MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2885416623 · doi:10.1158/1538-7445.am2018-4768

Abstract 4768: Characteristics of patients diagnosed de novo with AJCC7 stage III or regionally advanced cutaneous melanoma and trends in adjuvant therapy: An analysis of the SEER cancer registry in the United States

2018· article· en· W2885416623 on OpenAlexaff
Ahmad A. Tarhini, Sameer R. Ghate, Antônio Nakasato, Raluca Ionescu‐Ittu, Sherry Shi, Briana Ndife, Rebecca Burne, François Laliberté, Mei Sheng Duh

Bibliographic record

VenueCancer Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers
Canadian institutionsGroup for Research in Decision Analysis
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIpilimumabSystemic therapyMelanomaInternal medicineRadiation therapyCancer registryCancerStage (stratigraphy)OncologyAdjuvant therapyNivolumabDabrafenibAdjuvantSurgeryBreast cancerImmunotherapyVemurafenibMetastatic melanoma

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: The v1.2018 National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines adopted nivolumab and dabrafenib/trametinib as potential adjuvant therapies for selected patients (pts) with AJCC7 stage III/regionally advanced melanoma. There is a need to understand which patient characteristics may affect adjuvant treatment choices and what lessons can be learned from the era of adjuvant interferon-alfa and ipilimumab. This study aimed to describe characteristics and use of adjuvant therapy in pts with stage III/regional melanoma. Methods: Pts newly diagnosed with invasive melanoma were identified in the US Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registry (most recent 5 years: 2010 -2014; n = 106,195). Stage III melanoma was defined based on the AJCC7 classification (n = 7,669); pts classified as AJCC7 stages I/II but with reported lymphatic metastasis were considered regionally advanced and included (n =169). Pt characteristics measured at the time of the diagnosis are reported by treatments (systemic and radiation) initiated as the main course of treatment in the 4 months post-diagnosis. Results: Of 7,838 pts with stage III/regional disease at diagnosis from 2010-2014, 1,414 (18.0%) received radiation therapy (± systemic), 1,001 (12.8%) received systemic therapy (± radiation), 443 (5.7%) received radiation + systemic therapy, and 5,866 (74.8%) were not treated with either radiation or systemic therapy. Table 1 reports selected patient characteristics by treatment received. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that many pts with stage III/regional melanoma, even those not treated, have risk factors known to be associated with worse prognosis. Use of radiation therapy or adjuvant systemic therapy was rare during the study period (2010-2014). It remains to be determined how the new treatment landscape will change the use of adjuvant therapy. Table 1.Stage III1/regionally advanced melanomaRadiation (± systemic)(n =1,414 )Systemic (± radiation) (n = 1,001)Systemic + radiation (n = 443)Neither2 (n =5,866 )Age at diagnosis, median (Q1-Q3)65 (55 - 76)58 (48 - 68)61 (51 - 71)62 (51 - 73)Males, %57.351.174.337.6LN classification (from TNM), %N145.347.545.461.9N2 (includes N2c)35.334.139.726.7N319.118.114.011.4Ulceration, %Yes20.325.29.339.0No22.824.38.846.3Unknown56.950.581.914.7Number mitoses per square mm, %None1.62.70.94.71 - 514.818.84.539.3≥ 615.018.27.924.3Unknown68.660.386.731.7LN involvement (any), %91.494.091.693.91 LN33.637.431.857.72 - 3 LNs25.326.323.922.5> 3 LNs19.216.818.57.5Unknown number of LNs13.313.617.46.2Microscopic nodal metastasis3 (regardless of the number of LNs)20.231.28.861.7Satellite / in-transit without LN involvement (N2c), %5.32.62.55.2LN, lymph node; TNM, tumor/node/metastasis (TNM) classification of malignant tumors. [1] Stage III melanoma was defined based on the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) 7 edition classification; [2] Radiation therapy and chemotherapy are reported in the SEER with moderate sensitivity (80% and 68%, respectively) and high specificity. This implies the "Neither" category may include some false -negative (i.e., treated) pts.[3] Includes pts identified with clinically occult (microscopic) LN metastases only, pts with isolated tumor cells only in LN, and/or pts who underwent sentinel LN biopsy and were found to have LN metastasis. Citation Format: Ahmad Tarhini, Sameer Ghate, Antonio Nakasato, Raluca Ionescu-Ittu, Sherry Shi, Briana Ndife, Rebecca Burne, François Laliberté, Mei S. Duh. Characteristics of patients diagnosed de novo with AJCC7 stage III or regionally advanced cutaneous melanoma and trends in adjuvant therapy: An analysis of the SEER cancer registry in the United States [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 4768.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.015

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.333 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCancer Research→Same topicCancer Immunotherapy and Biomarkers→French-language works237,207→