Critical reviews in oncology/hematology · 2026
The prognostic impact of pregnancy-associated melanoma on overall and melanoma-specific survival: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
СтатьяСистематический обзорМетаанализНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Stylianakis Dimitrios, Solinas Cinzia, Petrelli Fausto, Nazzaro Gianluca, Passoni Emanuela, Martella Serafina, Stylianakis Ioannis, Donisi Clelia, Scartozzi Mario, Lambertini Matteo, Garrone Ornella, Denaro Nerina
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Pregnancy-associated melanoma (PAM) - melanoma diagnosed during pregnancy or within 12 months postpartum - raises concern that physiological immune adaptations may worsen tumour outcomes, yet whether PAM independently confers worse survival remains unresolved.
METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for observational studies comparing survival in PAM versus non-PAM women reporting adjusted hazard ratios. Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-E. Four pre-specified random-effects meta-analyses (REML; Hartung-Knapp adjustment) were stratified by timing (antepartum, postpartum) and outcome (overall survival [OS], melanoma-specific survival [MSS]).
RESULTS: From 454 deduplicated records, 11 studies entered qualitative synthesis and 3 low-risk-of-bias studies (16,467 women; 1662 PAM) were meta-analysed. Neither antepartum (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.19-6.70; I²=65.6%) nor postpartum PAM (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.39-3.38; I²=54.8%) showed a significant OS difference; MSS analyses were similarly null. Sensitivity analyses restricted to staged cases eliminated heterogeneity entirely, shifting estimates toward protection (antepartum HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.44-1.39). Stage-matched evidence yielded a borderline-significant pooled HR of 0.85 (95% CI 0.73-1.00; I²=0%) favouring PAM.
CONCLUSIONS: PAM does not independently worsen OS or MSS when stage is adequately controlled. Observed heterogeneity reflects incomplete stage ascertainment rather than true biological variation. Future registries must adopt standardised PAM definitions and ensure complete staging to yield reliable survival estimates.
METHODS: We searched PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Cochrane CENTRAL, and ClinicalTrials.gov for observational studies comparing survival in PAM versus non-PAM women reporting adjusted hazard ratios. Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-E. Four pre-specified random-effects meta-analyses (REML; Hartung-Knapp adjustment) were stratified by timing (antepartum, postpartum) and outcome (overall survival [OS], melanoma-specific survival [MSS]).
RESULTS: From 454 deduplicated records, 11 studies entered qualitative synthesis and 3 low-risk-of-bias studies (16,467 women; 1662 PAM) were meta-analysed. Neither antepartum (HR 1.13, 95% CI 0.19-6.70; I²=65.6%) nor postpartum PAM (HR 1.14, 95% CI 0.39-3.38; I²=54.8%) showed a significant OS difference; MSS analyses were similarly null. Sensitivity analyses restricted to staged cases eliminated heterogeneity entirely, shifting estimates toward protection (antepartum HR 0.78, 95% CI 0.44-1.39). Stage-matched evidence yielded a borderline-significant pooled HR of 0.85 (95% CI 0.73-1.00; I²=0%) favouring PAM.
CONCLUSIONS: PAM does not independently worsen OS or MSS when stage is adequately controlled. Observed heterogeneity reflects incomplete stage ascertainment rather than true biological variation. Future registries must adopt standardised PAM definitions and ensure complete staging to yield reliable survival estimates.