Changing Age Distribution of Melanoma Patients

Paul, Joan; Sbicca, Jennifer A.; Hirano, Stefanie A.; Mushti, Sirisha; Pariser, Robert J.

doi:10.1097/smj.0000000000000026

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“… 6 The annual incidence of in situ melanoma has increased at a faster rate to that of invasive melanoma in Australia, 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 New Zealand, 11 , 12 Italy, 13 , 14 , 15 Spain 16 and the United States. 17 , 18 , 19 However, the relationship between in situ and invasive melanoma remains unclear 11 even though many previous studies have compared their epidemiological characteristics 7 , 8 , 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 or subsequent risk of melanoma. 27 , 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 The risk of subsequent melanoma of either type was found to be higher among the patients with primary in situ melanoma when compared to those with primary invasive melanoma for some studies, 30 , 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 whereas a Queensland study 27 found that the risk of subsequent invasive melanoma was greater for patients with primary invasive melanoma compared to those with primary in situ melanoma.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The risk of subsequent invasive melanoma after a primary in situ or invasive melanoma in a high incidence country (New Zealand)

Myint

Selak

Elwood

2022

Skin Health and Disease

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Patients with invasive melanoma are at increased risk of developing subsequent invasive melanoma, but the risks for those with primary in situ melanoma are unclear. Objectives To assess and compare the cumulative risk of subsequent invasive melanoma after primary invasive or in situ melanoma. To estimate the standardized incidence ratio (SIR) of subsequent invasive melanoma compared to population incidence in both cohorts. Methods Patients with a first diagnosis of melanoma (invasive or in situ) between 2001 and 2017 were identified from the New Zealand national cancer registry, and any subsequent invasive melanoma during follow‐up to the end of 2017 identified. Cumulative risk of subsequent invasive melanoma was estimated by Kaplan–Meier analysis separately for primary invasive and in situ cohorts. Risk of subsequent invasive melanoma was assessed using Cox proportional hazard models. SIR was assessed, allowing for age, sex, ethnicity, year of diagnosis and follow up time. Results Among 33 284 primary invasive and 27 978 primary in situ melanoma patients, median follow up time was 5.5 and 5.7 years, respectively. A subsequent invasive melanoma developed in 1777 (5%) of the invasive and 1469 (5%) of the in situ cohort, with the same median interval (2.5 years) from initial to first subsequent lesion in both cohorts. The cumulative incidence of subsequent invasive melanoma at 5 years was similar in the two cohorts (invasive 4.2%, in situ 3.8%); the cumulative incidence increased linearly over time in both cohorts. The risk of subsequent invasive melanoma was marginally higher for primary invasive compared to in situ melanoma after adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity and body site of the initial lesion (hazard ratio 1.11, 95% CI 1.02–1.21). Compared to population incidence, the SIR of invasive melanoma was 4.6 (95% CI 4.3–4.9) for the primary invasive and 4 (95% CI 3.7–4.2) for the primary in situ melanoma cohorts. Conclusions The risk of subsequent invasive melanoma is similar whether patients present with in situ or invasive melanoma. Thus follow‐up surveillance for new lesions should be similar, although patients with invasive melanoma require more surveillance for recurrence.

show abstract