BRAF-V600 Mutation Heterogeneity in Primary and Metastatic Melanoma: A Study With Pyrosequencing and Immunohistochemistry

Genetic Concordance in Primary Cutaneous Melanoma and Matched Metastasis: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Studying primary melanoma and its corresponding metastasis has twofold benefits. Firstly, to better understand tumor biology, and secondly, to determine which sample should be examined in assessing drug targets. This study systematically analyzed all the literature on primary melanoma and its matched metastasis. Following PRISMA guidelines, we searched multiple medical databases for relevant publications from January 2000 to December 2022, assessed the quality of the primary-level studies using the QUIPS tool, and summarized the concordance rate of the most reported genes using the random-effects model. Finally, we evaluated the inter-study heterogeneity using the subgroup analysis. Thirty-one studies investigated the concordance of BRAF and NRAS in 1220 and 629 patients, respectively. The pooled concordance rate was 89.4% [95% CI: 84.5; 93.5] for BRAF and 97.8% [95% CI: 95.8; 99.4] for NRAS. When high-quality studies were considered, only BRAF mutation status consistency increased. Five studies reported the concordance status of c-KIT (93%, 44 patients) and TERT promoter (64%, 53 patients). Lastly, three studies analyzed the concordance of cancer genes involved in the signaling pathways, apoptosis, and proliferation, such as CDKN2A (25%, four patients), TP53 (44%, nine patients), and PIK3CA (20%, five patients). Our study found that the concordance of known drug targets (mainly BRAF) during melanoma progression is higher than in previous meta-analyses, likely due to advances in molecular techniques. Furthermore, significant heterogeneity exists in the genes involved in the melanoma genetic makeup; although our results are based on small patient samples, more research is necessary for validation.

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline Update

PURPOSE

To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of systemic therapy for melanoma.

METHODS

American Society of Clinical Oncology convened an Expert Panel and conducted an updated systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

The updated review identified 21 additional randomized trials.

UPDATED RECOMMENDATIONS

Neoadjuvant pembrolizumab was newly recommended for patients with resectable stage IIIB to IV cutaneous melanoma. For patients with resected cutaneous melanoma, adjuvant nivolumab or pembrolizumab was newly recommended for stage IIB-C disease and adjuvant nivolumab plus ipilimumab was added as a potential option for stage IV disease. For patients with unresectable or metastatic cutaneous melanoma, nivolumab plus relatlimab was added as a potential option regardless of BRAF mutation status and nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab was preferred over BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy. Talimogene laherparepvec is no longer recommended as an option for patients with BRAF wild-type disease who have progressed on anti-PD-1 therapy. Ipilimumab- and ipilimumab-containing regimens are no longer recommended for patients with BRAF-mutated disease after progression on other therapies.This full update incorporates the new recommendations for uveal melanoma published in the 2022 Rapid Recommendation Update.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/melanoma-guidelines.

From Samples to Germline and Somatic Sequence Variation: A Focus on Next-Generation Sequencing in Melanoma Research

Next-generation sequencing (NGS) applications have flourished in the last decade, permitting the identification of cancer driver genes and profoundly expanding the possibilities of genomic studies of cancer, including melanoma. Here we aimed to present a technical review across many of the methodological approaches brought by the use of NGS applications with a focus on assessing germline and somatic sequence variation. We provide cautionary notes and discuss key technical details involved in library preparation, the most common problems with the samples, and guidance to circumvent them. We also provide an overview of the sequence-based methods for cancer genomics, exposing the pros and cons of targeted sequencing vs. exome or whole-genome sequencing (WGS), the fundamentals of the most common commercial platforms, and a comparison of throughputs and key applications. Details of the steps and the main software involved in the bioinformatics processing of the sequencing results, from preprocessing to variant prioritization and filtering, are also provided in the context of the full spectrum of genetic variation (SNVs, indels, CNVs, structural variation, and gene fusions). Finally, we put the emphasis on selected bioinformatic pipelines behind (a) short-read WGS identification of small germline and somatic variants, (b) detection of gene fusions from transcriptomes, and (c) de novo assembly of genomes from long-read WGS data. Overall, we provide comprehensive guidance across the main methodological procedures involved in obtaining sequencing results for the most common short- and long-read NGS platforms, highlighting key applications in melanoma research.

