MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.3390/cancers18010121

Медицинская библиотека · Cancers · 2025

Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Surveillance: A Delphi Panel Consensus.

Alban Juan, Bowen R Christopher, Reichstein David A, McKean Meredith, Lutzky Jose, Weis Ezekiel, Carvajal Richard D, Dulka Susan, Morse Brian G, Butler Marcus O, Rapisuwon Suthee, Kim Kevin B, Chandrasekaran Sanjay, Warner Allison Betof, Zager Jonathan S, Chmielowski Bartosz, Patel Sapna P, Hernandez-Aya Leonel Fernando, Correa Zelia M, Fecher Leslie A, Najjar Yana G, Montazeri Kamaneh, Shoushtari Alexander N, Javed Asad, Gombos Dan S, Salama April K S, Tsai Katy, Miller Frank H, Khushalani Nikhil, Seedor Rino S, Lipson Evan J, Reddy Sunil A, Buchbinder Elizabeth, Bhatia Shailender, Pavlick Anna, Mehmi Inderjit, Aaberg Thomas, Ikeguchi Alexandra P, Kim Ivana K, Walter Scott D, Singh Arun D, Sullivan Ryan J, Choi Jacob S, Williams Basil K, Orloff Marlana, Mruthyunjaya Prithvi, Schollenberger Megan D, Gandhi Namita, Harbour J William, Chandra Sunandana

СтатьяПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

BACKGROUND/

OBJECTIVES

Uveal melanoma is a rare but aggressive intraocular malignancy that metastasizes in up to half of patients, most commonly to the liver, despite effective local treatment. In the absence of robust evidence, there are no standardized guidelines for post-treatment surveillance, resulting in wide variation in imaging modalities, frequency, and duration across physicians and institutions. This study aimed to develop expert consensus recommendations for surveillance strategies in patients with uveal melanoma.

METHODS

A modified Delphi method was conducted across three iterative survey rounds between September 2024 and February 2025 using an online platform. Panelists included medical oncologists, ocular oncologists, radiologists, and surgical oncologists from North America. A multidisciplinary steering committee developed statements addressing risk-based surveillance using both molecular and clinical prognostic factors, including gene expression profiling (GEP) and PRAME status. Consensus was defined a priori as ≥70% of panelists rating a statement 7-9 on a 9-point Likert scale.

RESULTS

Forty-nine experts were invited, and 41 completed at least one survey round. The panel represented 17 U.S. states, Washington, D.C., and two Canadian provinces. Twelve statements reached stable consensus, including recommendations for imaging modality, frequency, and duration in intermediate- and high-risk patients. Although there was agreement that low-risk patients warrant surveillance, no consensus was reached on the optimal approach for this group.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first study to provide consensus-based guidance incorporating GEP and PRAME status into surveillance recommendations for uveal melanoma, offering a standardized framework to guide clinical practice and future research.

Для цитирования: Alban Juan, Bowen R Christopher, Reichstein David A, McKean Meredith, Lutzky Jose, Weis Ezekiel, Carvajal Richard D, Dulka Susan, Morse Brian G, Butler Marcus O, Rapisuwon Suthee, Kim Kevin B, Chandrasekaran Sanjay, Warner Allison Betof, Zager Jonathan S, Chmielowski Bartosz, Patel Sapna P, Hernandez-Aya Leonel Fernando, Correa Zelia M, Fecher Leslie A, Najjar Yana G, Montazeri Kamaneh, Shoushtari Alexander N, Javed Asad, Gombos Dan S, Salama April K S, Tsai Katy, Miller Frank H, Khushalani Nikhil, Seedor Rino S, Lipson Evan J, Reddy Sunil A, Buchbinder Elizabeth, Bhatia Shailender, Pavlick Anna, Mehmi Inderjit, Aaberg Thomas, Ikeguchi Alexandra P, Kim Ivana K, Walter Scott D, Singh Arun D, Sullivan Ryan J, Choi Jacob S, Williams Basil K, Orloff Marlana, Mruthyunjaya Prithvi, Schollenberger Megan D, Gandhi Namita, Harbour J William, Chandra Sunandana. Metastatic Uveal Melanoma Surveillance: A Delphi Panel Consensus.. Cancers. 2025. DOI: 10.3390/cancers18010121.
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

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.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.