Home
JournalsCollections
For Authors For Reviewers For Editorial Board Members
Article Processing Charges Open Access
Ethics Advertising Policy
Editorial Policy Resource Center
Company Information Contact Us
OPEN ACCESS

Age-period-cohort Analysis of Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma Incidence in the United States from 1987 to 2016

  • Ruofei Du1,
  • Jiayu Guo1,
  • Jing Li1 and
  • Jun Lyu2,3,* 
Cancer Screening and Prevention   2024;3(3):133-141

doi: 10.14218/CSP.2024.00019

Received:

Revised:

Accepted:

Published online:

 Author information

Citation: Du R, Guo J, Li J, Lyu J. Age-period-cohort Analysis of Cutaneous Malignant Melanoma Incidence in the United States from 1987 to 2016. Cancer Screen Prev. 2024;3(3):133-141. doi: 10.14218/CSP.2024.00019.

Abstract

Background and objectives

The prevalence and fatality rates of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) have been rising, particularly among the elderly. This study analyzes CMM incidence trends in the United States elderly population from 1987 to 2016 to inform prevention and management strategies.

Methods

Using incidence data from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database spanning 1989 to 2008, we calculated the age-adjusted standardized population incidence rates for CMM in elderly individuals. The Joinpoint software was employed to estimate annual percent change and analyze trends in CMM incidence among elderly individuals from 1987 to 2016.

Results

The study included 56,997 elderly CMM patients from eight Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results registries, of whom 36,726 were male (64.4%). The age-adjusted CMM incidence rate from 2012 to 2016 was 0.99 per 1,000, a 2.8-fold increase from 1987–1991 (95% confidence interval: 2.7–2.9). Incidence rates increased with age and birth cohort, peaking at 1.53 per 1,000 males and 0.59 per 1,000 females aged 85+ during 2012–2016. Birth cohort effects also showed a continuous increase.

Conclusions

This study reveals a substantial increase in CMM incidence rates among the elderly from 1987 to 2016, particularly between 2012 and 2016. Incidence rates escalated with age and birth cohort, with the highest rates observed in individuals aged 85 and older.

Keywords

Age-period-cohort, Oldest-old, Cutaneous malignant melanoma, Incidence, Annual percent change, Incidence trends

Introduction

Skin cancer is the most prevalent malignancy in the United States, with malignant melanoma being a highly aggressive form that originates in melanocytes, the cells responsible for producing skin pigment. Despite advances in treatment that have improved survival rates, malignant melanoma remains the deadliest type of skin cancer, and its global incidence continues to rise. Malignant melanoma can develop in various locations, including the skin, mucous membranes, eyes, and even the meninges. The most common types are cutaneous melanoma, ocular melanoma, and mucosal melanoma.1,2

Cutaneous melanomas are further categorized into subtypes, including chronic malignant melanoma, superficial spreading melanoma, nodular melanoma, and acral lentiginous melanoma, each with distinct clinical and histological features.1 While early diagnosis and appropriate treatment result in a five-year survival rate of 95% for most skin cancers, the incidence and mortality rates of cutaneous malignant melanoma (CMM) are notably higher, accounting for 65% of all skin cancer-related deaths.3 Though patients with metastatic melanoma face a disheartening 5% long-term survival rate, early detection of CMM offers a much more favorable prognosis, often leading to a complete cure.3

The global incidence of malignant melanoma has been increasing, with significant demographic disparities. In Western countries such as New Zealand and Australia, the incidence rates are among the highest, with age-standardized rates of 40.2/100,000 and 37.7/100,000 for males, respectively.4 In Canada, the national crude incidence rate is reported as 20.75 cases per 100,000 individuals per year.5 In the United States, melanoma is the fifth most common cancer, with an annual incidence of 73,870 cases.6 The lifetime risk of developing melanoma has increased dramatically, from 1 in 1,500 in the 1930s to 1 in 59 today.6 CMM, a recalcitrant and aggressive melanocyte malignancy, has demonstrated a conspicuous and continuous rise in incidence globally, drawing significant attention from public health and medical research communities.7