BRAF Immunoexpression Can Be Intralesionally Heterogeneous but BRAF V600E Mutation Status Is Intralesionally Homogeneous and Interlesionally Concordant in Melanoma: A Study of 140 Lesions From 98 Patients

ABSTRACT

This study sought to confirm the homogeneity of BRAF V600E mutation status in melanoma. BRAF immunohistochemistry was performed on 102 lesions from 60 patients of melanoma with BRAF V600E mutation and 38 negative-control melanoma lesions from 38 patients, both of which were confirmed by real-time PCR or the MassARRAY System. In the positive-control lesions, 9 lesions from 7 patients with preceding BRAF-inhibitor therapy were included. Of the 102 BRAF-mutant lesions, 101 (99.0%) showed diffuse BRAF immunoexpression, but 39 (38.2%) of them showed various heterogeneous intensities. The heterogeneous intensity of immunostaining was due to necrosis (n = 10), minimal or clear cytoplasm (n = 5), tissue crush (n = 8), insufficient fixation (n = 24), or technical error (n = 4). Only 1 lesion (1.0%) with nondiffuse immunoexpression harbored 80% weakly BRAF-positive tumor area and 20% BRAF-negative area with tissue damage. Sanger sequencing performed on the weak or negative regions in 7 lesions revealed BRAF V600E mutation in all the tested lesions. By contrast, all 38 negative-control lesions demonstrated no BRAF immunoexpression. This study demonstrated intralesional homogeneity and interlesional concordance for BRAF V600E mutation status and intralesional frequent heterogeneity for BRAF immunoexpression. The abovementioned 5 phenomena caused substantial reduction in BRAF immunostaining intensity. In 9 lesions within this study, BRAF immunoexpression and BRAF V600E point mutation status were not affected by preceding BRAF inhibitor therapy. Our data would also support the position that it does not matter whether we select primary or metastatic samples for BRAF mutation analysis.

Heterogeneity in Melanoma

There is growing evidence that tumour heterogeneity has an imperative role in cancer development, evolution and resistance to therapy. Continuing advancements in biomedical research enable tumour heterogeneity to be observed and studied more critically. As one of the most heterogeneous human cancers, melanoma displays a high level of biological complexity during disease progression. However, much is still unknown regarding melanoma tumour heterogeneity, as well as the role it plays in disease progression and treatment response. This review aims to provide a concise summary of the importance of tumour heterogeneity in melanoma.

BRAF V600 Mutation Detection in Plasma Cell-Free DNA: NCCTG N0879 (Alliance)

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the prognostic significance of detectable circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) BRAF V600E/K mutations in patients with advanced melanoma enrolled in a clinical trial without BRAF-targeted therapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

BRAF V600E/K mutation status was determined on archived tissue and pretreatment stored plasma from 149 patients with unresectable stage IV melanoma who were enrolled between May 5, 2010 and May 2, 2014 in the North Central Cancer Treatment Group/Alliance N0879 randomized phase 2 clinical trial. Results were reported as presence or absence of cfDNA BRAF V600E/K detection of assay vs tissue. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were assessed for patients with and without detectable BRAF mutation.

RESULTS

In total, 63 of 149 (42.3%) patients had BRAF V600E/K results for tissue and blood, and 20 of 63 (31.7%) patients had tissue-diagnosed mutant BRAF. Of these, 11 of 20 (55.0%) patients had detectable plasma cfDNA BRAF. Among patients with tissue-mutant BRAF V600E/K, PFS and OS were shorter for those with corresponding cfDNA mutations (PFS, 5.8 vs 12.0 months; P=.051; OS, 9.2 vs 27.1 months; P=.054). Our assay demonstrated sensitivity of 55% (95% CI, 0.322 to 0.768), specificity of 97.7% (95% CI, 0.932 to 1.000), positive predictive value of 91.7% (95% CI, 0.760 to 1.000), and negative predictive value of 82.4% (95% CI, 0.719 to 0.928).

