Validation of a 40-gene expression profile test to predict metastatic risk in localized high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Current staging systems for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) have limited positive predictive value for identifying patients who will experience metastasis.

OBJECTIVE

To develop and validate a gene expression profile (GEP) test for predicting risk for metastasis in localized, high-risk cSCC with the goal of improving risk-directed patient management.

METHODS

Archival formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded primary cSCC tissue and clinicopathologic data (n = 586) were collected from 23 independent centers in a prospectively designed study. A GEP signature was developed using a discovery cohort (n = 202) and validated in a separate, nonoverlapping, independent cohort (n = 324).

RESULTS

A prognostic 40-GEP test was developed and validated, stratifying patients with high-risk cSCC into classes based on metastasis risk: class 1 (low risk), class 2A (high risk), and class 2B (highest risk). For the validation cohort, 3-year metastasis-free survival rates were 91.4%, 80.6%, and 44.0%, respectively. A positive predictive value of 60% was achieved for the highest-risk group (class 2B), an improvement over staging systems, and negative predictive value, sensitivity, and specificity were comparable to staging systems.

LIMITATIONS

Potential understaging of cases could affect metastasis rate accuracy.

CONCLUSION

The 40-GEP test is an independent predictor of metastatic risk that can complement current staging systems for patients with high-risk cSCC.

Molecular risk prediction in cutaneous melanoma: A meta-analysis of the 31-gene expression profile prognostic test in 1,479 patients

BACKGROUND

Multiple studies have reported on the accuracy of the prognostic 31-gene expression profile test for cutaneous melanoma. Consistency of the test results across studies has not been systematically evaluated.

OBJECTIVE

To assess the robustness of the prognostic value of the 31-gene expression profile.

METHODS

Raw data were obtained from studies identified from systematic review. A meta-analysis was performed to determine overall effect of the 31-gene expression profile. Clinical outcome metrics for the 31-gene expression profile were compared with American Joint Committee on Cancer staging.

RESULTS

Three studies met inclusion criteria; data from a novel cohort of 211 patients were included (n = 1,479). Five-year recurrence-free and distant metastasis-free survival rates were 91.4% and 94.1% for Class 1A patients and 43.6% and 55.5% for Class 2B patients (P < .0001). Meta-analysis results showed that Class 2 was significantly associated with recurrence (hazard ratio 2.90; P < .0001) and distant metastasis (hazard ratio 2.75; P < .0001). The 31-gene expression profile identified American Joint Committee on Cancer stage I to III patient subsets with high likelihood for recurrence and distant metastasis. Sensitivity was 76% (95% confidence interval 71%-80%) and 76% (95% confidence interval 70%-82%) for each end point, respectively. When 31-gene expression profile and sentinel lymph node biopsy results were considered together, sensitivity and negative predictive value for distant metastasis-free survival were both improved.

CONCLUSION

The 31-gene expression profile test consistently and accurately identifies melanoma patients at increased risk of metastasis, is independent of other clinicopathologic covariates, and augments current risk stratification by reclassifying patients for heightened surveillance who were previously designated as being at low risk.

Three-year survival outcomes in a prospective cohort evaluating a prognostic 31-gene expression profile (31-GEP) test for cutaneous melanoma (CM)

