Wendy Liu

Clinical outcome and pathological features associated with NRAS mutation in cutaneous melanoma

The effect of NRAS mutations on the pathological features and clinical outcomes in patients with cutaneous melanoma was compared with that of tumors containing BRAFV600E mutations and tumors wild type for both (WT). Clinical outcome data were obtained from a prospective cohort of 249 patients. Mutations involving NRAS and BRAFV600E were detected by PCR and were sequence verified. Cox proportional hazards regression was performed to relate NRAS and BRAF mutations to clinical outcome. Seventy‐five percentage of NRAS mutations occurred in tumors >1 mm thick (BRAFV600E 40%, WT 34%); 75% of NRAS mutations had >1 mitosis/mm2 (BRAFV600E 40%, WT 55%). When compared to WT, multivariate analysis of melanoma‐specific survival (MSS) identified NRAS mutations as an adverse prognostic factor [hazard ratio (HR) 2.96; P = 0.04] but not BRAFV600E mutations (HR 1.73; P = 0.23). NRAS mutations were associated with thicker tumors and higher rates of mitosis when compared to BRAFV600E and WT melanoma and independently of this, with shorter MSS.

Loss of CDKN2A expression is a frequent event in primary invasive melanoma and correlates with sensitivity to the CDK4/6 inhibitor PD0332991 in melanoma cell lines

We have investigated the potential for the p16‐cyclin D‐CDK4/6‐retinoblastoma protein pathway to be exploited as a therapeutic target in melanoma. In a cohort of 143 patients with primary invasive melanoma, we used fluorescence in situ hybridization to detect gene copy number variations (CNVs) in CDK4, CCND1, and CDKN2A and immunohistochemistry to determine protein expression. CNVs were common in melanoma, with gain of CDK4 or CCND1 in 37 and 18% of cases, respectively, and hemizygous or homozygous loss of CDKN2A in 56%. Three‐quarters of all patients demonstrated a CNV in at least one of the three genes. The combination of CCND1 gain with either a gain of CDK4 and/or loss of CDKN2A was associated with poorer melanoma‐specific survival. In 47 melanoma cell lines homozygous loss, methylation or mutation of CDKN2A gene or loss of protein (p16INK4A) predicted sensitivity to the CDK4/6 inhibitor PD0332991, while RB1 loss predicted resistance.

Mutations in KIT occur at low frequency in melanomas arising from anatomical sites associated with chronic and intermittent sun exposure

In melanoma, mutations in KIT are most frequent in acral and mucosal subtypes and rarely reported in cutaneous melanomas particularly those associated with intermittent UV exposure. Conversely melanomas arising within chronic sun damaged skin are considered to harbour KIT mutations at higher rates. To characterize the frequency of KIT mutations in a representative melanoma population, 261 patients from two Australian melanoma centres were prospectively screened for mutations in exons 11, 13 and 17 of the KIT gene. A total of 257 patients had cutaneous melanoma arising from non‐acral sites and four were acral melanomas. No mucosal or ocular melanomas were analysed. KIT mutations were identified in five tumours (2% of the entire cohort) including two acral melanomas. Two of the three non‐acral melanomas with KIT mutations were associated with markers of chronic sun damage as assessed by the degree of skin elastosis. In the remaining cohort, 43% had chronically sun damaged skin. This report confirms that within an Australian population, KIT mutations are infrequent in cutaneous melanomas associated with both intermittent and chronic sun exposed skin.

What features do patients notice that help to distinguish between benign pigmented lesions and melanomas?: the ABCD(E) rule versus the seven-point checklist.

The ABCD(E) rule and the seven-point checklist are diagnostic aids that have proven to be useful in the hands of physicians; however, little is known of their value to patients with respect to aiding self-detection. The objective of this study was to investigate features that patients notice when identifying melanomas and to explore how well these features correspond to the ABCD(E) rule and the seven-point checklist. A retrospective, modified, case–control study involving patient interviews was performed. All interviews were conducted through the private consulting rooms of a Melbourne dermatologist (JWK) and a Newcastle plastic surgeon (CH) prior to the result of pathology being known to the patients and the interviewers. Sixty-seven patients with benign pigmented skin lesions and 46 patients with melanomas were included. Using a logistic regression model, the change in size/new lesion and change in colour (major criteria, seven-point checklist) were most useful in differentiating between melanomas and benign pigmented lesions in the hands of patients [odds ratio (OR), 4.74; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.85–12.19; P=0.001; OR, 4.27; 95% CI, 1.62–11.26; P=0.003, respectively). The ABCD(E) rule failed to discriminate between melanoma and other benign pigmented skin lesions. It can be concluded that, of the patients’ observations, changes in size or colour were most important in distinguishing between benign pigmented lesions and melanomas. Such features therefore deserve emphasis in public education campaigns. Medical professionals should also remember to seek a history of change in assessing pigmented skin lesions.