CONCLUSION

In advanced melanoma, detectable cfDNA BRAF V600E/K mutation is present in about half the patients with stage IV with BRAF-mutant melanoma tumor tissue and appears to confer a poorer prognosis when detectable. Given the poorer prognosis, cfDNA can be used to risk-stratify patients with metastatic melanoma in practice or clinical trials.Trial Registration: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00976573.

BRAF Heterogeneity in Melanoma

OPINION STATEMENT

In the era of molecular targeted therapy, the accurate detection of BRAF mutation in melanoma has become increasingly important. With the advances of molecular analyses and immunohistochemistry, the presence of BRAF mutational heterogeneity in melanoma has been widely recognized. Although most patients with melanoma have a homogeneous BRAF mutation status because the BRAF mutation occurs at an early stage of melanoma development and acts as a driver gene mutation, BRAF mutational heterogeneity does exist, among different tumor sites of a single patient (intertumor heterogeneity) and/or even within a single tumor (intratumor heterogeneity). To summarize the published reports, about 10% of melanoma patients may show intertumorally discordant BRAF status and about 15% of BRAF-mutated melanomas may have intratumor BRAF heterogeneity, although the reported results vary strikingly among the studies and methods used. Considering the BRAF heterogeneity of melanoma, a single biopsy from a single tumor may not be sufficient to uncover the entire BRAF status of a patient. Multiple samples from different sites may be preferable to assess the indication of BRAF/MEK inhibitors, as recommended by the current clinical guidelines. The impact of BRAF heterogeneity on patient survival or the response to treatment with BRAF/MEK inhibitors is an interesting issue, but requires further investigation.

Systemic Therapy for Melanoma: ASCO Guideline

PURPOSE

To provide guidance to clinicians regarding the use of systemic therapy for melanoma.

METHODS

ASCO convened an Expert Panel and conducted a systematic review of the literature.

RESULTS

A systematic review, one meta-analysis, and 34 additional randomized trials were identified. The published studies included a wide range of systemic therapies in cutaneous and noncutaneous melanoma.

RECOMMENDATIONS

In the adjuvant setting, nivolumab or pembrolizumab should be offered to patients with resected stage IIIA/B/C/D BRAF wild-type cutaneous melanoma, while either of those two agents or the combination of dabrafenib and trametinib should be offered in BRAF-mutant disease. No recommendation could be made for or against the use of neoadjuvant therapy in cutaneous melanoma. In the unresectable/metastatic setting, ipilimumab plus nivolumab, nivolumab alone, or pembrolizumab alone should be offered to patients with BRAF wild-type cutaneous melanoma, while those three regimens or combination BRAF/MEK inhibitor therapy with dabrafenib/trametinib, encorafenib/binimetinib, or vemurafenib/cobimetinib should be offered in BRAF-mutant disease. Patients with mucosal melanoma may be offered the same therapies recommended for cutaneous melanoma. No recommendation could be made for or against specific therapy for uveal melanoma. Additional information is available at www.asco.org/melanoma-guidelines.

Recent advances in the management of cutaneous malignant melanoma: our case cohort

Decades of research into the management of cutaneous malignant melanoma have proven it to be a 'tough nut to crack', and its incidence has continued to increase over the last 30 years. Surgery remains a gold standard for early-stage melanoma with five-year survival of 98% for stage I disease, and 90% for stage II. Nonetheless, patients with stage III disease are at a higher risk, resulting in local recurrence as well as distant metastasis. Research regarding the control of metastatic malignant melanoma of the head and neck has evolved. Currently the search is on to understand metastatic malignant melanoma as a heterogeneous disease both at the molecular and clinical level. This paper focuses on the latest systemic therapy for metastatic disease of the head and neck, including cytotoxic chemotherapy, immunotherapy, and target therapy. The new eighth edition of tumour staging, and the sequelae for malignant melanoma, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), surgical intervention, and its benefits and shortfalls, are discussed. Also, the outcome of our cohort series of patients with metastatic cutaneous malignant melanoma who were treated with systemic combination therapy in Dorset is presented.