Since 1975, the incidence of malignant melanoma in the United States has increased by over 320%, a trend expected to continue until at least 2029.8 From 2006 to 2017, the United States Hispanic population experienced a particularly rapid increase in melanoma incidence, with Hispanic whites exhibiting the highest incidence of acral lentiginous melanoma compared to other populations of color.9

The demographic landscape in the United States is also changing, with an increasing proportion of the population reaching advanced age. By 2050, the population aged 85 years and older is expected to more than double, from 5.7 million to 24 million, making it the fastest-growing demographic.10 This shift underscores the importance of studying CMM incidence and mortality rates within this age group.10

CMM is the leading cause of death among skin tumors, and in recent years, both its incidence and mortality rates have been steadily rising, particularly among the elderly.11 Older patients with CMM typically present with more aggressive disease characteristics, such as a higher prevalence of ulceration and deeper tumor invasion, as indicated by Breslow’s index.12 These factors often result in a more advanced stage of diagnosis compared to younger patients.12 Additionally, older adults are more likely to present with melanoma on the head and neck, with lentigo malignant melanoma being more common in this age group.13,14

Elderly patients generally have a poorer prognosis, with reduced melanoma-specific survival compared to younger adults.11 Understanding the differences in clinical presentation and outcomes in the elderly is crucial for optimizing prevention, diagnosis, and treatment strategies tailored to this population.

The Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database, maintained by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), is a comprehensive nationwide cancer registry system that aggregates clinical and epidemiological data from cancer patients across the United States. These data are vital for both cancer research and clinical practice, providing researchers with insights into the epidemiological characteristics of various cancers, treatment effectiveness, and patient survival rates.15,16

Age-adjusted standardized population rates are essential tools in epidemiological studies and public health assessments. These rates adjust for differences in age distribution across populations, allowing for meaningful comparisons of health outcomes such as disease incidence or mortality. By using a standard population as a reference, these rates offer a more accurate reflection of the true burden of a condition, making them crucial for evaluating health trends, informing policy decisions, and comparing outcomes across different regions or time periods.17

In this study, we leverage SEER Research Plus Data from 1987 to 2016, covering eight registries up to November 2021 (1975–2019). We employ an age-period-cohort analysis to explore trends in CMM incidence among the elderly population in the United States. The primary goal is to provide scientific evidence to support the development of strategies for CMM prevention and management in the elderly and to evaluate their efficacy.

The following sections will elaborate on the research methodologies, data analysis, and findings, offering a comprehensive understanding of CMM incidence trends in elderly Americans and the factors influencing these trends.

Materials and methods

The data for this study were obtained from the SEER Program, maintained by the NCI. The SEER database is a comprehensive source of population-based information, covering approximately 34.6% of the United States population. It collects data on cancer incidence, survival, and prevalence from various geographic areas representing a cross-section of the nation. The SEER program is renowned for its high-quality data, gathered from multiple registries across the United States, ensuring a broad and diverse representation of cancer patients.18,19

Patient selection

Data from the SEER Program, comprising eight registries, were queried for the period spanning 1987 to 2016. Patients diagnosed with CMM of the skin were identified based on histology using the International Classification of Diseases for Oncology, Third Edition (ICD-O-3) codes 8720/3-8722/3, 8730/3-8780/3, and ICD-O-3 codes C44, C60.9, C63.2. Inclusion criteria were as follows: (1) the primary tumor site was the skin; (2) patients were aged 65 years or older at the time of diagnosis; (3) the diagnosis was confirmed pathologically; (4) complete follow-up data were available, with survival times exceeding zero days; and (5) the diagnosis occurred between 1987 and 2016. Exclusion criteria included: (1) cases where the diagnosis was based solely on autopsy or death certificate information; (2) instances with indeterminate survival times; and (3) patients diagnosed with secondary or metastatic tumors rather than primary CMM.