9519

Background: A 31-GEP test is a validated prognostic tool for predicting the risk of metastasis in CM, classifying patients (pts) as Class 1 (low risk) or Class 2 (high risk). Here we report updated survival analysis from two clinical registry studies (NCT02355574/NCT02355587) designed to prospectively evaluate outcomes in patients for whom the GEP test was part of their clinical care. Methods: Eleven US dermatologic and surgical centers participated using IRB-approved protocols. Participants were CM pts ≥16 years old who had successful 31-GEP test results. Recurrence-free (RFS), distant metastasis-free (DMFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis. Results: At data censoring, 340 pts were accrued who had completed at least one follow-up visit. Median age was 58 years (range 18-87), 53.5% were male, median Breslow thickness was 1.2mm (range 0.2-12mm), 18.2% (62/340) were ulcerated, and 11.2% (38/340) had a positive sentinel lymph node (SLN). Median follow-up was 3.2 years for pts without an event. Six percent (16/265) of Class 1 pts had a recurrence compared to 33% (25/75) of Class 2 pts (p < 0.001). Three-year RFS was 96%, 91%, 80%, and 62% for Class 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B, respectively (p < 0.001). Three-year DMFS was 97%, 93%, 84%, and 80% for Class 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B, respectively (p < 0.001). Three-year OS was 98%, 90%, 96%, and 74% for Class 1A, 1B, 2A, and 2B, respectively (p < 0.001). Class 2 was an independent predictor of RFS and OS in multivariate analysis (respective HRs: 2.28 and 3.70, p < 0.05). Conclusions: Consistent with results from previous studies, this analysis demonstrates that the GEP test complements conventional staging and improves the ability to identify high-risk CM pts. These results support use of the test for guiding decisions related to follow-up, surveillance, and treatment in CM pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02355574/NCT02355587.

Guidance of sentinel lymph node biopsy decisions in patients with T1–T2 melanoma using gene expression profiling

Aim: Can gene expression profiling be used to identify patients with T1–T2 melanoma at low risk for sentinel lymph node (SLN) positivity? Patients & methods: Bioinformatics modeling determined a population in which a 31-gene expression profile test predicted <5% SLN positivity. Multicenter, prospectively-tested (n = 1421) and retrospective (n = 690) cohorts were used for validation and outcomes, respectively. Results: Patients 55–64 years and ≥65 years with a class 1A (low-risk) profile had SLN positivity rates of 4.9% and 1.6%. Class 2B (high-risk) patients had SLN positivity rates of 30.8% and 11.9%. Melanoma-specific survival was 99.3% for patients ≥55 years with class 1A, T1–T2 tumors and 55.0% for class 2B, SLN-positive, T1–T2 tumors. Conclusion: The 31-gene expression profile test identifies patients who could potentially avoid SLN biopsy.

Performance of a 31-gene expression profile test in cutaneous melanomas of the head and neck

Background

We report the performance of a gene expression profile test to classify the recurrence risk of cutaneous melanoma tumors of the head and neck as low‐risk Class 1 or high‐risk Class 2.

Methods

Of note, 157 primary head and neck cutaneous melanoma tumors were identified. Survival analyses were performed using Kaplan‐Meier and Cox methods.

Results

Gene expression profile class and node status stratified tumors into significantly different 5‐year survival groups by Kaplan‐Meier method (P < .0001 for all end points), and both were independent predictors of recurrence in multivariate analysis. Overall, 74% of distant metastases and 88% of melanoma‐specific deaths had Class 2 risk.

Conclusion

The gene expression profile test identifies cases at increased risk for metastasis and death independent of a clinically or pathologically negative nodal status, suggesting that incorporation of this molecular tool could improve clinical management of patients with head and neck cutaneous melanoma, especially in those with a negative sentinel lymph node biopsy.

Identification of risk in cutaneous melanoma patients: Prognostic and predictive markers

New therapeutic modalities for melanoma promise benefit in selected individuals. Efficacy appears greater in patients with lower tumor burden, suggesting an important role for risk-stratified surveillance. Robust predictive markers might permit optimization of agent to patient, while low-risk prognostic markers might guide more conservative management. This review evaluates protein, gene, and multiplexed marker panels that may contribute to better risk assessment and improved management of patients with cutaneous melanoma.

Identification of patients at risk of metastasis using a prognostic 31-gene expression profile in subpopulations of melanoma patients with favorable outcomes by standard criteria

BACKGROUND

A substantial number of patients who relapse and die from cutaneous melanoma (CM) are categorized as being at low risk by traditional staging factors. The 31-gene expression profile (31-GEP) test independently stratifies metastatic risk of patients with CM as low (Class 1, with 1A indicating lowest risk) or high (Class 2,with 2B indicating highest risk).