Intra- and Inter-Tumor BRAF Heterogeneity in Acral Melanoma: An Immunohistochemical Analysis

The current development of BRAF inhibitors has revolutionized the treatment of unresectable melanoma. As the potential heterogeneity of BRAF mutations in melanoma has been reported, accurate detection of BRAF mutations are important. However, the genetic heterogeneity of acral melanoma-a distinct type of melanoma with a unique genetic background-has not fully been investigated. We conducted a retrospective review of our acral melanoma patients. Of the 196 patients with acral melanoma, we retrieved 31 pairs of primary and matched metastatic melanomas. We immunostained the 31 pairs with VE1, a BRAFV600E-mutation-specific monoclonal antibody. Immunohistochemistry with VE1 showed a high degree of sensitivity and specificity for detecting BRAFV600E mutations compared with the real-time polymerase chain reaction method. A total of nine primary (29.0%) and eight metastatic (25.8%) acral melanomas were positive for VE1. In three patients (9.7%), we observed a discordance of VE1 staining between the primary and metastatic lesions. Of note, VE1 immunohistochemical staining revealed a remarkable degree of intra-tumor genetic heterogeneity in acral melanoma. Our study reveals that VE1 immunostaining is a useful ancillary method for detecting BRAFV600E mutations in acral melanoma and allows for a clear visualization of intra- and inter-tumor BRAF heterogeneity.

Immunohistochemistry as a Genetic Surrogate in Dermatopathology: Pearls and Pitfalls

Immunohistochemistry (IHC) is routinely performed in most laboratories, and other than purchase of commercially available antibodies, requires no additional equipment or reagents. As such, IHC is an accessible and relatively inexpensive test and one that can be performed quite quickly. This is in sharp contrast to genomic or mutational testing methodologies that are routinely "send out" tests as they require specialized equipment and reagents as well as individuals with expertise in the performance of the tests and analysis of the results, resulting in a prolonged turn-round-time and enhanced associated costs. However, many open questions remain in a rapidly changing therapeutic and scientific landscape with most obvious one being what exactly is the utility of "good old fashioned" IHC in the age of targeted therapy? For molecular applications, is a negative immunohistochemical result enough as a stand-alone diagnostic or predictive product? Is a positive immunohistochemical result perhaps more suitable for a role in screening for molecular alterations rather than a definitive testing modality? This review is an attempt to answer those very questions. We elucidate the broad range of entities in which IHC is currently used as a molecular surrogate and underscore pearls and pitfalls associated with each. Special attention is given to entities for which targeted therapies are currently available and to entities in which molecular data is of clinical utility as a prognosticator.

[Clinical challenges and implications of intratumor heterogeneity]

Tumors display a high, albeit variable, grade of intratumor heterogeneity, both from a clinical and a morphological viewpoint. Furthermore, recent methods of large-scale molecular analysis demonstrate to what extent tumors can also be heterogeneous from a molecular perspective. This is of paramount importance for patients as it has a great impact on the success of so-called precision therapies and explains the reason for a significant number of therapeutic failures in modern oncology. We present an up-to-date review of the latest findings in a group of tumors with a high social impact, commonly seen in the daily routine of the pathology laboratory.

Sensitivity and Usefulness of VE1 Immunohistochemical Staining in Acral Melanomas with BRAF Mutation

Background

Acral melanomas are known to have a low frequency of BRAF mutation, in contrary to higher KIT mutation. Recently, VE1 immunostaining was reported to have a good correlation with BRAF mutation status.