Statistical analysis

An annual percentage change (APC) analysis was conducted using five-year age intervals and 5-year period intervals, resulting in five age groups (65–69 years, 70–74 years, 75–79 years, 80–84 years, and ≥85 years) and six period intervals (1987–1991, 1992–1996, 1997–2001, 2002–2006, 2007–2011, and 2012–2016). Birth cohorts were defined based on the midpoints of the age and period intervals. Age-adjusted incidence rates were calculated using the United States standard population in 2000. Ratios, with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), were calculated using the Tiwari 2006 revision in SEER*Stat 8.4.2 (NCI).20

To assess trends in CMM incidence rates among elderly individuals in the United States from 1987 to 2016, this study used the Joinpoint Regression Model. For population-based trends in cancer incidence and mortality rates, the logarithmic linear model is typically used.

The main outcomes of the Joinpoint model were the APC and the average annual percent change (AAPC), both with their respective 95% CI. In the logarithmic linear model, denoted as In(y) = β0 + β1x, where x represents the year of diagnosis, the APC can be computed using the following formula expressed as follows:

APC=[yx+1yxyx]100=(eβ11)100

To analyze long-term trends in CMM incidence rates, we used version 5.0 of the Joinpoint program from the NCI, available at https://surveillance.cancer.gov/joinpoint/ . This program uses the Monte Carlo permutation method to evaluate the statistical significance of changes in trends. The optimal joinpoint model was determined by analyzing log-transformed data. The APC for individual linear segments and the AAPC for each joinpoint model across the entire study period were calculated, with 95% CI determined using the normal approximation method.21

In cases where a significant difference in the linear slope of the time trend was detected, the joinpoint model was used to determine whether the age-adjusted incidence rates were best described by a single linear segment or multiple segments. A statistically significant trend, indicated by the APC or AAPC, was classified as increasing (slope > 0) or decreasing (slope < 0). Parallelism tests were conducted to determine whether the direction of slope changes in trends was similar or different between groups. These tests allowed for an analysis of whether the fitted models for different groups (e.g., females and males) had similar shapes but were shifted along the x-axis (i.e., the year of diagnosis). The statistical significance (P-value) from this test indicated whether the two compared AAPCs were statistically distinct.22 All tests were two-sided, with a significance level set at α = 0.05.

Finally, the APC model was employed to identify patterns in long-term incidence rate trends, considering the age at CMM diagnosis (age), the year of CMM diagnosis (period), and the birth year (cohort). The APC model described associations between cancer incidence rates and age, period (calendar year of diagnosis), and birth cohort. Graphs generated from these models provided a visual representation of trends while controlling for competing effects, such as birth cohort influences that adjust for age and period effects. These models were fitted using the NCI’s Age-Period-Cohort web tool, available at https://analysistools.cancer.gov/apc/ . This tool provided estimates of net drift (the expected age-adjusted rate of change over time in the APC), local drift (the expected age-specific rate of change over time), and cohort rate ratios (RR, the ratio of age-specific rates for each birth cohort relative to a reference cohort). The tool also enabled the testing of the equality of observed trends.23

Results

Incidence rates

The study included a total of 56,997 cases, with 36,726 (64.4%) being male patients. During the period from 2012 to 2016, the overall age-adjusted incidence rate of CMM was 0.99 per 1,000 individuals (95% CI, 0.98–1.01), representing a striking 2.8-fold increase compared to the period from 1987 to 1991 (95% CI, 2.7–2.9), as shown in Table 1. When stratified by gender, the age-adjusted incidence rate for males during 2012–2016 was 1.53 per 1,000 (95% CI, 1.50–1.56), while for females, it was 0.59 per 1,000 (95% CI, 0.57–0.60). These findings highlight a significant increase since the initial cohort analysis (1987–1991), with the age-adjusted incidence rate for males rising 2.9 times (95% CI, 2.8–3.0), and for females increasing 2.3 times (95% CI, 2.2–2.4). Additionally, we examined the distribution of CMM incidence rates based on race/ethnicity and geographic location (Table 1). It is evident that CMM is more prevalent in the white population compared to black and other racial/ethnic groups. Among white individuals, the incidence rate of CMM escalated from 0.40 per 1,000 to 1.22 per 1,000 (rate ratio 3.0; 95% CI, 2.9–3.1) between 1987–1991 and 2012–2016. When stratified by geographic location, Utah, Seattle, and Atlanta reported higher CMM incidence rates (Utah: 1.506 per 1,000; 95% CI, 1.442–1.571; Seattle: 1.110 per 1,000; 95% CI, 1.073–1.147), and Atlanta (1.100 per 1,000; 95% CI, 1.050–1.153). The overall increase in incidence rates from 1987–1991 to 2012–2016 was 2.8 times (95% CI, 2.7–2.9).

