melanoma incidence
Recently Published Documents


TOTAL DOCUMENTS

223
(FIVE YEARS 45)

H-INDEX

33
(FIVE YEARS 5)

Author(s):  
Adriana Raquel Rinflerch ◽  
Victoria Ines Volonteri ◽  
María Cecilia Roude ◽  
Laura Vanina Pagotto ◽  
Melina Pol ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Kye Wen Tan ◽  
Dominic Wei Ting Yap ◽  
Benjamin Kye Jyn Tan ◽  
Yao Hao Teo ◽  
Elisabeth Ker Hsuen Tan ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Eszter A. Janka ◽  
Beatrix Ványai ◽  
Zsolt Dajnoki ◽  
Imre L. Szabó ◽  
Dániel Reibl ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 50 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Julia Steinberg ◽  
Jin Yee Lee ◽  
Harry Wang ◽  
Matthew Law ◽  
Amelia Smit ◽  
...  

Abstract Background To improve melanoma early detection, tools to predict personal risk based on genetic information (polygenic risk scores, PRS) have been developed, but require external validation. Methods We analysed invasive melanoma incidence in UK Biobank (UKB; n = 395,647; 1,651 cases) and the Melbourne Collaborative Cohort Study (MCCS, Australia; n = 4,765; 303 cases). Three PRS were evaluated: 68 genetic variants (SNPs) at 54 loci from a 2020 meta-analysis (PRS68); 50 SNPs significant in the 2020 meta-analysis excluding UKB (PRS50); 45 SNPs at 21 loci known pre-2020 (PRS45). 10-year melanoma risks were calculated from population-level cancer registry data by age group and sex, with and without PRS adjustment. Results All PRS were strongly associated with melanoma incidence, including after adjustment for age, sex, ethnicity, and ease of tanning. Predicted absolute melanoma risks based on age and sex alone underestimated melanoma incidence in UKB (ratio expected/observed cases E/O=0.65, 95% confidence interval 0.62-0.68) and MCCS (E/O=0.65, 0.57-0.73). For UKB, this was reduced by PRS-adjustment, e.g. PRS50-adjusted risks E/O=0.91 (0.87-0.95). Discriminative ability for PRS68- and PRS50-adjusted absolute risks was higher than for risks based on age and sex alone (deltaAUC 0.07-0.1, p < 0.0001), and higher than for PRS45-adjusted risks (deltaAUC 0.02-0.04, p < 0.001). Conclusions A PRS derived from a larger, more diverse meta-analysis improves melanoma risk prediction compared to an earlier PRS. Re-calibration of absolute risks may be necessary for application to specific populations. Key messages A genetic score can improve prediction of melanoma risk and might help tailor melanoma prevention and early detection strategies to different risk levels.


Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (15) ◽  
pp. 3866
Author(s):  
Stephanie G. Lashway ◽  
Robin B. Harris ◽  
Leslie V. Farland ◽  
Mary Kay O’Rourke ◽  
Leslie K. Dennis

The incidence of malignant melanoma in the United States is increasing, possibly due to changes in ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure due to lifestyle or increased awareness and diagnosis of melanoma. To determine if more recent birth cohorts experience higher rates of melanoma as they age, we examined age and birth cohort trends in the United States stratified by anatomic site and cancer type (in situ vs. malignant) of the melanoma diagnosed from 1975–2017. Poisson regression of cutaneous melanoma cases per population for 1975–2017 from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) cancer registries was used to estimate age adjusted incidence for five-year birth cohorts restricted to Whites, ages 15–84. The rate of melanoma incidence across birth cohorts varies by anatomic site and sex. Melanomas at all anatomic sites continue to increase, except for head and neck melanomas in men. Much of the increase in malignant melanoma is driven by cases of thin (<1.5 mm) lesions. While increased skin exams may contribute to the increased incidence of in situ and thin melanoma observed across birth cohorts, the shifts in anatomic site of highest melanoma incidence across birth cohorts suggest changes in UVR exposure may also play a role.


2021 ◽  
pp. 100013
Author(s):  
Cédric Rat ◽  
Laurie Blachier ◽  
Sandrine Hild ◽  
Florence Molinie ◽  
Aurélie Gaultier ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Vol 141 (5) ◽  
pp. S68
Author(s):  
M. Berman Rosa ◽  
M. Le ◽  
I. Litvinov ◽  
A. Ramanakumar

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Isabel Smidt‐Nielsen ◽  
Mette Bagger ◽  
Steffen Heegaard ◽  
Klaus Kaae Andersen ◽  
Jens Folke Kiilgaard

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document