Objective

We aimed to evaluate the clinicopathological features of BRAF-mutated acral melanomas and validate the correlation of the VE1 immunohistochemical stains in those cases.

Methods

The clinical features (age, sex, anatomical site), and histopathological characteristics of 41 patients with acral melanoma were evaluated. We performed a next-generation sequencing to detect BRAF mutation status. We also determined the correlation of VE1 immunohistochemical staining with BRAF mutation status.

Results

Among 19 acral melanomas with BRAF mutation, common histopathological subtype was acral lentiginous melanoma (8/19, 42%) and nodular melanoma (8/19, 42%) and superficial spreading melanoma (3/19, 16%) followed. VE1 immunostaining results were positive in all 15 cases with BRAF V600E mutation (sensitivity 100%), and negative in 4 cases of BRAF non-V600E mutation. However, VE1 immunostaining was negative in all 22 patients with BRAF wild-type.

Conclusion

VE1 immunostaining had a good correlation with BRAF V600E mutation status.

Concordance in BRAF V600E status over time in malignant melanoma and corresponding metastases

AIMS

The aims of the present study were to analyse the usability of an immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis as compared with a frequently used mutation detection analysis, and to examine the extent of intratumour and intertumour heterogeneity of BRAF V600E in primary tumours and their corresponding metastases. In the development of intertumour heterogeneity between the primary tumour and the corresponding metastases, time as a factor was also investigated.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In total, 227 samples from 224 melanoma patients were analysed with both the Cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test and IHC anti-BRAF V600E staining. In 82 primary tumours and 224 corresponding metastases, the extents of intertumour and intratumour heterogeneity were investigated with IHC staining. In 15 cases, disagreement between IHC analysis and the Cobas test was seen. In all but one of the examined patients, homogeneity between the primary tumour and the corresponding metastasis was found. Except for this one case, no heterogeneity developed over longer periods.

CONCLUSION

IHC analysis can be safely used as a BRAF pretreatment screening tool, and no additional test is needed when staining is positive. However, if stains are negative, additional tests are essential for detection of other BRAF mutations. We suggest that using primary melanoma tissues is just as safe as using metastatic tissue for detection of BRAF V600E, as BRAF intertumour heterogeneity is extremely rare. In addition, the time between diagnosis of the primary tumour and diagnosis of the corresponding metastasis seems not to increase the risk of intertumour heterogeneity.

Intratumor and Intertumor Heterogeneity in Melanoma

Melanoma is a cancer that exhibits one of the most aggressive and heterogeneous features. The incidence rate escalates. A high number of clones harboring various mutations contribute to an exceptional level of intratumor heterogeneity of melanoma. It also refers to metastases which may originate from different subclones of primary lesion. Such component of the neoplasm biology is termed intertumor and intratumor heterogeneity. These levels of tumor heterogeneity hinder accurate diagnosis and effective treatment. The increasing number of research on the topic reflects the need for understanding limitation or failure of contemporary therapies. Majority of analyses concentrate on mutations in cancer-related genes. Novel high-throughput techniques reveal even higher degree of variations within a lesion. Consolidation of theories and researches indicates new routes for treatment options such as targets for immunotherapy. The demand for personalized approach in melanoma treatment requires extensive knowledge on intratumor and intertumor heterogeneity on the level of genome, transcriptome/proteome, and epigenome. Thus, achievements in exploration of melanoma variety are described in details. Particularly, the issue of tumor heterogeneity or homogeneity given BRAF mutations is discussed.

Prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations in melanoma: a German study from routine care

BACKGROUND

Hotspot mutations of the oncogenes BRAF and NRAS are the most common genetic alterations in cutaneous melanoma. Specific inhibitors of BRAF and MEK have shown significant survival benefits in large phase III trials. However, the prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations outside of clinical trials remains unclear.