Table 1

Change in cutaneous malignant melanoma incidence rates over time

VariableRate (95% CI)
Rate ratio (95% CI)
1987–19912012–2016 
Overall0.36 (0.35–0.37)0.99 (0.98–1.01)2.8 (2.7–2.9)
Sex
  Male0.52 (0.50–0.55)1.53 (1.50–1.56)2.9 (2.8–3.0)
  Female0.25 (0.24–0.27)0.59 (0.57–0.60)2.3 (2.2–2.4)
Race
  White0.40 (0.39–0.42)1.22 (1,20–1.24)3.0 (2.9–3.1)
  Black0.07 (0.05–0.11)0.04 (0.03–0.06)0.6 (0.4–1.0)
  Other0.04 (0.02–0.05)0.08 (0.07–0.10)2.3 (1.5–3.8)
SEER registry
  San Francisco, California0.385 (0.359–0.413)1.032 (0.996–1.069)2.7 (2.5–2.9)
  Connecticut0.398 (0.371–0.425)0.866 (0.831–0.902)2.2 (2.0–2.4)
  Hawaii0.228 (0.189–0.272)0.793 (0.741–0.847)3.5 (2.8–4.2)
  Lowa0.309 (0.286–0.334)0.865 (0.828–0.903)2.8 (2.6–3.1)
  New Mexico0.396 (0.352–0.444)0.649 (0.609–0.691)1.6 (1.4–1.9)
  Seattle (Puget Sound)0.345 (0.318–0.373)1.110 (1.073–1.147)3.2 (3.0–3.5)
  Utah0.413 (0.366–0.463)1.506 (1.442–1.571)3.6 (3.2–4.1)
  Atlanta (Metropolitan)0.385 (0.342–0.431)1.100 (1.050–1.153)2.9 (2.5–3.2)

APC analysis

Over the course of 30 years, from 1987 to 2016, a persistent upward trend in the incidence rate of CMM was observed. Based on the APC, this ascending trend can be divided into two distinct segments, with a pivotal shift in 2009. Between 1987 and 2009, there was a pronounced upward trend, with a substantial APC of 4.45%. However, after 2009, the trend moderated, displaying a somewhat less steep incline compared to the earlier period (Fig. 1).

Associations of age and calendar period of diagnosis with CMM incidence among all patients.
Fig. 1  Associations of age and calendar period of diagnosis with CMM incidence among all patients.

CMM, cutaneous malignant melanoma.

Period trends in age-adjusted CMM incidence rates

We began our analysis by examining the period trends in the evolving incidence rates of CMM in the United States. Figures 2a and b illustrate the fluctuations in age-specific CMM incidence rates across various observation periods (years) for American males and females from 1987 to 2016. Overall, CMM incidence rates tend to be higher in older age groups, regardless of the observation period. Across all five age groups, an upward trajectory in CMM incidence rates is evident over the years. Notably, the 80–84 age group among males exhibits a significantly pronounced upward trend, with an APC of 6.04%. Among females, the 75–79 age group shows a significant upward trend, with an APC of 3.69%. In the male population, the incidence rate of CMM in the 85+ age group initially declines, followed by an increase, with an inflection point in 1989. In contrast, the incidence rate in the 80–84 age group initially rises rapidly but decelerates post-2010, with an APC of 0.31%. Among females, the 75–79 age group shows an initial decline followed by an increase in CMM incidence rates, with the inflection point occurring in 1990.

Associations of age and period of diagnosis with CMM (cutaneous malignant melanoma).
Fig. 2  Associations of age and period of diagnosis with CMM (cutaneous malignant melanoma).

(a) Association of age and calendar period of diagnosis with CMM incidence among male patients. (b) Association of age and calendar period of diagnosis with CMM incidence among female patients.

