Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.,The overall survival (OS) of patients with metastatic uveal melanoma is short, the evidence for effectiveness of treatments is limited, and no consensus on the choice of treatment exists.,We aimed to advance interpretation of OS as an outcome by pooling peer-reviewed data.,The design is a systematic review and meta-analysis.,We searched PubMed from 1 January 1980, to 29 March 2017, for articles reporting patient-level survival in Kaplan-Meier or numerical form.,We digitized survival graphs, pooled individual survival times, calculated median OS by treatment modality, and compared each modality by the log-rank test and Cox regression using conventional chemotherapy (CHT) as a reference.,Individual-level data were obtained from 78 articles with 2494 patients.,The median OS across all treatment modalities was 1.07 years (range: 0.59-2.50 years).,Pooled OS reported after isolated hepatic perfusion [median OS: 1.34 years; hazard ratio (HR): 0.92, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.87-0.97, P = 0.0040], immunoembolization (median OS: 1.63; HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.95-1.00, P = 0.0080), and surgery (median OS: 1.43; HR: 0.94, 95% CI: 0.92-0.96, P < 0.0001) was longer, and after checkpoint inhibitor shorter (median OS: 0.59; HR: 1.13, 95% CI: 1.06-1.20, P < 0.0001) than after CHT (median OS: 0.91 years), but subject to identifiable confounding factors.,OS following other modalities did not differ from CHT.,Reported OS was unassociated with the decade of publication, but depended on the percentage of first-line treated patients.,Our results suggest no clinically significant difference in OS by treatment modality or decade.,Most of the difference in reported OS likely is attributable to surveillance, selection, and publication bias rather than treatment-related prolongation.,Our pooled data provide benchmarks for future trials.
Objective To estimate the burden of melanoma resulting from sunbed use in western Europe.,Design Systematic review and meta-analysis.,Data sources PubMed, ISI Web of Science (Science Citation Index Expanded), Embase, Pascal, Cochrane Library, LILACS, and MedCarib, along with published surveys reporting prevalence of sunbed use at national level in Europe.,Study selection Observational studies reporting a measure of risk for skin cancer (cutaneous melanoma, squamous cell carcinoma, basal cell carcinoma) associated with ever use of sunbeds.,Results Based on 27 studies ever use of sunbeds was associated with a summary relative risk of 1.20 (95% confidence interval 1.08 to 1.34).,Publication bias was not evident.,Restricting the analysis to cohorts and population based studies, the summary relative risk was 1.25 (1.09 to 1.43).,Calculations for dose-response showed a 1.8% (95% confidence interval 0% to 3.8%) increase in risk of melanoma for each additional session of sunbed use per year.,Based on 13 informative studies, first use of sunbeds before age 35 years was associated with a summary relative risk of 1.87 (1.41 to 2.48), with no indication of heterogeneity between studies.,By using prevalence data from surveys and data from GLOBOCAN 2008, in 2008 in the 15 original member countries of the European Community plus three countries that were members of the European Free Trade Association, an estimated 3438 cases of melanoma could be attributable to sunbed use, most (n=2341) occurring among women.,Conclusions Sunbed use is associated with a significant increase in risk of melanoma.,This risk increases with number of sunbed sessions and with initial usage at a young age (<35 years).,The cancerous damage associated with sunbed use is substantial and could be avoided by strict regulations.