Erika Richtig

The companies publishing predatory journals are an emerging problem in the area of scientific literature as they only seek to drain money from authors without providing any customer service for the authors or their readership. These predatory journals try to attract new submissions by aggressive email advertising and high acceptance rates. But in turn, they do not provide proper peer review, and therefore, the scientific quality of submitted articles is questionable. This is important because more and more people, including patients, are reading such journals and rely on the information they provide. Consequently, predatory journals are a serious threat to the integrity of medical science, and it is crucial for scientists, physicians and even patients to be aware of this problem. In this review, we briefly summarize the history of the open access movement, as well as the rise of and roles played by predatory journals. In conclusion, young and inexperienced authors publishing in a predatory journal must be aware of the damage of their reputation, of inadequate peer review processes and that unprofitable journals might get closed and all published articles in that journal might be lost.

PURPOSE Limited prospective data are available on sequential immunotherapy and BRAF/MEK inhibition for BRAFV600-mutant metastatic melanoma. METHODS SECOMBIT is a randomized, three-arm, noncomparative phase II trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02631447 ). Patients with untreated, metastatic BRAFV600-mutant melanoma from 37 sites in nine countries were randomly assigned to arm A (encorafenib [450 mg orally once daily] plus binimetinib [45 mg orally twice daily] until progressive disease [PD] -> ipilimumab plus nivolumab [ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks and nivolumab 1 mg/kg once every 3 weeks × four cycles -> nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks]), arm B [ipilimumab plus nivolumab until PD -> encorafenib plus binimetinib], or arm C (encorafenib plus binimetinib for 8 weeks -> ipilimumab plus nivolumab until PD -> encorafenib plus binimetinib). The primary end point was overall survival (OS) at 2 years. Secondary end points included total progression-free survival, 3-year OS, best overall response rate, duration of response, and biomarkers in the intent-to-treat population. Safety was analyzed throughout sequential treatment in all participants who received at least one dose of study medication. RESULTS A total of 209 patients were randomly assigned (69 in arm A, 71 in arm B, and 69 in arm C). At a median follow-up of 32.2 (interquartile range, 27.9-41.6) months, median OS was not reached in any arm and more than 30 patients were alive in all arms. Assuming a null hypothesis of median OS of ≤ 15 months, the OS end point was met for all arms. The 2-year and 3-year OS rates were 65% (95% CI, 54 to 76) and 54% (95% CI, 41 to 67) in arm A, 73% (95% CI, 62 to 84) and 62% (95% CI, 48 to 76) in arm B, and 69% (95% CI, 59 to 80) and 60% (95% CI, 58 to 72) in arm C. No new safety signals emerged. CONCLUSION Sequential immunotherapy and targeted therapy provide clinically meaningful survival benefits for patients with BRAFV600-mutant melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma and nonmelanoma skin cancer are the most frequent malignant tumors by far among whites. Currently, early diagnosis is the most efficient method for preventing a fatal outcome. In vivo confocal laser-scanning microscopy (CLSM) is a recently developed potential diagnostic tool. METHODS: One hundred seventeen melanocytic skin lesions and 45 nonmelanocytic skin lesions (90 benign nevi, 27 malignant melanomas, 15 basal cell carcinomas, and 30 seborrheic keratoses) were sampled consecutively and were examined using proprietary CLSM equipment. Stored images were rated by 4 independent observers. RESULTS: Differentiation between melanoma and all other lesions based solely on CLSM examination was achieved with a positive predictive value of 94.22%. Malignant lesions (melanoma and basal cell carcinoma) as a group were diagnosed with a positive predictive value of 96.34%. Assessment of distinct CLSM features showed a strong interobserver correlation (kappa >0.80 for 11 of 13 criteria). Classification and regression tree analysis yielded a 3-step algorithm based on only 3 criteria, facilitating a correct classification in 96.30% of melanomas, 98.89% of benign nevi, and 100% of basal cell carcinomas and seborrheic keratoses. CONCLUSIONS: In vivo CLSM examination appeared to be a promising method for the noninvasive assessment of melanoma and nonmelanoma skin tumors.

BACKGROUND: Based on the dermoscopic classification of acquired melanocytic naevi, six different dermoscopic types can be distinguished by morphology (globular, globular-reticular, globular-homogeneous, reticular, reticular-homogeneous, homogeneous) and by pigment distribution (uniform, central hyperpigmentation, central hypopigmentation, peripheral hyperpigmentation, peripheral hypopigmentation, multifocal hyper/hypopigmentation). It has been suggested that most individuals harbour one predominant dermoscopic type among their naevi. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate whether the age of the patient influences the predominant naevus pattern observed in individuals with multiple acquired melanocytic naevi. METHODS: Individuals were recruited from the pigmented skin lesion clinic in Graz between July 2000 and February 2001. Individuals with at least 10 melanocytic naevi were selected consecutively until a total of 10 individuals in each of five age groups was obtained. Age groups were: 0-15 years, 16-30 years, 31-45 years, 46-60 years and > 60 years. Digitized images of acquired melanocytic naevi, defined as benign melanocytic proliferations having a diameter of at least 5 mm with a macular component and which were not apparent within the first year of life, were evaluated by dermoscopic criteria. The associations of dermoscopic features as a function of patient age were analysed. We calculated absolute numbers and frequencies, given as percentages, as well as predominance of the dermoscopic types of naevi in the different age groups. RESULTS: Analysis of 1268 naevi revealed that the globular pattern predominated in the youngest age group. By contrast, the reticular and/or homogeneous patterns were increasingly exhibited in naevi from older individuals (older than 15 years). Uniform pigmentation was most common in melanocytic naevi in the youngest age group, while central hyperpigmentation was predominantly seen in the group of individuals aged 16-30 years. CONCLUSIONS: The predominance of dermoscopic types of melanocytic naevi varies according to the individual's age. Awareness of the age-related dermoscopic predominance of melanocytic naevi might allow more accurate recognition of dermoscopic patterns of melanocytic skin lesions that are unusual with respect to the individual's age. This observation may help in the early recognition of some 'banal'-appearing melanomas. Furthermore, the observations made in this study raise interesting questions regarding naevus evolution.