Cohort trends in age-adjusted CMM incidence rates

Figures 3a and b provide insights into the fluctuations in age-specific CMM incidence rates based on birth cohorts for American males and females from 1987 to 2016. The results from the birth cohort models reveal that, particularly among males aged 65 and older, individuals of the same age but from different birth years show a gradual increase in CMM incidence rates as their birth years advance. In contrast, the differences in birth cohort trends were less pronounced between females and males. CMM incidence rates across various age groups generally show a gradual increase as birth years progress. However, in the elderly male population, the overall incidence rate of CMM exceeded that of elderly females. Notably, male CMM incidence rates, spanning different age groups and birth cohorts, surpassed 44, with males aged 85 and older showing the highest incidence rates.

Associations of age and birth cohort with CMM (cutaneous malignant melanoma).
Fig. 3  Associations of age and birth cohort with CMM (cutaneous malignant melanoma).

(a) Association of age and birth cohort with CMM incidence among male patients. (b) Association of age and birth cohort with CMM incidence among female patients.

Age-period-cohort models

As shown by the longitudinal age curve in Figure 4, the incidence rate of skin melanoma peaks in the older age groups. Figure 5a illustrates the rising trend over time, with a notable increase starting around 2000. Rates exceeding 1.0 after 2000 indicate that the incidence of CMM is increasing during these periods compared to the reference period. The shaded areas represent confidence intervals, highlighting a significant upward trend over time. Figure 5b demonstrates a steady rise in incidence rates among recent birth cohorts, indicating that individuals born more recently are at a higher risk of developing CMM than those from earlier cohorts. This increase is particularly sharp for cohorts born after 1940, with a pronounced risk for those born after 1950.

Longitudinal age curves of CMM in SEER 8 from 1978 to 2016 and corresponding 95% CI.
Fig. 4  Longitudinal age curves of CMM in SEER 8 from 1978 to 2016 and corresponding 95% CI.

CI, confidence interval; CMM, cutaneous malignant melanoma; SEER, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results.

Incidence rate ratios by period for CMM incidence in SEER 8 (a). Incidence rate ratios by birth cohort for CMM incidence in SEER 8 database (b). Shaded bands indicate the 95% CI.
Fig. 5  Incidence rate ratios by period for CMM incidence in SEER 8 (a). Incidence rate ratios by birth cohort for CMM incidence in SEER 8 database (b). Shaded bands indicate the 95% CI.

CI, confidence interval; CMM, cutaneous malignant melanoma; RR, rate ratio; SEER, Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results.

Discussion

The incidence rate of CMM among elderly individuals in the United States varies significantly across different genders, races, and geographic locations. Utah had the highest incidence of CMM in older adults from 2012 to 2016 (95% CI, 1.442–1.571). Both Hawaii and Utah show a high rate of increase in CMM incidence. In 2019, Utah had the highest incidence of distant melanoma among white women, with an incidence rate of 3.45 cases per 100,000.24 This high incidence aligns with broader trends in the United States, where melanoma incidence has been rising, particularly among older adults.25 The high prevalence in Hawaii and Utah may be related to lifestyle factors that increase Ultraviolet (UV) exposure, such as outdoor activities and tanning habits.8 Changes in clothing styles and recreational behaviors over recent decades have also contributed to increased UV exposure, particularly in sunny states such as Hawaii.26 A comparative analysis across different time periods reveals a notable upward trend in overall incidence rates in recent decades.

