Toward personalized skin cancer care: multiple skin cancer development in five cohorts
Wheless, L.; Liao, K.-P.; Zhang, S.; Li, Y.; Yao, L.; Xu, Y.; Madden, C.; Ike, J.; Smith, I. T.; Mosley, D. A.; Grossarth, S. N.; Hartman, R. I.; Wilson, O. D.; Hung, A. M.; Wehner, M. R.
Show abstract
ImportanceMany patients will develop more than one skin cancer, however most research to date has examined only case status. ObjectiveDescribe the frequency and timing of the treatment of multiple skin cancers in individual patients over time DesignLongitudinal claims and electronic health record-based cohort study SettingVanderbilt University Medical Center database called the Synthetic Derivative, VA, Medicare, Optum Clinformatics(R) Data Mart Database, IBM Marketscan ParticipantsAll patients with a Current Procedural Terminology code for the surgical management of a skin cancer in each of five cohorts. ExposuresNone. Main Outcomes and MeasuresThe number of CPT codes for skin cancer treatment in each individual occurring on the same day as an ICD code for skin cancer over time ResultsOur cohort included 5,508,374 patients and 13,102,123 total skin cancers treated. Conclusions and RelevanceNearly half of patients treated for skin cancer were treated for more than one skin cancer. Patients who have not developed a second skin cancer by 2 years after the first are unlikely to develop multiple skin cancers within the following 5 years. Better data formatting will allow for improved granularity in identifying individuals at high risk for multiple skin cancers and those unlikely to benefit from continued annual surveillance. Resource planning should take into account not just the number of skin cancer cases, but the individual burden of disease. Key pointsQuestion: How many skin cancer patients are treated for more than one skin cancer and how soon after the first skin cancer do they occur? Findings: 43% of patients were treated for more than one skin cancer, the majority of which occurred within two years after the initial skin cancer. Just 3% of patients were treated for 10 or more skin cancers, but these patients accounted for 22% of all of the skin cancer treatments in the cohort Meaning: Nearly half of all skin cancer patients were treated for multiple skin cancers, while those without a second skin cancer after two years were less likely to be treated for a subsequent skin cancer within the next five years.
Matching journals
The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
Similar papers in this journal
- Use of Skin Cancer Procedures, Medicare Reimbursement, and Overall Expenditures, 2012-2017 93%
- Missing data in the medical record for oncology patients: prevalence and association with outcomes 92%
- A comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis of the global data involving 61,532 cancer patients with SARS-CoV-2 infection 90%
Similar papers in this journal
- Diagnostic value of cutaneous manifestation of SARS-CoV-2 infection 89%
- Gene expression landscape of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma progression 89%
- Comprehensive profiling of the mutational landscape of hidradenoma papilliferum validates key role of alterations in the PI3K/AKT pathway alterations 89%
Similar papers in this journal
- Baseline tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte patterns and response to immune checkpoint inhibition in metastatic cutaneous melanoma 90%
- Repurposing cardiovascular disease prediction models for cancer 87%
- Development of an artificial intelligence-generated, explainable treatment recommendation system for urothelial carcinoma and renal cell carcinoma to support multidisciplinary cancer conferences 87%
Similar papers in this journal
- The human Flower isoform hFWE4 facilitates cornification in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma 89%
- Topical GZ21T inhibits the growth of actinic keratoses in a UVB induced model of skin carcinogenesis 89%
- Temporal Aspects of the Association between Exposure to the World Trade Center Disaster and Risk of Skin Melanoma 87%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.