METHODS

The mutational status of BRAF (exon 15) and NRAS (exon 2 and 3) was determined in melanoma samples of 217 patients with pyrosequencing and Sanger sequencing. The genotypes were correlated with clinical outcomes and pathologic features of the primary tumors. Time to disease progression was calculated with the cumulative incidence function. Survival analyses were performed with Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Relative survival was calculated with the Ederer-II method. Treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) was allowed.

RESULTS

Mutations in BRAF and NRAS were identified in 40.1 and 24.4% of cases, respectively. Concurrent mutations in both genes were detected in further 2.3%. The remaining 33.2% were wild type for the investigated exons (WT). BRAF mutations were significantly associated with younger age at first diagnosis (p < 0.001) and truncal localization of the culprit primary (p = 0.002). The nodular subtype was most common in the NRAS cohort. In addition, NRAS-mutant melanoma patients showed a higher frequency of nodal relapse (p = 0.013) and development of metastatic disease (p = 0.021). The time to loco-regional nodal relapse was shortest in NRAS-mutant melanoma (p = 0.002). Presence of NRAS mutation was an independent risk factor for disease progression in multivariate analysis (HR 2.01; 95% CI 1.02 - 3.98). BRAF-mutant melanoma patients showed a tendency for better overall and relative survival. Genotype was not a consistent risk factor in multivariate analysis. Instead, positive sentinel lymph node status (HR 2.65; 95% CI 1.15 - 6.10) and treatment with ICB in stage IV disease (HR 0.17; 95% CI 0.06-0.48) were significant multivariate risk factors.

CONCLUSIONS

NRAS-mutant tumors tended to behave more aggressively particularly in early stages of the disease in this high-risk melanoma population. Treatment with immune checkpoint blockade improved survival in stage IV disease in a real-world setting.

Discrepancy in BRAF status among patients with metastatic malignant melanoma: A meta-analysis

The incidence of malignant melanoma is growing rapidly. Approximately half of the cases are BRAF mutated, making treatment with kinase inhibitors a (MEK and BRAF inhibitors) preferred choice in the advanced setting. The vast majority of these patients will benefit from the treatment. It is therefore of vital importance that the BRAF analysis is reliable and reflects the true nature of the tumour. Intraindividual tumour BRAF heterogeneity may exist, and changes of BRAF status over time might occur. We reviewed the literature by searching the PubMed database and 630 potentially relevant studies were identified. Thereafter, studies that investigated intralesional heterogeneity only, studies with ≤10 patients and studies that did not include adequate data to calculate discrepancy rates were excluded. Twenty-two studies met our inclusion criteria and were included in the meta-analysis. The pooled discrepancy rate between primary and metastatic lesions was 13.4% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 9.2-18.2%) while it was 7.3% (95% CI: 3.3-12.6) between two metastatic lesions. The number of patients whose tumoural BRAF status was changed from mutation to wild type and from wild type to mutation, respectively, was comparable. We conclude that a clinically meaningful discrepancy rate in BRAF status both between primary-metastatic and metastatic-metastatic melanoma lesions exists. Our results support the polyclonal model of melanomas in which subclones with different BRAF status co-exist in the same melanoma lesion. In addition, the results indicate a need for biopsy of a metastatic lesion for subsequent BRAF analysis when treatment with kinase inhibitors is considered.

Controversies in Intrapatient Melanoma BRAFV600E Mutation Status

Therapies targeting the BRAF oncogene have improved the overall and disease-free survival of patients with advanced melanomas. An unresolved issue in clinical practice is the existence (or not) of BRAF-mutated and BRAF-nonmutated tumors in individual patients (intrapatient BRAF mutation heterogeneity), which may serve as a mechanism of resistance to BRAF inhibitors or lead to diagnostic problems. Different research groups have reported differing results after analyzing the BRAF mutation statuses of multiple melanoma tumors. Herein, we present a brief revision of the literature on this controversial topic and propose a theory to justify the divergence of the results found in the literature.

