Evaluation of a Gene Expression Profiling Assay in Primary Cutaneous Melanoma
- PMID: 33486642
- DOI: 10.1245/s10434-020-09563-7
Evaluation of a Gene Expression Profiling Assay in Primary Cutaneous Melanoma
Abstract
Background: A significant proportion of deaths from cutaneous melanoma occur among patients with an initial diagnosis of stage 1 or 2 disease. The Decision-Dx Melanoma (DDM) 31-gene assay attempts to stratify these patients by risk of recurrence. This study aimed to evaluate this assay in a large single-institution series.
Methods: A retrospective chart review of all patients who underwent surgery for melanoma at a large academic cancer center with DDM results was performed. Patient demographics, tumor pathologic characteristics, sentinel node status, gene expression profile (GEP) class, and recurrence-free survival (RFS) were reviewed. The primary outcomes were recurrence of melanoma and distant metastatic recurrence.
Results: Data from 361 patients were analyzed. The median follow-up period was 15 months. Sentinel node biopsy was performed for 75.9% (n = 274) of the patients, 53 (19.4%) of whom tested positive. Overall, 13.6% (n = 49) of the patients had recurrence, and 8% (n = 29) had distant metastatic recurrence. The 3- and 5-year RFS rates were respectively 85% and 75% for the class 1A group, 74% and 47% for the class 1B/class 2A group, and 54% and 45% for the class 2B group. Increased Breslow thickness, ulceration, mitoses, sentinel node biopsy positivity, and GEP class 2B status were significantly associated with RFS and distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) in the univariate analysis (all p < 0.05). In the multivariate analysis, only Breslow thickness and ulceration were associated with RFS (p < 0.003), and only Breslow thickness was associated with DMFS (p < 0.001).
Conclusion: Genetic profiling of cutaneous melanoma can assist in predicting recurrence and help determine the need for close surveillance. However, traditional pathologic factors remain the strongest independent predictors of recurrence risk.
Comment in
-
Post-Publication Discussion: In Reply.Ann Surg Oncol. 2022 Feb;29(2):818-819. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-11097-5. Epub 2021 Dec 1. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022. PMID: 34853939 No abstract available.
-
Post-Publication Discussion: Invitation for Reply.Ann Surg Oncol. 2022 Feb;29(2):820. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-11096-6. Epub 2021 Dec 1. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022. PMID: 34853940 No abstract available.
-
Genomic Expression Profiling in Melanoma and the Road to Clinical Practice.Ann Surg Oncol. 2022 Feb;29(2):764-766. doi: 10.1245/s10434-021-11099-3. Epub 2021 Dec 1. Ann Surg Oncol. 2022. PMID: 34853941 No abstract available.
References
-
- Siegel RL, Miller KD, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69:7–34. https://doi.org/10.3322/caac.21551 . - DOI - PubMed
-
- Berger AC, Davidson RS, Poitras JK, et al. Clinical impact of a 31-gene expression profile test for cutaneous melanoma in 156 prospectively and consecutively tested patients. Curr Med Res Opin. 2016;32:1599–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/03007995.2016.1192997 . - DOI - PubMed
-
- Balch CM, Gershenwald JE, Soong SJ, et al. Final version of 2009 AJCC melanoma staging and classification. J Clin Oncol. 2009;27:6199–206. https://doi.org/10.1200/jco.2009.23.4799 . - DOI - PubMed - PMC
-
- Whiteman DC, Baade PD, Olsen CM. More people die from thin melanomas (≤ 1 mm) than from thick melanomas (> 4 mm) in Queensland, Australia. J Invest Dermatol. 2015;135:1190–3. https://doi.org/10.1038/jid.2014.452 . - DOI - PubMed
-
- Shaikh WR, Dusza SW, Weinstock MA, Oliveria SA, Geller AC, Halpern AC. Melanoma thickness and survival trends in the United States, 1989–2009. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108:1–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/djv294 . - DOI
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical
