You are seeing this message because your Web browser does not support basic Web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.


ABOUT ARCHIVES
Advanced Search

Welcome   | My Account | E-mail Alerts | Access Rights | Sign In


  Vol. 125 No. 7, July 2007 TABLE OF CONTENTS
  Archives
  •  Online Features
  Clinical Trial Retrospective
 This Article
 •Full text
 •PDF
 • Reply to article
 •Send to a friend
 • Save in My Folder
 •Save to citation manager
 •Permissions
 Citing Articles
 •Citation map
 •Citing articles on HighWire
 •Citing articles on Web of Science (5)
 •Contact me when this article is cited
 Related Content
 •Related articles
 •Similar articles in this journal
 Topic Collections
 •Ocular/ Adnexal Tumors
 •Enucleation
 •Dermatology
 •Statistics and Research Methods
 •Melanoma
 •Alert me on articles by topic
 Social Bookmarking
  Add to CiteULike Add to Connotea Add to Del.icio.us Add to Digg Add to Reddit Add to Technorati Add to Twitter What's this?

Legacy of the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study

Bertil Damato, MD, PhD, FRCOphth

Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(7):966-968.

Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text and any section headings.

Zimmerman et al1 caused much consternation when in the 1970s they suggested that enucleation of eyes with uveal melanoma accelerated metastatic death by disseminating tumor cells into the general circulation. Their hypothesis was based on the peak in mortality in the second postoperative year. Around the same time, Manschot and van Strik2 declared that radiotherapy of uveal melanoma was unjustifiable because histology frequently demonstrated viable melanoma cells in irradiated eyes. Studies reporting no significant differences in survival between enucleation and radiotherapy were unconvincing because they were nonrandomized with inadequate patient numbers and short follow-up. The "Zimmerman-Manschot debate" stirred much controversy about the treatment of choroidal melanoma, unsettling both patients and ophthalmologists. For these reasons, it was entirely reasonable to undertake large, collaborative studies that would provide definitive answers on how survival and quality of life are influenced by enucleation, pre-enucleation radiotherapy, and brachytherapy.

The Collaborative . . . [Full Text of this Article]


AUTHOR INFORMATION
Author Affiliations: Ocular Oncology Service, Royal Liverpool University Hospital, Liverpool, England.



Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter     What's this?

RELATED ARTICLES

A Retrospective Look at Prospective Investigations
Simmons Lessell
Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(7):965.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  

The Investigators' Perspective on the Collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study
Stuart L. Fine and Barbara S. Hawkins
Arch Ophthalmol. 2007;125(7):968-971.
EXTRACT | FULL TEXT  


THIS ARTICLE HAS BEEN CITED BY OTHER ARTICLES

Translating Uveal Melanoma Cytogenetics Into Clinical Care
Damato and Coupland
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:423-429.
ABSTRACT | FULL TEXT  

Genomic Typing of Uveal Melanoma
Damato and Coupland
Arch Ophthalmol 2009;127:113-114.
FULL TEXT  

Choroidal melanoma endoresection, dandelions and allegory-based medicine
Damato
Br J Ophthalmol 2008;92:1013-1014.
FULL TEXT  





HOME | CURRENT ISSUE | PAST ISSUES | TOPIC COLLECTIONS | CME | SUBMIT | SUBSCRIBE | HELP
CONDITIONS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
 
© 2007 American Medical Association. All Rights Reserved.