Utilizing Joinpoint regression to provide a detailed description and statistical analysis of temporal trends in CMM incidence rates among elderly individuals in the United States, this study uncovers a sustained upward trend in CMM incidence over the past three decades. Various factors may contribute to this trend, including prolonged exposure to ultraviolet radiation, indoor tanning, immunosuppression, the presence of moles (nevi), family history, and obesity.8 This trend is also partly driven by an aging population in industrialized countries, where older individuals are more susceptible to melanoma due to cumulative sun exposure over their lifetimes.12 A global study analyzing trends from 1990 to 2019 found that the age-standardized incidence rate of malignant skin melanoma increased in most countries, with a positive correlation between incidence rates and the Human Development Index.27 In the United States, the incidence of melanoma in the lower limbs and hips increased significantly from 2000 to 2019, particularly among those over 50 years old, highlighting a rising trend in older age groups.28 While the incidence of CMM in the elderly has risen rapidly, the rate of change has slowed since 2010. The inflection point in 2009 suggests that certain factors or interventions may have started impacting melanoma incidence trends after that year. Distinct trends in incidence rates were observed among different male age groups, with the 2009 inflection point, as seen in a melanoma epidemiology study in Hungary, signaling a potential shift influenced by various factors or interventions.29 The slowdown in malignant melanoma incidence among older adults around 2010 can be attributed to changes in diagnostic practices, healthcare utilization, and demographic shifts. These factors have influenced the detection and management of melanoma in the elderly, potentially stabilizing incidence rates. This suggests that the rise in melanoma incidence prior to 2010 may partly reflect overdiagnosis rather than a genuine increase in disease prevalence. During this period, healthcare utilization increased, including more frequent dermatology visits and skin biopsies for Medicare beneficiaries. This enhanced surveillance may have led to the detection of more early melanomas, many of which do not progress to invasive disease. The stabilization of incidence rates in older adults may indicate efforts to address overdiagnosis, as the detection of non-invasive melanomas has increased without a corresponding rise in mortality, suggesting that many detected cases may not require aggressive treatment.30

After adjusting for age, the incidence of CMM exhibited an increasing trend over the observation period. However, in some age groups, notably the 80–84 age group, the growth rate of incidence slowed during a specific period. Incidence rates in elderly females were lower than in elderly males, and overall, the rate of increase in incidence among elderly females was less pronounced than among males. Studies by Bellenghi et al.31 suggest that differences in incidence rates can be partially attributed to gender-related behaviors. Additionally, melanoma incidence in older men exceeds that of women, possibly due to lower rates of skin self-examination and fewer dermatologic visits among men.32 Furthermore, in the elderly population, melanoma is more frequently located in the head and neck area, with specific subtypes such as lentigo malignant melanoma being more common, along with a higher Breslow index, presence of ulceration, and increased mitotic rate compared to younger individuals.13 Recent findings indicate that biological variations, including genetic and epigenetic factors, play a crucial role. In recent years, the rate of incidence growth has decelerated, potentially reflecting increased awareness of skin health, more stringent sun protection measures, or improved early detection.7

CMM remains a substantial health concern, and according to other research, the number of cases of cutaneous malignant melanoma in the elderly population is expected to rise.33 These findings underscore the continued importance of vigilance regarding CMM among the elderly and the necessity for prevention and early detection strategies. Age, time period, and birth cohort effects are all critical factors in comprehending the heightened incidence of CMM.

While this study provides valuable insights into the trends in CMM incidence among the elderly in the United States, several limitations must be acknowledged. First, the study relies on data that may be subject to reporting biases, particularly regarding the accuracy and completeness of melanoma diagnoses over time. Second, while Joinpoint analysis offers a robust method for identifying temporal trends, it does not account for potential confounding variables that might influence these trends, such as changes in public awareness, diagnostic technologies, or healthcare access. Third, the study does not differentiate between various histopathological subtypes of CMM, which could have different etiologies and prognoses, potentially leading to an oversimplification of the observed trends. Fourth, geographic variations in sun exposure, socioeconomic factors, and healthcare infrastructure across the United States may not be fully captured in the analysis, limiting the generalizability of the findings. Lastly, the observational nature of this study precludes the establishment of causal relationships between the identified trends and specific risk factors or interventions. Future research should address these limitations by incorporating more granular data, exploring the impact of specific interventions, and utilizing more sophisticated statistical techniques to account for potential confounders.

Conclusions

The incidence of CMM among the elderly population in the United States has shown a notable upward trend over the past three decades. This increase is influenced by a complex interplay of factors, including UV exposure, changes in healthcare practices, and demographic shifts. While the incidence rate continues to rise, particularly in certain geographic regions, there has been a recent deceleration in this trend, possibly due to increased awareness, early detection, and the potential impact of overdiagnosis. Despite this, CMM remains a significant health concern, especially among older adults, necessitating continued efforts in prevention, early diagnosis, and research into targeted interventions. Addressing the limitations identified in this study will be crucial for advancing our understanding of CMM trends and for developing more effective public health strategies to mitigate the burden of melanoma in the aging population.

