Nevus-associated acral melanoma has lower risk of recurrence and mortality than de novo acral melanoma: A multicenter, retrospective analysis of 482 patients - 19/02/25

Abstract |
Background |
It is unknown whether acral melanomas (AMs) associated with pre-existing nevi have similar risk to other AMs.
Objective |
To compare risk of recurrence and death between AMs associated with pre-existing nevi and de novo AMs.
Methods |
We conducted a multicenter retrospective cohort study involving patients diagnosed with AMs between February 2011 and November 2022.
Results |
About 164 patients (34.0%) had nevus-associated acral melanoma (NAAM). NAAM has lower risk of recurrence (hazard ratio: 0.69; 95% CI: 0.52-0.91; P = .008) and mortality (hazard ratio: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.37-0.76; P < .001) than de novo acral melanoma (DNAM). The 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) was 55.1% for NAAM compared to 42.3% for DNAM. The 5-year overall survival (OS) was 75.1% for NAAM and 63.2% for DNAM. Multivariate analyses identified Breslow thickness, nevus association, and sentinel node status as independent predictors of RFS. Age, Breslow thickness, nevus association, lymphovascular invasion, ulceration, and sentinel node status were independent predictors of OS.
Limitations |
The study's limitations included its retrospective design and missing data.
Conclusion |
Patients with nevus-associated AMs had significantly better RFS and OS compared to those with de novo AMs. Nevus association was an independent prognostic factor for both RFS and OS.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Key words : acral melanoma, clinicopathological, de novo melanoma, nevus-associated melanoma, overall survival, recurrence-free survival
Abbreviations used : AM, CI, CM, DNAM, HR, NAAM, NAM, OS, RFS, SLNB
Plan
| Funding sources: None. |
|
| Patient consent: Not applicable. |
|
| IRB approval status: This study was approved by the Ethics Committee of the First Hospital of Jilin University (AF-IRB-032-06), and individual consent for this retrospective analysis was waived. All agencies have been approved by their respective institutional review committees. |
Vol 92 - N° 3
P. 538-545 - mars 2025 Retour au numéroBienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?
