Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma

Alyson L. Mahar, Carolyn Compton, Susan Halabi, Kenneth R. Hess, Jeffrey E. Gershenwald, Richard A. Scolyer, Patti A. Groome

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

21 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

The 7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging system classifies patients according to prognosis. Significant within-stage heterogeneity remains and the inclusion of additional clinicopathologic and other host- and tumor-based prognostic factors have been proposed. Clinical prognostic tools have been developed for use in clinical practice to refine survival estimates. Little is known about the comparative features of tools in melanoma. We performed a systematic search of the scientific published literature for clinical prognostic tools in melanoma and web-based resources. A priori criteria were used to evaluate their quality and clinical relevance, and included intended clinical use, model development approaches, validation strategies, and performance metrics. We identified 17 clinical prognostic tools for primary cutaneous melanoma. Patients with stages I–III and T1 or thin melanoma were the most frequently considered populations. Seventy-five percent of tools were developed using data collected from patients diagnosed in 2006 or earlier, and the well-established factors of tumor thickness, ulceration, and age were included in 70 % of tools. Internal validity using cross-validation or bootstrapping techniques was performed for two tools only. Fewer than half were evaluated for external validity; however, when done, the appropriate statistical methodology was applied and results indicated good generalizability. Several clinical prognostic tools have the potential to refine survival estimates for individual melanoma patients; however, there is a great opportunity to improve these tools and to foster the development of new, validated tools by the inclusion of contemporary clinicopathological covariates and by using improved statistical and methodological approaches.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1-9
Number of pages9
JournalAnnals of Surgical Oncology
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - Apr 6 2016

Fingerprint

Melanoma
Survival
Neoplasm Staging
Neoplasms
Skin
Population

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Surgery
  • Oncology

Cite this

Mahar, A. L., Compton, C., Halabi, S., Hess, K. R., Gershenwald, J. E., Scolyer, R. A., & Groome, P. A. (Accepted/In press). Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma. Annals of Surgical Oncology, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5212-5

Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma. / Mahar, Alyson L.; Compton, Carolyn; Halabi, Susan; Hess, Kenneth R.; Gershenwald, Jeffrey E.; Scolyer, Richard A.; Groome, Patti A.

In: Annals of Surgical Oncology, 06.04.2016, p. 1-9.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Mahar, AL, Compton, C, Halabi, S, Hess, KR, Gershenwald, JE, Scolyer, RA & Groome, PA 2016, 'Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma', Annals of Surgical Oncology, pp. 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5212-5
Mahar, Alyson L. ; Compton, Carolyn ; Halabi, Susan ; Hess, Kenneth R. ; Gershenwald, Jeffrey E. ; Scolyer, Richard A. ; Groome, Patti A. / Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma. In: Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2016 ; pp. 1-9.
@article{2c15fe8e41a3408e8ca67974190814de,
title = "Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma",
abstract = "The 7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging system classifies patients according to prognosis. Significant within-stage heterogeneity remains and the inclusion of additional clinicopathologic and other host- and tumor-based prognostic factors have been proposed. Clinical prognostic tools have been developed for use in clinical practice to refine survival estimates. Little is known about the comparative features of tools in melanoma. We performed a systematic search of the scientific published literature for clinical prognostic tools in melanoma and web-based resources. A priori criteria were used to evaluate their quality and clinical relevance, and included intended clinical use, model development approaches, validation strategies, and performance metrics. We identified 17 clinical prognostic tools for primary cutaneous melanoma. Patients with stages I–III and T1 or thin melanoma were the most frequently considered populations. Seventy-five percent of tools were developed using data collected from patients diagnosed in 2006 or earlier, and the well-established factors of tumor thickness, ulceration, and age were included in 70 {\%} of tools. Internal validity using cross-validation or bootstrapping techniques was performed for two tools only. Fewer than half were evaluated for external validity; however, when done, the appropriate statistical methodology was applied and results indicated good generalizability. Several clinical prognostic tools have the potential to refine survival estimates for individual melanoma patients; however, there is a great opportunity to improve these tools and to foster the development of new, validated tools by the inclusion of contemporary clinicopathological covariates and by using improved statistical and methodological approaches.",
author = "Mahar, {Alyson L.} and Carolyn Compton and Susan Halabi and Hess, {Kenneth R.} and Gershenwald, {Jeffrey E.} and Scolyer, {Richard A.} and Groome, {Patti A.}",
year = "2016",
month = "4",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1245/s10434-016-5212-5",
language = "English (US)",
pages = "1--9",
journal = "Annals of Surgical Oncology",
issn = "1068-9265",
publisher = "Springer New York",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Critical Assessment of Clinical Prognostic Tools in Melanoma

