Incidence of in Situ vs Invasive Melanoma: Testing the "Obligate Precursor" Hypothesis.
Journal
Journal of the National Cancer Institute
ISSN: 1460-2105
Titre abrégé: J Natl Cancer Inst
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 7503089
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
06 10 2022
06 10 2022
Historique:
accepted:
22
06
2022
received:
29
04
2022
revised:
29
05
2022
pubmed:
1
9
2022
medline:
13
10
2022
entrez:
31
8
2022
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Melanoma incidence has been rising in populations with predominantly European ancestry (White), speculated to be partly driven by heightened detection of indolent tumors. If in situ melanomas are destined to evolve to invasive cancers, detecting and removing them should deplete the pool of invasive lesions, and people with in situ melanoma should, on average, be younger than those with invasive melanoma. We analyzed long-term incidence trends (1982-2018) for in situ and invasive melanomas in 3 predominantly White populations with high, medium, and low melanoma rates: Queensland (Australia), United States White, and Scotland. We calculated the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of in situ to invasive melanomas and estimated the contributions of age, period, and cohort effects. We compared age at diagnosis of in situ vs invasive melanomas overall and stratified by sex and anatomic site. In all 3 populations, the in situ to invasive incidence rate ratio increased statistically significantly from less than 0.3 in 1982 to 1.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.88 to 2.02) in Queensland, 0.93 (95% CI = 0.90 to 0.96) in the US White population, and 0.58 (95% CI = 0.54 to 0.63) in Scotland in 2018. The mean age at diagnosis of in situ melanomas was the same or higher than invasive melanomas for almost all time periods among men and women and on all body sites except the lower limbs. The increasing ratio of in situ to invasive melanoma incidence over time, together with the high (and increasing) mean age at diagnosis of in situ melanomas, is consistent with more indolent lesions coming to clinical attention than in previous eras.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Melanoma incidence has been rising in populations with predominantly European ancestry (White), speculated to be partly driven by heightened detection of indolent tumors. If in situ melanomas are destined to evolve to invasive cancers, detecting and removing them should deplete the pool of invasive lesions, and people with in situ melanoma should, on average, be younger than those with invasive melanoma.
METHODS
We analyzed long-term incidence trends (1982-2018) for in situ and invasive melanomas in 3 predominantly White populations with high, medium, and low melanoma rates: Queensland (Australia), United States White, and Scotland. We calculated the incidence rate ratio (IRR) of in situ to invasive melanomas and estimated the contributions of age, period, and cohort effects. We compared age at diagnosis of in situ vs invasive melanomas overall and stratified by sex and anatomic site.
RESULTS
In all 3 populations, the in situ to invasive incidence rate ratio increased statistically significantly from less than 0.3 in 1982 to 1.95 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.88 to 2.02) in Queensland, 0.93 (95% CI = 0.90 to 0.96) in the US White population, and 0.58 (95% CI = 0.54 to 0.63) in Scotland in 2018. The mean age at diagnosis of in situ melanomas was the same or higher than invasive melanomas for almost all time periods among men and women and on all body sites except the lower limbs.
CONCLUSIONS
The increasing ratio of in situ to invasive melanoma incidence over time, together with the high (and increasing) mean age at diagnosis of in situ melanomas, is consistent with more indolent lesions coming to clinical attention than in previous eras.
Identifiants
pubmed: 36042554
pii: 6677176
doi: 10.1093/jnci/djac138
pmc: PMC9552301
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
1364-1370Commentaires et corrections
Type : CommentIn
Type : CommentIn
Informations de copyright
© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press.
Références
Nat Rev Cancer. 2016 Jun;16(6):345-58
pubmed: 27125352
Int J Cancer. 2018 Apr 15;142(8):1528-1535
pubmed: 29105744
JAMA Dermatol. 2022 Jun 1;158(6):675-679
pubmed: 35442415
Prev Med. 2014 Apr;61:75-80
pubmed: 24418263
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2011 Nov;65(5 Suppl 1):S124-32
pubmed: 22018061
J Skin Cancer. 2015;2015:904393
pubmed: 26839706
Melanoma Manag. 2014 Aug;1(1):75-84
pubmed: 30190812
J Invest Dermatol. 2015 Apr;135(4):1190-1193
pubmed: 25330295
JAMA Dermatol. 2022 Apr 1;158(4):426-431
pubmed: 35293957
N Engl J Med. 2015 Nov 12;373(20):1926-36
pubmed: 26559571
Pathology. 2018 Jan;50(1):16-23
pubmed: 29132722
N Engl J Med. 2021 Jan 7;384(1):72-79
pubmed: 33406334
Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2012 Nov;21(11):1893-901
pubmed: 22962407
JAMA Dermatol. 2013 Mar;149(3):363-4
pubmed: 23552730
JAMA Dermatol. 2015 Sep;151(9):982-90
pubmed: 26039788
R I Med J (2013). 2022 Apr 1;105(3):17-21
pubmed: 35349614
JAMA Dermatol. 2020 Jan 1;156(1):57-64
pubmed: 31721989
Eur J Cancer. 2018 Mar;92:108-118
pubmed: 29395684
Cancer Epidemiol. 2021 Feb;70:101874
pubmed: 33341599
BMJ. 2017 Jun 28;357:j2813
pubmed: 28659278
Stat Methods Med Res. 2019 Oct-Nov;28(10-11):3363-3391
pubmed: 30306829
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2008 Dec;59(6):1081-5
pubmed: 19022107
Br J Cancer. 1995 Jul;72(1):224-8
pubmed: 7599057
J Invest Dermatol. 2016 Jun;136(6):1161-1171
pubmed: 26902923
Melanoma Res. 2001 Oct;11(5):523-9
pubmed: 11595891
Arch Pathol Lab Med. 2020 Apr;144(4):500-522
pubmed: 32057276
Stat Med. 2010 May 20;29(11):1228-38
pubmed: 20209480
J Am Acad Dermatol. 2012 Sep;67(3):387-94
pubmed: 22153791
JAMA. 2016 Jul 26;316(4):429-35
pubmed: 27458948
Br J Dermatol. 2020 Dec;183(6):1056-1064
pubmed: 32133614
Med J Aust. 2020 Aug;213(4):189-189.e1
pubmed: 32277474