Declarations

Acknowledgement

None.

Ethical statement

We signed the “Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Program Data-Use Agreement” in accordance with the requirements for using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) database. Therefore, we obtained the data with permission and were able to download it from the SEER database. This article does not fall within the scope of ethics committee review and, according to current ethical standards, does not require ethical approval. The data used in this paper were collected from public databases and are considered public resources.

Data sharing statement

All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files. All related information was derived from the SEER program using SEER*Stat version 8.4.1 (https://seer.cancer.gov/).

Funding

This work was supported by the Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Traditional Chinese Medicine Informatization (2021B1212040007).

Conflict of interest

Jun Lyu is an editorial board member of Cancer Screening and Prevention. The authors report no other competing interests.

Authors’ contributions

Conception and design (RFD), data collection and assembly (RFD, JYG), data analysis and interpretation, manuscript writing, and final approval of manuscript (RFD, JYG, JL, JLY). All authors have approved the final version and publication of the manuscript.

References

  1. Simanjuntak LT. Genetic Predisposition to Malignant Melanoma in the Population of Batam, Indonesia: A Case-Control Study. Scientific Journal of Dermatology and Venereology 2023;1(2):87-99 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  2. Seetharamu N, Ott PA, Pavlick AC. Mucosal melanomas: a case-based review of the literature. Oncologist 2010;15(7):772-781 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  3. Cummins DL, Cummins JM, Pantle H, Silverman MA, Leonard AL, Chanmugam A. Cutaneous malignant melanoma. Mayo Clin Proc 2006;81(4):500-507 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  4. Mun GH. Management of malignant melanoma. Arch Plast Surg 2012;39(5):565-574 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  5. Conte S, Ghazawi FM, Le M, Nedjar H, Alakel A, Lagacé F, et al. Population-Based Study Detailing Cutaneous Melanoma Incidence and Mortality Trends in Canada. Front Med (Lausanne) 2022;9:830254 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  6. Rigel DS. Epidemiology of melanoma. Semin Cutan Med Surg 2010;29(4):204-209 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  7. Markovic SN, Erickson LA, Rao RD, Weenig RH, Pockaj BA, Bardia A, et al. Malignant melanoma in the 21st century, part 1: epidemiology, risk factors, screening, prevention, and diagnosis. Mayo Clin Proc 2007;82(3):364-380 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  8. Saginala K, Barsouk A, Aluru JS, Rawla P, Barsouk A. Epidemiology of Melanoma. Med Sci (Basel) 2021;9(4):63 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  9. Kye YL, Xie C, Riva H, Samaniego M, Ramirez F, Fernandez L, et al. Abstract C075: Increasing incidence of cutaneous malignant melanoma in the Hispanic population of the United States from 2006-2017. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2022;31(1 Suppl):C075 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  10. Hanson HA, Smith KR, Stroup AM, Harrell CJ. An age-period-cohort analysis of cancer incidence among the oldest old, Utah 1973-2002. Popul Stud (Camb) 2015;69(1):7-22 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  11. Iglesias-Pena N, Paradela S, Tejera-Vaquerizo A, Boada A, Fonseca E. Cutaneous Melanoma in the Elderly: Review of a Growing Problem. Actas Dermosifiliogr (Engl Ed) 2019;110(6):434-447 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  12. Buja A, Rugge M, Trevisiol C, Zanovello A, Brazzale AR, Zorzi M, et al. Cutaneous melanoma in older patients. BMC Geriatr 2024;24(1):232 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  13. Segura S, Podlipnik S, Boada A, Martí RM, Sabat M, Yélamos O, et al. Melanoma-specific survival is worse in the elderly: a multicentric cohort study. Melanoma Res 2023;33(6):532-538 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  14. Purim KSM, Bonetti JPC, Silva JYF, Marques LB, Pinto MCS, Ribeiro LC. Characteristics of melanoma in the elderly. Rev Col Bras Cir 2020;47:e20202441 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  15. Che WQ, Li YJ, Tsang CK, Wang YJ, Chen Z, Wang XY, et al. How