OBJECTIVE

To assess risk prediction by the 31-GEP test within 3 low-risk (according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer) populations of patients with CM: those who are sentinel lymph node (SLN) negative, those with stage I to IIA tumors, and those with thin (≤1 mm [T1]) tumors.

METHODS

A total of 3 previous validation studies provided a nonoverlapping cohort of 690 patients with 31-GEP results, staging information, and survival outcomes. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis were performed.

RESULTS

The results included the identification of 70% of SLN-negative patients who experienced metastasis as Class 2, the discovery of reduced recurrence-free survival for patients with thin tumors and Class 2B biology compared with that of those with Class 1A biology (P < .0001); and determination of the 31-GEP test as an independent predictor of risk compared with traditional staging factors in patients with stage I to IIA tumors.

LIMITATIONS

Diagnoses spanned multiple versions of pathologic staging criteria.

CONCLUSIONS

The 31-GEP test identifies high-risk patients who are likely to experience recurrence or die of melanoma within low-risk groups of subpopulations of patients with CM who have SLN-negative disease, stage I to IIA tumors, and thin tumors.

Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Impact Evaluation of a 31-Gene Expression Profile Test for Management of Melanoma Patients

Objective: A 31-gene expression profile (GEP) test that has been clinically validated identifies melanoma patients with low (Class 1) or high (Class 2) risk of metastasis based on primary tumor biology.  This study aimed to prospectively evaluate the test impact on clinical management of melanoma patients.Methods:  Physicians at 16 dermatology, surgical or medical oncology centers examined patients to assess clinical features of the primary melanoma.  Recommendations for clinical follow-up and surveillance were collected.  Following consent of the patient and performance of the GEP test, recommendations for management were again collected, and pre- and post-test recommendations were assessed to determine changes in management resulting from the addition of GEP testing to traditional clinicopathologic risk factors.   Results:  Post-test management plans changed for 49% (122 of 247) of cases in the study when compared to pre-test plans. Thirty-six percent (66 of 181) of Class 1 cases had a management change, compared to 85% (56 of 66) of Class 2 cases.  GEP class was a significant factor for change in care during the study (p<0.001), with Class 1 accounting for 91% (39 of 43) of cases with decreased management intensity, and Class 2 accounting for 72% (49 of 68) of cases with increases.Conclusions: The reported study show that the 31-gene GEP test improves net health outcomes in the management of cutaneous melanoma.  Physicians used test results to guide risk-appropriate changes that match the biological risk of the tumor, including directing more frequent and intense surveillance to high-risk, Class 2 patients.

Analytic validity of DecisionDx-Melanoma, a gene expression profile test for determining metastatic risk in melanoma patients

BACKGROUND

The DecisionDx-Melanoma test provides prognostic information for patients with cutaneous melanoma (CM). Using formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded primary tumor tissue, the RT-PCR-based test classifies patients into a low- (Class 1) or high-risk (Class 2) category for recurrence based on expression of 31 genes. The current study was designed to assess the analytical validity of this test.

METHODS

Inter-assay, inter-instrument, and inter-operator studies were performed to evaluate reliability of the 31-gene expression test results, sample stability and reagent stability. From March 2013 through June 2016, the gene expression test was performed on 8244 CM tumors. De-identified data from Pathology Reports were used to assess technical success.

RESULTS

Robust sample and reagent stability was observed. Inter-assay concordance on 168 specimens run on 2 consecutive days was 99% and matched probability scores were significantly correlated (R² = 0.96). Inter-instrument concordance was 95%, and probability scores had a correlation R² of 0.99 (p < 0.001). From 8244 CM specimens submitted since 2013, 85% (7023) fulfilled pre-specified tumor content parameters. In these samples with sufficient tumor requirements, the technical success of the test was 98%.

CONCLUSION

DecisionDx-Melanoma is a robust gene expression profile test that demonstrates strong reproducibility between experiments and has high technical reliability on clinical samples.

