is a rare variant of melanoma representing around 1% of total cases of melanoma diagnosed. The usual sites of mucosal involvement are the sino-nasal passages, the oral cavity, and less commonly the upper gastrointestinal (GI) tract. It also has been reported to occur in vulvovaginal and anorectal mucosa. We present a rare case of mucosal melanoma that presented as recurrent epistaxis, headache, and sinus pressure. CT maxillofacial imaging revealed a large mass right nasal cavity. This was biopsied by ENT and shown to be mucosal melanoma. This was treated with palliative radiation followed by immunotherapy with nivolumab. Along with details of the case, we also discuss current treatment options with a focus on the role of immunotherapy and its efficacy in cases of head and neck mucosal melanoma. Our review of literature supports use of combination immunotherapy (including both nivolumab and ipilimumab) as it shows greater efficacy than either therapy alone. When combined with radiation therapy (RT) the overall response rate is improved and RT induces an abscopal effect; where benefits of RT are also seen at nonirradiated locations. In our patient, the use of radiation was essentially palliative as the patient was deemed to not be a surgical candidate. We discuss in our literature review the optimum timing of radiation in relation to definitive surgery or immunotherapy.

show abstract

An updated review of mucosal melanoma: Survival meta‑analysis

Cited by 28 publications

References 70 publications

Prognostic factors in 161 patients with mucosal melanoma: a study of German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry

Prognostic factors in 161 patients with mucosal melanoma: a study of German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry

RAGE Signaling in Melanoma Tumors

Mucosal Melanoma: A Rare Entity and Review of the Literature

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About