MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Conjunctival melanoma treatment outcomes in 288 patients: a multicentre international data-sharing study

2020· article· en· W3083702882 on OpenAlexaff
Puneet Jain, Paul T. Finger, Maria Filì, Bertil Damato, Sarah E. Coupland, Heinrich Heimann, Nihal Kenawy, Niels J. Brouwer, Marina Marinkovic, Sjoerd G. van Duinen, Jean‐Pierre Caujolle, C. Maschi, Stefan Seregard, David E. Pelayes, Martin Folgar, Yacoub A. Yousef, Hatem Krema, Brenda Gallie, Alberto Calle-Vasquez

Bibliographic record

VenueBritish Journal of Ophthalmology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOcular Oncology and Treatments
Canadian institutionsPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineMelanomaDermatologyMEDLINEOphthalmologyOptometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BACKGROUND: To relate conjunctival melanoma characteristics to local control. METHODS: Retrospective, registry-based interventional study with data gathered from 10 ophthalmic oncology centres from 9 countries on 4 continents. Conjunctival melanoma patients diagnosed between January 2001 and December 2013 were enrolled in the study. Primary treatments included local excision, excision with cryotherapy and exenteration. Adjuvant treatments included topical chemotherapy, brachytherapy, proton and external beam radiotherapy (EBRT). Cumulative 5-year and 10-year Kaplan-Meier local recurrence rates were related to clinical and pathological T-categories of the eighth edition of the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system. RESULTS: 288 patients had a mean initial age of 59.7±16.8 years. Clinical T-categories (cT) were cT1 (n=218,75.7%), cT2 (n=34, 11.8%), cT3 (n=15, 5.2%), cTx (n=21,7.3%) with no cT4. Primary treatment included local excision (n=161/288, 55.9%) followed by excision biopsy with cryotherapy (n=108/288, 37.5%) and exenteration (n=5/288, 1.7%). Adjuvant therapies included topical mitomycin (n=107/288, 37.1%), plaque-brachytherapy (n=55/288, 19.1%), proton-beam (n=36/288, 13.5%), topical interferon (n=20/288, 6.9%) and EBRT (n=15/288, 5.2%). Secondary exenteration was performed (n=11/283, 3.9%). Local recurrence was noted in 19.1% (median=3.6 years). Cumulative local recurrence was 5.4% (3.2-8.9%), 19.3% (14.4-25.5%) and 36.9% (26.5-49.9%) at 1, 5 and 10 years, respectively. cT3 and cT2 tumors were twice as likely to recur than cT1 tumours, but only cT3 had statistically significantly greater risk of local recurrence than T1 (p=0.013). Factors such as tumour ulceration, plica or caruncle involvement and tumour thickness were not significantly associated with an increased risk of local recurrence. CONCLUSION: This multicentre international study showed that eighth edition of AJCC tumour staging was related to the risk of local recurrence of conjunctival melanoma after treatment. The 10-year cumulative local recurrence remains high despite current management.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.498

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.359
Teacher spread0.283 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations62
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBritish Journal of OphthalmologySame topicOcular Oncology and TreatmentsFrench-language works237,207