AU - Mahar, Alyson L.

AU - Compton, Carolyn

AU - Halabi, Susan

AU - Hess, Kenneth R.

AU - Gershenwald, Jeffrey E.

AU - Scolyer, Richard A.

AU - Groome, Patti A.

PY - 2016/4/6

Y1 - 2016/4/6

N2 - The 7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging system classifies patients according to prognosis. Significant within-stage heterogeneity remains and the inclusion of additional clinicopathologic and other host- and tumor-based prognostic factors have been proposed. Clinical prognostic tools have been developed for use in clinical practice to refine survival estimates. Little is known about the comparative features of tools in melanoma. We performed a systematic search of the scientific published literature for clinical prognostic tools in melanoma and web-based resources. A priori criteria were used to evaluate their quality and clinical relevance, and included intended clinical use, model development approaches, validation strategies, and performance metrics. We identified 17 clinical prognostic tools for primary cutaneous melanoma. Patients with stages I–III and T1 or thin melanoma were the most frequently considered populations. Seventy-five percent of tools were developed using data collected from patients diagnosed in 2006 or earlier, and the well-established factors of tumor thickness, ulceration, and age were included in 70 % of tools. Internal validity using cross-validation or bootstrapping techniques was performed for two tools only. Fewer than half were evaluated for external validity; however, when done, the appropriate statistical methodology was applied and results indicated good generalizability. Several clinical prognostic tools have the potential to refine survival estimates for individual melanoma patients; however, there is a great opportunity to improve these tools and to foster the development of new, validated tools by the inclusion of contemporary clinicopathological covariates and by using improved statistical and methodological approaches.

AB - The 7th edition American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) melanoma staging system classifies patients according to prognosis. Significant within-stage heterogeneity remains and the inclusion of additional clinicopathologic and other host- and tumor-based prognostic factors have been proposed. Clinical prognostic tools have been developed for use in clinical practice to refine survival estimates. Little is known about the comparative features of tools in melanoma. We performed a systematic search of the scientific published literature for clinical prognostic tools in melanoma and web-based resources. A priori criteria were used to evaluate their quality and clinical relevance, and included intended clinical use, model development approaches, validation strategies, and performance metrics. We identified 17 clinical prognostic tools for primary cutaneous melanoma. Patients with stages I–III and T1 or thin melanoma were the most frequently considered populations. Seventy-five percent of tools were developed using data collected from patients diagnosed in 2006 or earlier, and the well-established factors of tumor thickness, ulceration, and age were included in 70 % of tools. Internal validity using cross-validation or bootstrapping techniques was performed for two tools only. Fewer than half were evaluated for external validity; however, when done, the appropriate statistical methodology was applied and results indicated good generalizability. Several clinical prognostic tools have the potential to refine survival estimates for individual melanoma patients; however, there is a great opportunity to improve these tools and to foster the development of new, validated tools by the inclusion of contemporary clinicopathological covariates and by using improved statistical and methodological approaches.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84962765449&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84962765449&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1245/s10434-016-5212-5

DO - 10.1245/s10434-016-5212-5

M3 - Article

C2 - 27052645

AN - SCOPUS:84962765449

SP - 1

EP - 9

JO - Annals of Surgical Oncology

JF - Annals of Surgical Oncology

SN - 1068-9265

ER -