↓ Skip to main content

A systematic review of non‐surgical treatments for lentigo maligna

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology, August 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (81st percentile)

Mentioned by

policy
1 policy source
twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
60 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
42 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A systematic review of non‐surgical treatments for lentigo maligna
Published in
Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology, August 2015
DOI 10.1111/jdv.13252
Pubmed ID
Authors

T Read, C Noonan, M David, M Wagels, M Foote, H Schaider, H P Soyer, B M Smithers

Abstract

Lentigo maligna (LM) is the most common melanocytic malignancy of the head and neck. If left untreated, LM can progress to lentigo maligna melanoma (LMM). Complete surgical excision is the gold standard for treatment, however, due to the location, size, and advanced age of patients, surgery is not always acceptable. As a result, there is ongoing interest in alternative, less invasive treatment modalities. To provide a structured review of key literature reporting the use of radiotherapy, imiquimod and laser therapy for the management of LM in patients where surgical resection is prohibited. An independent review was conducted following a comprehensive search of the National Library of Medicine using MEDLINE and PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ScienceDirect and Cochrane Library databases. Data were presented in tabular format, and crude data pooled to calculate mean recurrence rates for each therapy. Of 29 studies met the inclusion criteria: radiotherapy 10; topical imiquimod 10; laser therapies 9<Query: This part "radiotherapy 10; topical imiquimod 10; laser therapies 9" of the sentence is not clear. Please check and update appropriately>. Radiotherapy demostrated recurrence rates of up to 31% (mean 11.5%), with follow-up durations of 1-96 months. Topical imiquimod recurrence rates were up to 50% (mean 24.5%), with follow-up durations of 2-49 months. Laser therapy yielded recurrence rates of up to 100% (mean 34.4%), and follow-up durations of 8-78 months. in each of the treatment series the I(2) value measuring statistical heterogeneity exceeded the accepted threshold of 50% and as such a meta-analysis of included data were inappropriate. For non-surgical patients with LM, radiotherapy and topical imiquimod were efficacious treatments. Radiotherapy produced superior complete response rates and fewer recurrences than imiquimod although both are promising non-invasive modalities. There was no consistent body of evidence regarding laser therapy although response rates of up to 100% were reported in low quality studies. A prospective comparative trial is indicated and would provide accurate data on the long-term efficacy and overall utility of these treatments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 42 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 42 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 6 14%
Student > Bachelor 6 14%
Other 5 12%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 12%
Researcher 4 10%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 8 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 27 64%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 5%
Psychology 1 2%
Unknown 10 24%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 August 2020.
All research outputs
#6,754,462
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology
#1,334
of 5,367 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#72,437
of 278,035 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology & Venereology
#14
of 79 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,367 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 74% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 278,035 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 79 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 81% of its contemporaries.