Performance of a prognostic 31-gene expression profile in an independent cohort of 523 cutaneous melanoma patients

BACKGROUND

The heterogeneous behavior of patients with melanoma makes prognostication challenging. To address this, a gene expression profile (GEP) test to predict metastatic risk was previously developed. This study evaluates the GEP's prognostic accuracy in an independent cohort of cutaneous melanoma patients.

METHODS

This multi-center study analyzed primary melanoma tumors from 523 patients, using the GEP to classify patients as Class 1 (low risk) and Class 2 (high risk). Molecular classification was correlated to clinical outcome and assessed along with AJCC v7 staging criteria. Primary endpoints were recurrence-free (RFS) and distant metastasis-free (DMFS) survival.

RESULTS

The 5-year RFS rates for Class 1 and Class 2 were 88% and 52%, respectively, and DMFS rates were 93% versus 60%, respectively (P < 0.001). The GEP was a significant predictor of RFS and DMFS in univariate analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 5.4 and 6.6, respectively, P < 0.001 for each), along with Breslow thickness, ulceration, mitotic rate, and sentinel lymph node (SLN) status (P < 0.001 for each). GEP, tumor thickness and SLN status were significant predictors of RFS and DMFS in a multivariate model that also included ulceration and mitotic rate (RFS HR = 2.1, 1.2, and 2.5, respectively, P < 0.001 for each; and DMFS HR = 2.7, 1.3 and 3.0, respectively, P < 0.01 for each).

CONCLUSIONS

The GEP test is an objective predictor of metastatic risk and provides additional independent prognostic information to traditional staging to help estimate an individual's risk for recurrence. The assay identified 70% of stage I and II patients who ultimately developed distant metastasis. Its role in consideration of patients for adjuvant therapy should be examined prospectively.

Impact of Gene Expression Profiling on Decision-Making in Clinically Node Negative Melanoma Patients after Surgical Staging

INTRODUCTION

The surgeon's role in the follow-up of pathologic stage I and II melanoma patients has traditionally been minimal. Melanoma genetic expression profile (GEP) testing provides binary risk assessment (Class 1-low risk, Class 2-high risk), which can assist in predicting metastasis and formulating appropriate follow up. We sought to determine the impact of GEP results on the management of clinically node negative cutaneous melanoma patients staged with sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB).

METHODS

A retrospective review of prospectively gathered data consisting of patients seen from September 2015 - August 2016 was performed to determine whether GEP class influenced follow-up recommendations. Patients were stratified into four groups based on recommended follow-up plan: Dermatology alone, Surgical Oncology, Surgical Oncology with recommendation for adjuvant clinical trial, or Medical and Surgical Oncology.

RESULTS

Of ninety-one patients, 38 were pathologically stage I, 42 stage II, 10 stage III, and 1 stage IV. Combining all stages, GEP Class 1 patients were more likely to be followed by Dermatology alone and less like to be followed by Surgical Oncology with recommendation for adjuvant trial compared to Class 2 patients (P less than 0.001). Among stage 1 patients, Class 1 were more likely to follow up with Dermatology alone compared to Class 2 patients (82 vs. 0%; P less than 0.001). Among stage II patients, GEP Class 1 were more likely to follow up with Dermatology alone (21 vs 0%) and more Class 2 patients followed up with surgery and recommendations for adjuvant trial (36 vs 64%; P less than 0.05). There was no difference in follow up for stage III patients based on the GEP results (P=0.76).

CONCLUSION

GEP results were significantly associated with the management of stage I-II melanoma patients after staging with SLNB. For node negative patients, Class 2 results led to more aggressive follow up and management. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(2):196-199.

Interim analysis of survival in a prospective, multi-center registry cohort of cutaneous melanoma tested with a prognostic 31-gene expression profile test

BACKGROUND

A 31-gene expression profile (GEP) test that provides risk classification of cutaneous melanoma (CM) patients has been validated in several retrospective studies. The objective of the reported study was a prospective evaluation of the GEP performance in patients enrolled in two clinical registries.

