Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2015 May;24(5):817-24.
doi: 10.1158/1055-9965.EPI-14-1062. Epub 2015 Feb 24.

Development and validation of a melanoma risk score based on pooled data from 16 case-control studies

Affiliations

Development and validation of a melanoma risk score based on pooled data from 16 case-control studies

John R Davies et al. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev. 2015 May.

Abstract

Background: We report the development of a cutaneous melanoma risk algorithm based upon seven factors; hair color, skin type, family history, freckling, nevus count, number of large nevi, and history of sunburn, intended to form the basis of a self-assessment Web tool for the general public.

Methods: Predicted odds of melanoma were estimated by analyzing a pooled dataset from 16 case-control studies using logistic random coefficients models. Risk categories were defined based on the distribution of the predicted odds in the controls from these studies. Imputation was used to estimate missing data in the pooled datasets. The 30th, 60th, and 90th centiles were used to distribute individuals into four risk groups for their age, sex, and geographic location. Cross-validation was used to test the robustness of the thresholds for each group by leaving out each study one by one. Performance of the model was assessed in an independent UK case-control study dataset.

Results: Cross-validation confirmed the robustness of the threshold estimates. Cases and controls were well discriminated in the independent dataset [area under the curve, 0.75; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.73-0.78]. Twenty-nine percent of cases were in the highest risk group compared with 7% of controls, and 43% of controls were in the lowest risk group compared with 13% of cases.

Conclusion: We have identified a composite score representing an estimate of relative risk and successfully validated this score in an independent dataset.

Impact: This score may be a useful tool to inform members of the public about their melanoma risk.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of interest: none

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
ROC curve showing discrimination between cases and controls in the Leeds melanoma case-control study using the risk algorithm: (AUC=0.75, 95% CI 0.73-0.78).

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Erdmann F, Lortet-Tieulent J, Schuz J, Zeeb H, Greinert R, Breitbart EW, et al. International trends in the incidence of malignant melanoma 1953-2008-are recent generations at higher or lower risk? Int J Cancer. 2012 - PubMed
    1. Hill D, White V, Marks R, Borland R. Changes in sun-related attitudes and behaviours, and reduced sunburn prevalence in a population at high risk of melanoma. Eur J Cancer Prev. 1993;2:447–56. - PubMed
    1. Gandini S, Sera F, Cattaruzza MS, Pasquini P, Zanetti R, Masini C, et al. Meta-analysis of risk factors for cutaneous melanoma: III. Family history, actinic damage and phenotypic factors. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41:2040–59. - PubMed
    1. Chang YM, Barrett JH, Bishop DT, Armstrong BK, Bataille V, Bergman W, et al. Sun exposure and melanoma risk at different latitudes: a pooled analysis of 5700 cases and 7216 controls. Int J Epidemiol. 2009;38:814–30. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Gandini S, Sera F, Cattaruzza MS, Pasquini P, Abeni D, Boyle P, et al. Meta-analysis of risk factors for cutaneous melanoma: I. Common and atypical naevi. Eur J Cancer. 2005;41:28–44. - PubMed

Publication types