Store
|
Contributing Editors
|
Help
|
Contact
|
Sign In
select
All
Images Only
Search
home
resources
images
handouts
videos
quizzes
boardreview
atoz
< Current issue
Dermatopathology: Practical & Conceptual January - March 2002
>
New Concept: Melanomas in Prepubescent Children: Review Comprehensively, Critique Historically, Criteria Diagnostically, and Course Biologically
Joan M. Mones, D.O.
A. Bernard Ackerman, M.D.
Abstract
Definition of “Prepubescent” and of Proven “Melanomas” for Purposes of This Treatise
Historical Perspective: Darier and A. Civatte, 1910
Historical Perspective: Coe, 1925; Pack and Anglem, 1939
Historical Perspective: Pack et al., 1947; L. Ackerman and del Regato, 1947
Historical Perspective: Pack, 1948; MacDonald, 1948
Historical Perspective: Spitz, 1948
Historical Perspective: Allen, 1949
Historical Perspective: Spitz, 1951; Pack and Scharnagel, 1951
Historical Perspective: Truax and Allen, 1953; Allen and Spitz, 1953
Historical Perspective: Becker, 1954; McWhorter and Woolner, 1954
Historical Perspective: McWhorter et al., 1954; Hendrix, 1954; Dobson, 1955
Historical Perspective: Allen, 1960
Historical Perspective: Hoagland and Hughes, 1960
Historical Perspective: Pontius and Dziabis, 1961; McGovern and Goulston, 1963
Historical Perspective: Giersten, 1964; Kopf and Andrade, 1966
Historical Perspective: Responses of Allen to Kopf and Andrade, 1966
Historical Perspective: Skov-Jensen et al., 1966; Zwaveling et al., 1966; Saksela and Rintala, 1968
Historical Perspective: Lerman et al., 1970
Historical Perspective: Trozak et al., 1975; Shanon et al., 1976
Historical Perspective: Helwig, 1975
Historical Perspective: Speculations of Helwig, 1975
Historical Perspective: Boddie, et al., 1978
Historical Perspective: Stomberg, 1979; Pratt et al., 1981
Historical Perspective: Flemming and Ruggins, 1985; Bader et al., 1985
Historical Perspective: Peters and Goellner, 1986
Historical Perspective: Moss and Briggs, 1986; Melnick et al., 1986; Chapman et al., 1987
Historical Perspective: Donner et al., 1988
Historical Perspective: Fisher et al., 1988
Historical Perspective: K. Smith et al., 1989: “Malignant Spitz’s Nevus”
Historical Perspective: Partoff et al., 1989; Roth et al., 1990
Historical Perspective: Allen, 1991
Historical Perspective: Temple et al., 1991
Historical Perspective: Crotty et al., 1992
Historical Perspective: A. H. Mehregan and D. A. Mehregan, 1993
Historical Perspective: Tate et al., 1993
Historical Perspective: Chun et al., 1993; Bartoli et al., 1994; Nitta et al., 1995
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1995
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1995: “Metastasizing Spitz’s Tumor”
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1995: “Atypical Spitz Tumor”
Historical Perspective: Lartigau et al., 1995
Historical Perspective: Whiteman et al., 1995; Handfield-Jones and N. Smith, 1996
Historical Perspective: Spatz et al., 1996; Naasan et al., 1996
Historical Perspective: Scalzo et al., 1997; Eady, 1997; Crotty, 1997; Zhu et al., 1997
Historical Perspective: Wu and Lambert, 1997; Milton et al., 1997
Historical Perspective: Spatz and Avril, 1998
Historical Perspective: Barnhill, 1998; Spatz and Barnhill, 1999
Historical Perspective: Barnhill et al., 1999
Historical Perspective: Rapini, 1999
Historical Perspective: Strojan and Lamovec, 2000; Davis, 2000; Neville et al., 2000
Historical Perspective: Kogut et al., 2000; Patterson et al., 2000; Zuckerman et al., 2001
Historical Perspective: Conti et al., 2001; Fabrizi and Massi, 2001
Summary: Major Sources of Error in Interpretation
Summary: Major Errors of Pack, Spitz, and Allen
Summary: Major errors of Helwig, K. Smith, and Barnhill
Our Experience
Clinical Appearance
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 18
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 19
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 20
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 21
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 22
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 23
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 24
)
Histopathologic Findings (
Figure 25
)
Differences Histopathologically Between Melanomas in Prepubescents and in Postpubescents: Scanning Magnification
Differences Histopathologically Between Melanomas in Prepubescents and Postpubescents: Higher Magnification
Histopathologic Differential Diagnosis
Biologic Behavior
Synthesis
Purpose of This Endeavor and the Essence of the Message
Conclusions
Addendum and Caveat
Postscript
Acknowledgements
References
SEE ALSO
-
melanoma
<
Previous
|
Next
>
Historical Perspective: Flemming and Ruggins, 1985; Bader et al., 1985
Flemming and Ruggins, in 1985, told of a 23-month-old boy with what they claimed was a melanoma on the right cheek.
34
Based on our own assessment of the clinical features and the histopathologic findings, this child had a Spitz's nevus and not a melanoma. There was no evidence of metastasis.
By searching the files of six hospitals during the years 1954 and 1977 and by utilizing 10 U.S. population-based Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Programs of the Biometry Branch of the National Cancer Institute between 1973 and 1976, Bader and coworkers
35
identified 183 patients with a diagnosis of melanoma confirmed histopathologically (4 of whom were determined, on review of sections of tissue, to have something other than melanoma and therefore were excluded), leaving 179 patients 20 years of age or younger with melanoma as the corpus of their series. They recorded their findings concerning the incidence and cause of melanoma in an article in 1985 titled, "Childhood malignant melanoma: Incidence and etiology." Included in this series, too, in addition to the 179 patients, were 154 patients studied by Pratt et al. and Boddie et al. Bader and associates concentrated primarily on the incidence of melanoma in children and adolescents, justifying that focus in these words:
"Most published reports of melanoma in children and adolescents have emphasized clinical and pathologic findings in small series of patients at single institutions. The 183 patients in this collaborative study provide new data on incidence and distribution of primary sites of childhood melanoma."
They neither discussed histopathologic findings nor showed photomicrographs, but they had this to say about age in relation to development of melanomas in children, adolescents, and young adults:
"Malignant melanoma comprised approximately 3% of all cancers in the first two decades of life, and thereafter. Incidence of malignant melanoma increased with age. No age peak was found in infancy to suggest the action of a transplacental carcinogen and no study patient had metastases from maternal melanoma. Melanoma developed seven times more frequently in the second decade of life than in the first (6.3 and 0.8 per million, respectively). Further rate increases through the sixth decade suggest the etiologic role of aging and cumulative exposure to sunlight and/or other carcinogens. The rising trend from the second decade suggests that the latency period for melanoma development may be as short as several years, particularly in genetically susceptible persons (i.e., the two patients with xeroderma pigmentosum). Hormonal influences and sex differences in areas of skin exposed to sunlight may explain the predominance of cutaneous melanomas of the head, neck, and trunk in women and girls. Much lower rates among blacks are probably due to protection against sunlight provided by skin pigmentation."
<
Previous
|
Next
>
This site is made possible in part by:
Copyright © Derm101.com. All Rights Reserved.