METHODS

Three-hundred twenty two CM patients enrolled in the EXPAND (NCT02355587) and INTEGRATE (NCT02355574) registries met the criteria of age ≥ 16 years, successful GEP result and ≥1 follow-up visit for inclusion in this interim analysis. Primary endpoints were recurrence-free (RFS), distant metastasis-free (DMFS), and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Median follow-up was 1.5 years for event-free patients. Median age for subjects was 58 years (range 18-87) and median Breslow thickness was 1.2 mm (range 0.2-12.0). Eighty-eight percent (282/322) of cases had stage I/II disease and 74% (237/322) had a SLN biopsy. Seventy-seven percent (248/322) had class 1 molecular profiles. 1.5-year RFS, DMFS, and OS rates were 97 vs. 77%, 99 vs. 89%, and 99 vs. 92% for class 1 vs. class 2, respectively (p < 0.0001 for each). Multivariate Cox regression showed Breslow thickness, mitotic rate, and GEP class to significantly predict recurrence (p < 0.01), while tumor thickness was the only significant predictor of distant metastasis and overall survival in this interim analysis.

CONCLUSIONS

Interim analysis of patient outcomes from a combined prospective cohort supports the 31-gene GEP's ability to stratify early-stage CM patients into two groups with significantly different metastatic risk. RFS outcomes in this real-world cohort are consistent with previously published analyses with retrospective specimens. GEP testing complements current clinicopathologic features and increases identification of high-risk patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02355574  and NCT02355587.

Gene expression profiling in uveal melanoma: technical reliability and correlation of molecular class with pathologic characteristics

BACKGROUND

A 15-gene expression profile test has been clinically validated and is widely utilized in newly diagnosed uveal melanoma (UM) patients to assess metastatic potential of the tumor. As most patients are treated with eye-sparing radiotherapy, there is limited tumor tissue available for testing, and technical reliability and success of prognostic testing are critical. This study assessed the analytical performance of the 15-gene expression test for UM and the correlation of molecular class with pathologic characteristics.

METHODS

Inter-assay, intra-assay, inter-instrument/operator, and inter-site experiments were conducted, and concordance of the 15-gene expression profile test results and associated discriminant scores for matched tumor samples were evaluated. Technical success was determined from de-identified clinical reports from January 2010 - May 2016. Pathologic characteristics of enucleated tumors were correlated with molecular class results.

RESULTS

Inter-assay concordance on 16 samples run on 3 consecutive days was 100%, and matched discriminant scores were strongly correlated (R² = 0.9944). Inter-assay concordance of 46 samples assayed within a one year period was 100%, with an R² value of 0.9747 for the discriminant scores. Intra-assay concordance of 12 samples run concurrently in duplicates was 100%; discriminant score correlation yielded an R² of 0.9934. Concordance between two sites assessing the same tumors was 100% with an R² of 0.9818 between discriminant scores. Inter-operator/instrument concordance was 96% for Class 1/2 calls and 90% for Class 1A/1B calls, and the discriminant scores had a correlation R² of 0.9636. Technical success was 96.3% on 5516 samples tested since 2010. Increased largest basal diameter and thickness were significantly associated with Class 1B and Class 2 vs. Class 1A signatures.

CONCLUSIONS

These results show that the 15-gene expression profile test for UM has robust, reproducible performance characteristics. The technical success rate during clinical testing remains as high as first reported during validation. As molecular testing becomes more prevalent for supporting precision medicine efforts, high technical success and reliability are key characteristics when testing such limited and precious samples. The performance of the 15-gene expression profile test in this study should provide confidence to physicians who use the test's molecular classification to inform patient management decisions.

