Comparison of Clinicopathologic Features and Survival of Histopathologically Amelanotic and Pigmented Melanomas: A Population-Based Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
IMPORTANCE Previous studies have reported that histopathologically amelanotic melanoma is associated with poorer survival than pigmented melanoma; however, small numbers of amelanotic melanomas, selected populations, lack of centralized pathologic review, or no adjustment for stage limit the interpretation or generalization of results from prior studies.OBJECTIVE To compare melanoma-specific survival between patients with histopathologically amelanotic and those with pigmented melanoma in a large international population-based study.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Survival analysis with a median follow-up of 7.6 years.The study population comprised 2995 patients with 3486 invasive primary melanomas centrally scored for histologic pigmentation from the Genes, Environment, and Melanoma(GEM) Study, which enrolled incident cases of melanoma diagnosed in 1998 through 2003 from international population-based cancer registries.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Clinicopathologic predictors and melanoma-specific survival of histologically amelanotic and pigmented melanoma were compared using generalized estimating equations and Cox regression models, respectively.RESULTS Of 3467 melanomas, 275 (8%) were histopathologically amelanotic. Female sex,nodular and unclassified or other histologic subtypes, increased Breslow thickness, presence of mitoses, severe solar elastosis, and lack of a coexisting nevus were independently associated with amelanotic melanoma (each P < .05). Amelanotic melanoma was generally ofa higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor stage at diagnosis (odds ratios[ORs] [95%CIs] between 2.9 [1.8-4.6] and 11.1 [5.8-21.2] for tumor stages between T1b and T3b and ORs [95%CIs] of 24.6 [13.6-44.4] for T4a and 29.1 [15.5-54.9] for T4b relative to T1a;P value for trend, <.001) than pigmented melanoma. Hazard of death from melanoma was higher for amelanotic than for pigmented melanoma (hazard ratio [HR], 2.0; 95%CI, 1.4-3.0)(P < .001), adjusted for age, sex, anatomic site, and study design variables, but survival did not differ once AJCC tumor stage was also taken into account (HR, 0.8; 95%CI, 0.5-1.2)(P = .36).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE At the population level, survival after diagnosis of amelanotic melanoma is poorer than after pigmented melanoma because of its more advanced stage at diagnosis. It is probable that amelanotic melanomas present at more advanced tumor stages because they are difficult to diagnose. The association of amelanotic melanoma with presence of mitoses independently of Breslow thickness and other clinicopathologic characteristics suggests that amelanotic melanomas might also grow faster than pigmented melanomas. New strategies for early diagnosis and investigation of the biological properties of amelanotic melanoma are warranted.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".