to use the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) data: research design and methodology. Mil Med Res 2023;10(1):50 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  16. Xu Y, Zheng X, Li Y, Ye X, Cheng H, Wang H, et al. Exploring patient medication adherence and data mining methods in clinical big data: A contemporary review. J Evid Based Med 2023;16(3):342-375 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  17. Akkoc N, Akar S. Standardization is essential for a more rigorous comparison of rates: comment on the reply by Gilgil, Kacar, and Tuncer. Clin Rheumatol 2007;26(1):136 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  18. National Cancer Institute. Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program. SEER*Stat Database: Incidence - SEER Research Data, 1975-2016. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute, DCCPS, Surveillance Research Program; April 2019. Available from: https://seer.cancer.gov/data/seerstat/nov2018. Accessed September 27, 2023 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  19. Howlader N, Noone AM, Krapcho M, Miller D, Bishop K, Kosary CL, et al. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 1975-2016. Bethesda (MD): National Cancer Institute; 2019 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  20. Tiwari RC, Clegg LX, Zou Z. Efficient interval estimation for age-adjusted cancer rates. Stat Methods Med Res 2006;15(6):547-569 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  21. Walters KA, Li Y, Tiwari RC, Zou Z. A Weighted-Least-Squares Estimation Approach to Comparing Trends in Age-Adjusted Cancer Rates Across Overlapping Regions. J Data Sci 2011;8(4):631-644 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  22. Kim HJ, Fay MP, Yu B, Barrett MJ, Feuer EJ. Comparability of segmented line regression models. Biometrics 2004;60(4):1005-1014 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  23. Rosenberg PS, Check DP, Anderson WF. A web tool for age-period-cohort analysis of cancer incidence and mortality rates. Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2014;23(11):2296-2302 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  24. Johnson CR, Liao CI, Obiakor B, Jiang RL, Kapp DS, Chan JK. Distant stage melanoma incidence among US adult women. J Clin Oncol 2023;41(16 Suppl):e21555-e21555 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  25. Shrivastava T, Ghimire P, Lingamaneni P, Ahuja K, Batra K. Long-term time trends in incidence, survival, and mortality of malignant melanoma in the United States. J Clin Oncol 2022;41(16 Suppl):e21599-e21599 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  26. Islami F, Sauer AG, Miller KD, Fedewa SA, Minihan AK, Geller AC, et al. Cutaneous melanomas attributable to ultraviolet radiation exposure by state. Int J Cancer 2020;147(5):1385-1390 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  27. Yuan J, Li X, Yu S. Global, Regional, and National Incidence Trend Analysis of Malignant Skin Melanoma Between 1990 and 2019, and Projections Until 2034. Cancer Control 2024;31:10732748241227340 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  28. Walz SN, Martineau J, Scampa M, Madduri S, Kalbermatten DF, Oranges CM. Incidence Trends of Melanoma of the Lower Limbs and Hips in the United States: A Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Analysis 2000-2019. Anticancer Res 2024;44(1):239-247 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  29. Liszkay G, Kiss Z, Gyulai R, Oláh J, Holló P, Emri G, et al. Changing Trends in Melanoma Incidence and Decreasing Melanoma Mortality in Hungary Between 2011 and 2019: A Nationwide Epidemiological Study. Front Oncol 2020;10:612459 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  30. Znaor A. Melanoma burden, healthcare utilization and the potential for overdiagnosis in the elderly U.S. population. Br J Dermatol 2017;177(3):625 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  31. Bellenghi M, Puglisi R, Pontecorvi G, De Feo A, Carè A, Mattia G. Sex and Gender Disparities in Melanoma. Cancers (Basel) 2020;12(7):1819 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  32. Raimondi S, Suppa M, Gandini S. Melanoma Epidemiology and Sun Exposure. Acta Derm Venereol 2020;100(11):adv00136 View Article PubMed/NCBI
  33. Tsai S, Balch C, Lange J. Epidemiology and treatment of melanoma in elderly patients. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 2010;7(3):148-152 View Article PubMed/NCBI