Quantitative analysis of single-nucleotide polymorphisms by pyrosequencing with di-base addition

We have developed and validated a novel method for quantitative detection of SNPs by using pyrosequencing with di-base addition (PDBA). Based on the principle that the signal intensity is proportional to the template concentration within a linear concentration range, linear formula (Y = AX + B) for each genotype is established, and the relationship between two genotypes of a single SNP can be resolved by corresponding linear formulas. Here, PDBA assays were developed to detect variants rs6717546 and rs4148324, and the linear formulas for each genotype of rs6717546 and rs4148324 were established. The method allowed to quantitatively determine each genotype and showed 100% accordant results against a panel of defined mixtures. A set of 24 template fragments containing variants rs6717546 or rs4148324 was tested to evaluate the method. Our results showed that allele frequency of each genotype was accurately quantified, with results comparable to those of conventional pyrosequencing. Furthermore, this method was capable of detecting alleles with frequencies as low as 3%, which was more sensitive than ∼5 to ∼7% level detected by conventional pyrosequencing. This method offers high sensitivity, reproducibility, and relatively low costs, and thus could provide a much-needed approach for quantitative analysis of SNPs in clinical samples.

Is immunohistochemistry of BRAF V600E useful as a screening tool and during progression disease of melanoma patients?

BACKGROUND

In clinical practice the gold standard method to assess BRAF status in patients with metastatic melanoma is based on molecular assays. Recently, a mutation-specific monoclonal antibody (VE1), which detects the BRAF V600E mutated protein, has been developed. With this study we aimed to confirm the clinical value of the VE1 Ventana® antibody, as today a univocal validated and accredited immunohistochemical procedure does not exist, to preliminary detect BRAF status in our routine diagnostic procedures. Moreover, we explored the biological meaning of BRAF immunohistochemical labeling both as a predictor marker of response to target therapy and, for the first time, as a player of acquired tumor drug resistance.

METHODS

We analyzed a retrospective series of 64 metastatic melanoma samples, previously investigated for molecular BRAF status, using a fully automatized immunohistochemical method. We correlated the data to the clinicopathologic characteristics of patients and their clinical outcome.

RESULTS

The sensitivity and the specificity of the Ventana® VE1 antibody were 89.2 and 96.2% respectively, while the positive predictive value and negative predictive value were 97.1 and 86.2%, respectively. For six mutated patients the histological sample before treatment and when disease progressed was available. The immunohistochemical BRAF V600E expression in the specimens when disease progressed was less intense and more heterogeneous compared to the basal expression. Multivariate analysis revealed that a less intense grade of positive expression is an independent predictor of a less aggressive stage at diagnosis (p = 0.0413).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings encourage the introduction of immunohistochemistry as a rapid screening tool for the assessment of BRAF status in melanoma patients in routine diagnostic procedures and prepare the ground for other studies to highlight the role of immunohistochemical BRAF V600E expression in patients at the time of progression.

BRAF Mutation (V600E) Prevalence in Mexican Patients Diagnosed with Melanoma

Background

B-Raf is a serine/threonine protein kinase activating the MAP kinase/ERK-signaling pathway. It has been shown that 50% of melanomas harbor activating BRAF mutations, with over 90% being the V600E mutation.

Objective

The goal of this research was to determine the prevalence of the BRAF V600E mutation in patients from Central Mexico diagnosed with primary melanoma.

Methods

Skin biopsies from 47 patients with melanoma were obtained from the dermatology department of the Hospital General ‘Dr. Manuel Gea González’ in Mexico City. For BRAF mutation determination, after DNA isolation, the gene region where the mutation occurs was amplified by PCR. Subsequently, the presence or absence of the V600E mutation was detected by Sanger sequencing performed at the private molecular diagnostic laboratory Vitagénesis in Monterrey, Mexico.

Results

Of the 47 patients sampled, 6.4% harbored the V600E mutation. No statistical significance was found between mutations and the type of tumor.