January 17, 2014
3 min read
Save

Stage III, IV melanoma increased risk for new primary melanomas

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

Patients with stage III or IV melanoma were at increased risk for developing new primary melanomas, according to study results.

Perspective from John Kirkwood, MD

The association was particularly apparent among men, as well as patients with a history of multiple primary melanomas before stage III or IV disease.

The analysis included 4,215 patients with stage III melanoma and 3,563 patients with stage IV melanoma who were diagnosed between 1983 and 2008 at the Melanoma Institute Australia.

Among patients with stage III disease, 229 (5%) had at least one new primary melanoma after their initial diagnosis.

The 6-month cumulative incidence rate of developing a new primary melanoma in this patient population was 1.2% (95% CI, 0.86-1.51). This increased to 1.8% (95% CI, 1.44-2.26) at 1 year, and 5.9% (95% CI, 5.08-6.74) at 10 years.

Among patients with stage IV disease, 43 (1%) had at least one new primary melanoma.

The cumulative incidence rate among these patients was 0.2% (95% CI, 0.07-0.36) at 3 months, 0.3% (95% CI, 0.15-0.51) at 6 months and 0.4% (95% CI, 0.25-0.7) at 1 year.

The risk for new primary melanomas was increased in men with stage III (HR=1.72; 95% CI, 1.28-2.32) and stage IV (HR=3.71; 95% CI, 1.46-9.44) disease.

Patients with a prior history of multiple primary melanoma also were at increased risk (stage III, HR=3.19; 95% CI, 2.24-4.52; stage IV, HR=2.64; 95% CI, 1.27-5.52).

“Whether patients with stage IV melanoma should undergo surveillance for new primary melanomas remains arguable at this point in time because of improved, but still poor, OS in this patient cohort,” the researchers wrote. “Although the incidence rates are lower than those observed in the studies of dabrafenib (Tafinlar, GlaxoSmithKline) and vemurafenib (Zelboraf, Genentech), the results must be compared with caution because of the more frequent and thorough dermatologic assessments in the BRAF inhibitor studies.”

Disclosure: The researchers report consultant or advisory roles with, as well as honoraria, research funding or other remuneration from, Abbot Molecular, Amgen, AstraZeneca, Bristol-Myers Squibb, GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, Morphotek, Novartis and Roche.