Examining Demographic, Geographic, and Temporal Patterns of Melanoma Incidence in Texas From 2000 to 2018: Retrospective Study
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Background: Melanoma currently ranks as the fifth leading cancer diagnosis and is projected to become the second most common cancer in the United States by 2040. Melanoma detected at earlier stages may be treated with less-risky and less-costly therapeutic options. Objective: This study aims to analyze temporal and spatial trends in melanoma incidence by stage at diagnosis (overall, early, and late) in Texas from 2000 to 2018, focusing on demographic and geographic variations to identify high-risk populations and regions for targeted prevention efforts. Methods: We used melanoma incidence data from all 254 Texas counties from the Texas Cancer Registry (TCR) from 2000 to 2018, aggregated by county and year. Among these, 250 counties reported melanoma cases during the period. Counties with no cases reported in a certain year were treated as having no cases. Melanoma cases were classified by SEER Summary Stage and stratified by the following four key covariates: age, sex, race and ethnicity, and stage at diagnosis. Incidence rates (IRs) were calculated per 100,000 population, and temporal trends were analyzed using joinpoint regression to determine average annual percentage changes (AAPCs) with 95% CIs for the whole time period (2000-2018), the most recent 10-year period (2009-2018), and the most recent 5-year period (2014-2018). Heat map visualizations were developed to assess temporal trends by patient age, year of diagnosis, stage at diagnosis, sex, and race and ethnicity. Spatial cluster analysis was conducted using Getis-Ord Gi* statistics to identify county-level geographic clusters of high and low melanoma incidence by stage at diagnosis. Results: A total of 82,462 melanoma cases were recorded, of which 74.7% (n=61,588) were early stage, 11.3% (n=9,352) were late stage, and 14% (n=11,522) were of unknown stage. Most cases were identified as males and non-Hispanic White individuals. Melanoma IRs increased from 2000 to 2018, particularly among older adults (60+ years; AAPC range 1.20%-1.84%; all P values were <.001), males (AAPC 1.59%; P<.001), and non-Hispanic White individuals (AAPC of 3.24% for early stage and 2.38% for late stage; P<.001 for early stage and P = .03 for late state). Early-stage diagnoses increased while the rates of late-stage diagnoses remained stable for the overall population. The spatial analysis showed that urban areas had higher early-stage incidence rates (P=.06), whereas rural areas showed higher late-stage incidence rates (P=.05), indicating possible geographic-based differences in access to dermatologic care. Conclusions: Melanoma incidence in Texas increased over the study time period, with the most-at-risk populations being non-Hispanic White individuals, males, and individuals aged 50 years and older. The stable rates of late-stage melanoma among racial and ethnic minority populations and rural populations highlight potential differences in access to diagnostic care. Future prevention efforts may benefit from increasing access to dermatologic care in areas with higher rates of late-stage melanoma at diagnosis.
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".