Disseminated peripheral neuroblastoma in a Rhodesian Ridgeback dog

CASE REPORT

A 4-year-old neutered male Rhodesian Ridgeback dog with right-sided Horner's syndrome, bilateral laryngeal paralysis, neck pain and bilateral hindlimb ataxia was euthanased following deterioration of its neurological status. Necropsy examination revealed an off-white retropharyngeal neoplastic mass (100 × 30 × 30 mm) attached to the base of the skull on the right side and macroscopic nodular metastases in the spleen and three vertebral bodies (C6, C7 and T6), including a nodule attached to the dura at C7. Histological evidence of neuroblastic tumour was detected in these macroscopic lesions, a regional lymph node, bone marrow of a femur and all 15 vertebral bodies (C1-T8) examined, including the three with macroscopic metastases, and in the lumens of small blood vessels in the lungs and liver. Ganglion cell differentiation was detected only in the primary retropharyngeal mass, one splenic nodule and the C7 dural nodule. Neoplastic cells were immunoreactive to neurofilament protein (ganglion cells only), vimentin and synaptophysin, and were negative for S100 protein, GFAP, CD3 and Pax5.

CONCLUSION

The diagnosis was disseminated peripheral neuroblastoma, differentiating subtype (International Neuroblastoma Pathology Classification), with likely primary involvement of the right cranial cervical ganglion. This appears to be the first report of neuroblastoma in a dog with widespread occult haematogenous metastasis to bone marrow.

Identification of high-risk cutaneous melanoma tumors is improved when combining the online American Joint Committee on Cancer Individualized Melanoma Patient Outcome Prediction Tool with a 31-gene expression profile-based classification

BACKGROUND

A significant proportion of patients with American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC)-defined early-stage cutaneous melanoma have disease recurrence and die. A 31-gene expression profile (GEP) that accurately assesses metastatic risk associated with primary cutaneous melanomas has been described.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to compare accuracy of the GEP in combination with risk determined using the web-based AJCC Individualized Melanoma Patient Outcome Prediction Tool.

METHODS

GEP results from 205 stage I/II cutaneous melanomas with sufficient clinical data for prognostication using the AJCC tool were classified as low (class 1) or high (class 2) risk. Two 5-year overall survival cutoffs (AJCC 79% and 68%), reflecting survival for patients with stage IIA or IIB disease, respectively, were assigned for binary AJCC risk.

RESULTS

Cox univariate analysis revealed significant risk classification of distant metastasis-free and overall survival (hazard ratio range 3.2-9.4, P < .001) for both tools. In all, 43 (21%) cases had discordant GEP and AJCC classification (using 79% cutoff). Eleven of 13 (85%) deaths in that group were predicted as high risk by GEP but low risk by AJCC.

LIMITATIONS

Specimens reflect tertiary care center referrals; more effective therapies have been approved for clinical use after accrual.

CONCLUSIONS

The GEP provides valuable prognostic information and improves identification of high-risk melanomas when used together with the AJCC online prediction tool.

Validation of a Gene Expression Test for Mesothelioma Prognosis in Formalin-Fixed Paraffin-Embedded Tissues

A molecular test performed using fresh-frozen tissue was proposed for use in the prognosis of patients with pleural mesothelioma. The accuracy of the test and its properties was assessed under Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments-approved guidelines using FFPE tissue from an independent multicenter patient cohort. Concordance studies were performed using matched frozen and FFPE mesothelioma samples. The prognostic value of the test was evaluated in an independent validation cohort of 73 mesothelioma patients who underwent surgical resection. FFPE-based classification demonstrated overall high concordance (83%) with the matched frozen specimens, on removal of cases with low confidence scores, showing sensitivity and specificity in predicting type B classification (poor outcome) of 43% and 98%, respectively. Concordance between research and clinical methods increased to 87% on removal of low confidence cases. Median survival times in the validation cohort were 18 and 7 months in type A and type B cases, respectively (P = 0.002). Multivariate classification adding pathologic staging information to the gene expression score resulted in significant stratification of risk groups. The median survival times were 52 and 14 months in the low-risk (class 1) and intermediate-risk (class 2) groups, respectively. The prognostic molecular test for mesothelioma can be performed on FFPE tissues to predict survival, and can provide an orthogonal tool, in combination with established pathologic parameters, for risk evaluation.

