Cutaneous malignant melanoma in children and adolescents treated in pediatric oncology units
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Recent progress in the understanding of tumor biology and new targeted therapies has led to improved survival in adults with malignant melanoma (MM). MM is rare in children, especially before puberty. We report here our experience with pediatric patients with MM, describe the clinical presentation, treatment and evolution, and compare prepubescent and postpubescent disease. METHODS: A retrospective, descriptive, national multicenter study was undertaken of 52 cases of MM in children and adolescents. Demographic, histopathology, treatment evolution data, and survival distributions are described. RESULTS: Median age was 15 years (5-18). The tumors were often amelanotic (45%) and raised (83%), and Breslow thickness was greater than 4 mm in 35% of cases. Histological examination showed superficial spreading (n = 16) or spitzoid (n = 16) or nodular (n = 9) pattern. Twelve children (23%) were less than 10 years of age. The spitzoid histotype was more frequent in prepubescent children (seven of 12). Seventeen patients relapsed, of whom four had skin lesions initially diagnosed as benign. Ten patients died after relapse. Five-year event-free survival and overall survival were 62.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 45.3-76) and 75.5% (95% CI: 56.8-87.1), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: MM appears to be different in prepubescent children, of whom most had a spitzoid histotype. Diagnosis can be difficult, leading to delay in treatment. New biological tools to identify targets for treatment in MM and to differentiate spitzoid melanomas from Spitz nevi now exist. As effective targeted therapies are now available, we recommend requesting biological examination of all melanocyte-derived skin lesions in children that could be malignant.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".