2 research outputs found

    Supplementary Material for: Impact of Age on the Management of Primary Melanoma Patients

    No full text
    <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> Age is an understudied factor when considering treatment options for melanoma. Here, we examine the impact of age on primary melanoma treatment in a prospective cohort of patients. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> We used logistic regression models to examine the associations between age and initial treatment, using recurrence and melanoma-specific survival as endpoints. <b><i>Results:</i></b> 444 primary melanoma patients were categorized into three groups by age at diagnosis: 19-45 years (24.3%), 46-70 (50.2%), and 71-95 (25.5%). In multivariate models, older patients experienced a higher risk of recurrence (hazard ratio 3.34, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.53-7.25; p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in positive biopsy margin rates or extent of surgical margins across age groups. Patients in the middle age group were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy than those in the older group (odds ratio 2.78, 95% CI 1.19-6.45; p = 0.02) and showed a trend to longer disease-free survival when receiving adjuvant therapy (p = 0.09). <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Our data support age as an independent negative prognostic factor in melanoma. Our data suggest that age does not affect primary surgical treatment but may affect decisions of whether or not patients receive postoperative treatment(s). Further work is needed to better understand the biological variables affecting treatment decisions and efficacy in older patients

    Supplementary Material for: Outcomes in Melanoma Patients Treated with BRAF/MEK-Directed Therapy or Immune Checkpoint Inhibition Stratified by Clinical Trial versus Standard of Care

    No full text
    <p><b><i>Objectives:</i></b> Since 2011, metastatic melanoma treatment has evolved with commercial approval of BRAF- and MEK-targeted therapy and CTLA-4- and PD-1-blocking antibodies (immune checkpoint inhibitors, ICI). While novel therapies have demonstrated improved prognosis in clinical trials, few studies have examined the evolution of prognosis and toxicity of these drugs among an unselected population. We assess whether survival and toxicity reported in trials, which typically exclude most patients with brain metastases and poor performance status, are recapitulated within a commercial access population. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> 182 patients diagnosed with stage IV melanoma from July 2006 to December 2013 and treated with BRAF- and/or MEK-targeted therapy or ICI were prospectively studied. Outcomes and clinicopathologic differences between trial and commercial cohorts were assessed. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Patients receiving commercial therapy (vs. on trial) had poorer prognostic features (i.e., brain metastases) and lower median overall survival (mOS) when assessed across all treatments (9.2 vs. 17.5 months, <i>p</i> = 0.0027). While toxicity within trial and commercial cohorts did not differ, patients who experienced toxicity had increased mOS (<i>p</i> < 0.001), irrespective of stratification by trial status or therapy. <b><i>Conclusion</i></b>: Metastatic melanoma patients receiving commercial treatment may represent a different clinical population with poor prognostic features compared to trial patients. Toxicity may prognosticate treatment benefit.</p