Atypical scrapie in Australia

BACKGROUND

Since its initial detection in Norway in 1998, atypical scrapie ('atypical/Nor98 scrapie') has been reported in sheep in the majority of European countries (including in regions free of classical scrapie) and in the Falkland Islands, the USA, Canada, New Zealand and Australia.

CASE SERIES

The diagnosis in Australia of atypical scrapie in four Merino and one Merino-cross sheep showing clinical signs of neurological disease was based on the detection of grey matter neuropil vacuolation (spongiform change) in the brain (particularly in the molecular layer of the cerebellar cortex) and associated abnormal prion protein (PrP^Sc ) deposition in both grey and white matter. Changes were minimal in the caudal brainstem, the predilection site for lesions of classical scrapie.

CONCLUSION

The distinctive lesion profile of atypical scrapie in these five sheep highlights the diagnostic importance of routine histological evaluation of the cerebellum for evidence of neuropil vacuolation and associated PrP^Sc deposition in adult sheep with suspected neurological disease.

Clinical impact of a 31-gene expression profile test for cutaneous melanoma in 156 prospectively and consecutively tested patients

OBJECTIVE

DecisionDx-Melanoma * is a 31-gene expression profile test that predicts the risk of metastasis in patients with primary cutaneous melanoma (CM). This study was designed to ascertain clinical management changes determined by the test outcome, which classifies CM patients being at low (Class 1) or high (Class 2) risk for recurrence.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Medical charts were reviewed from 156 CM patients from six institutions (three dermatology and three surgical oncology practices) who were consecutively tested between May 2013 and December 2015. Clinical management data that were compiled and compared before and after receipt of the 31-gene expression test result included frequency of physical exams, frequency and modality of imaging, and referrals to surgical and medical oncologists.

RESULTS

Forty-two percent of patients were Stage I, 47% were Stage II and 8% were Stage III. Overall, 95 patients (61%) were Class 1 and 61 (39%) were Class 2. Documented changes in management were observed in 82 (53%) patients, with the majority of Class 2 patients (77%) undergoing management changes compared to 37% of Class 1 patients (p < 0.0001 by Fisher's exact test). The majority (77/82, 94%) of these changes were concordant with the risk indicated by the test result (p < 0.0001 by Fisher's exact test), with increased management intensity for Class 2 patients and reduced management intensity for Class 1 patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Molecular risk classification by gene expression profiling has clinical impact and influences physicians to direct clinical management of CM patients. The vast majority of the changes implemented after the receipt of test results were reflective of the low or high recurrence risk associated with the patient's molecular classification. Because follow-up data was not collected for this patient cohort, the study is limited for the assessment of the impact of gene expression profile based management changes on healthcare resource utilization and patient outcome.

Clinical Performance and Management Outcomes with the DecisionDx-UM Gene Expression Profile Test in a Prospective Multicenter Study

Uveal melanoma management is challenging due to its metastatic propensity. DecisionDx-UM is a prospectively validated molecular test that interrogates primary tumor biology to provide objective information about metastatic potential that can be used in determining appropriate patient care. To evaluate the continued clinical validity and utility of DecisionDx-UM, beginning March 2010, 70 patients were enrolled in a prospective, multicenter, IRB-approved study to document patient management differences and clinical outcomes associated with low-risk Class 1 and high-risk Class 2 results indicated by DecisionDx-UM testing. Thirty-seven patients in the prospective study were Class 1 and 33 were Class 2. Class 1 patients had 100% 3-year metastasis-free survival compared to 63% for Class 2 (log rank test p = 0.003) with 27.3 median follow-up months in this interim analysis. Class 2 patients received significantly higher-intensity monitoring and more oncology/clinical trial referrals compared to Class 1 patients (Fisher's exact test p = 2.1 × 10(-13) and p = 0.04, resp.). The results of this study provide additional, prospective evidence in an independent cohort of patients that Class 1 and Class 2 patients are managed according to the differential metastatic risk indicated by DecisionDx-UM. The trial is registered with Clinical Application of DecisionDx-UM Gene Expression Assay Results (NCT02376920).