RESUMO
Background: Adequate methods reporting in observational and trial literature is critical to interpretation and implementation. Objective: Evaluate methodology reporting adherence in the dermatology literature and compare this to internal medicine (IM) literature. Methods: We performed a cross-sectional review of randomly-selected dermatology and IM manuscripts published between 2014-2018. Observational and trial articles were retrieved from PubMed. The primary outcome was percent adherence to STROBE or CONSORT methods-related checklist items (methods reporting score, MRS). Secondary outcomes included the relationship between methods section length (MSL) and MRS. We additionally compared these with IM literature. MRS and MSL were compared by overall article length, checklist type, field, journal, study topic, and funding source. Comparisons were assessed using univariable and multivariable linear regression. Results: We identified 389 articles (172 dermatology and 217 IM). Within dermatology, we identified 83 clinical trials and 89 observational studies. Mean MRS was 61.4 percent. A one word increase in MSL corresponded to a 0.02 percent increase MRS (ß=0.02, 95% CI 0.01-0.03). Mean MRS was 12.8 percent lower in the dermatology literature compared with IM (ß=-12.8%, -15.6-[-9.91]). Mean dermatology MSL was 345 words shorter (ß=-345, -413-[-277]). Studies from JAMA Dermatology, Journal of Investigative Dermatology, and British Journal of Dermatology, with government funding, and having supplemental methods had higher mean MRS's. Conclusion: Methods reporting quality was low in dermatology. A weak relationship between MRS and MSL was observed. These data support enhancing researcher emphasis on methods reporting, editorial staff, and peer reviewers that more strictly enforce checklist reporting.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Amelanotic melanoma (AM) is a rare form of melanoma lacking pigment. Data on AM risk factors and factors predicting survival are limited. OBJECTIVES: We sought to identify predictors of AM, survival differences in AM and melanotic melanoma, and AM-specific survival rates. METHODS: Using 2004 through 2015 National Cancer Database data, we compared 358,543 melanoma cases to 1,384 AM cases. Multivariable logistic regression identified AM risk factors, and AM survival was explored using Kaplan-Meier and multivariable Cox regression. RESULTS: Increased age; tumor location on the face, scalp, and neck; increased Breslow thickness; metastatic disease; ulceration; and higher mitotic rate were associated with AM. Five- and ten-year survival rates were higher for patients with MM (melanotic melanoma) than AM tumors (75.4% vs. 58.8% and 62.4% vs 45.1%; log-rank P<0.0001). No survival difference was seen after adjusting for staging factors. Among patients with AM, more recent diagnosis was associated with improved survival. Increased age, T4 tumor size, higher N-stage, metastasis, and ulceration predicted poorer survival. No survival advantage was seen for chemotherapy, immunotherapy, or radiation therapy, likely due to confounding. CONCLUSION: AM is more common in older patients on sun-exposed skin and is diagnosed at later stages. Advanced staging at diagnosis explains the survival differences. In patients with AM, regional and metastatic disease were the primary contributors of poorer outcomes. In at-risk patients, the threshold to biopsy should be lower for suspicious nonpigmented lesions.
RESUMO
Importance: Acne is a common dermatologic condition and significantly affects psychosocial health and quality of life. An international task force recommended routine use of quality-of-life measures for clinic visits associated with acne management, but this has yet to translate into clinical practice. Objective: To assess mean Skindex-16 scores over time among patients with moderate to severe acne receiving isotretinoin treatment. Design, Setting, and Participants: A longitudinal, retrospective case series study of Skindex-16 data collected at monthly visits from 57 consecutive patients with acne receiving isotretinoin; data were collected and evaluated between November 23, 2016, and January 22, 2019. Continuous variables were compared using quantile regression. Multivariable linear mixed models evaluated mean (95% CI) score trajectory over time. Main Outcomes and Measure: Skindex-16 scores, including normalized scores for the emotional, symptomatic, and functional aspects of having skin disease as well as an overall score. Results: Fifty-seven patients (31 [54.4 %] males, with median [interquartile range] age of 17.2 [15.9-18.1] years) in this case series study completed the Skindex-16 at baseline and at least once during follow-up. Baseline Skindex-16 scores were similar by sex but worse with increasing age. Emotional impact was more bothersome to patients with acne requiring isotretinoin treatment than either symptoms or functioning. Improvements of greater than 50% in overall and Emotional domain scores were seen by month 2 of receiving isotretinoin treatment (eg, overall scores decreased from 39.4 to 17.5 by month 2; a decrease of 22.0; P < .001). Qualitatively, Skindex-16 scores reached their nadir between months 3 and 5; at month 4, overall Skindex-16 scores showed a 4.4-fold improvement (from 39.4 at baseline to 8.9; P < .001) and Emotional domain scores showed a 4.8-fold improvement (from 57.7 at baseline to 11.9; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: The findings of this case series suggest that patients receiving isotretinoin treatment achieve greater than a 50% improvement in quality of life by month 2 and can expect approximately 4-fold to 5-fold improvements from baseline with a full course of isotretinoin. This study shows the potential of routine administration of quality of life measures to assess patient care in dermatology.
