MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4395014703 · doi:10.1016/j.jbo.2024.100603

Incidence, Risk Factors, and Survival of Bone Metastases and Skeletal-Related Events in Melanoma Patients: A Systematic Review and Quality Assessment of 29 Studies

2024· review· en· W4395014703 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michelle R. Shimizu, Olaf N. van de Langerijt, Daniel da Costa Torres, Tom M. de Groot, Olivier Q. Groot

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of bone oncology · 2024
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineIncidence (geometry)MelanomaOncologyInternal medicineIntensive care medicineCancer research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: Skeletal metastases make up 17% of all metastases from advanced-stage melanoma. Bone metastases are associated with increased morbidity and mortality and decreased quality of life due to their association with skeletal-related events (SREs), including pathological fracture, spinal cord compression, hypercalcemia, radiotherapy, and surgery. The study aimed to determine the incidence of bone metastases and SREs in melanoma, identify possible risk factors for the development of bone metastases and SREs, and investigate survival rates in this patient population. Methods: A computer-based literature search was conducted using Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials up to July 2023. The Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment Scale (NOS) was utilized for quality assessment. Study characteristics, patient information, risk factors for developing bone metastases and SREs, and characteristics for survival were recorded. Results: We included 29 studies. The average bone metastasis-free interval ranged from four to 72 months. Incidence of bone metastases varied from 2 % to 49 % across 14 studies. 69 % (20/29) of studies described the location of bone metastases, with 24 % (7/29) focusing solely on spinal metastases. In one study, 129 SREs were recorded in 71 % (59/83) of the patient cohort, with various manifestations. The use of bone-directed agents was independently associated with lower risk of SREs. Survival after detection of bone metastasis ranged from three to 13 months. Factors associated with survival included clinical, tumor-related, and treatment features. Conclusion: This review highlights the notable prevalence and risk factors of developing bone metastases and subsequent SREs in patients with melanoma. The surge in bone metastases poses a challenge in complication management, given the high prevalence of SREs. While this study offers a comprehensive overview of the incidence, risk factors, and outcomes associated with bone metastases and SREs in melanoma patients that may guide patient and physician decision-making, a notable gap lies in the limited availability of high-quality data and the heterogeneous design of the existing literature. Future research should address predictive factors for bone metastases and SREs in melanoma to facilitate patient and physician decision-making and ultimately improve outcomes in this patient population.

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)0.019
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.072
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Systematic review · Consensus signal: Systematic review
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0190.072
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0130.013
Bibliometrics0.0140.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.066
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.350 · 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 designSystematic review
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of bone oncologySame topicCutaneous Melanoma Detection and ManagementFrench-language works237,207