31-Gene Expression Profile Testing in Cutaneous Melanoma and Survival Outcomes in a Population-Based Analysis: A SEER Collaboration

PURPOSE

The DecisionDx-Melanoma 31-gene expression profile (31-GEP) test is validated to classify cutaneous malignant melanoma (CM) patient risk of recurrence, metastasis, or death as low (class 1A), intermediate (class 1B/2A), or high (class 2B). This study aimed to examine the effect of 31-GEP testing on survival outcomes and confirm the prognostic ability of the 31-GEP at the population level.

METHODS

Patients with stage I-III CM with a clinical 31-GEP result between 2016 and 2018 were linked to data from 17 SEER registries (n = 4,687) following registries' operation procedures for linkages. Melanoma-specific survival (MSS) and overall survival (OS) differences by 31-GEP risk category were examined using Kaplan-Meier analysis and the log-rank test. Crude and adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) were calculated using Cox regression model to evaluate variables associated with survival. 31-GEP tested patients were propensity score-matched to a cohort of non-31-GEP tested patients from the SEER database. Robustness of the effect of 31-GEP testing was assessed using resampling.

RESULTS

Patients with a 31-GEP class 1A result had higher 3-year MSS and OS than patients with a class 1B/2A or class 2B result (MSS: 99.7% v 97.1% v 89.6%, P < .001; OS: 96.6% v 90.2% v 79.4%, P < .001). A class 2B result was an independent predictor of MSS (HR, 7.00; 95% CI, 2.70 to 18.00) and OS (HR, 2.39; 95% CI, 1.54 to 3.70). 31-GEP testing was associated with a 29% lower MSS mortality (HR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.94) and 17% lower overall mortality (HR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.99) relative to untested patients.

CONCLUSION

In a population-based, clinically tested melanoma cohort, the 31-GEP stratified patients by their risk of dying from melanoma.

Optimizing treatment approaches for patients with cutaneous melanoma by integrating clinical and pathologic features with the 31-gene expression profile test

BACKGROUND

Many patients with low-stage cutaneous melanoma will experience tumor recurrence, metastasis, or death, and many higher staged patients will not.

OBJECTIVE

To develop an algorithm by integrating the 31-gene expression profile test with clinicopathologic data for an optimized, personalized risk of recurrence (integrated 31 risk of recurrence [i31-ROR]) or death and use i31-ROR in conjunction with a previously validated algorithm for precise sentinel lymph node positivity risk estimates (i31-SLNB) for optimized treatment plan decisions.

METHODS

Cox regression models for ROR were developed (n = 1581) and independently validated (n = 523) on a cohort with stage I-III melanoma. Using National Comprehensive Cancer Network cut points, i31-ROR performance was evaluated using the midpoint survival rates between patients with stage IIA and stage IIB disease as a risk threshold.

RESULTS

Patients with a low-risk i31-ROR result had significantly higher 5-year recurrence-free survival (91% vs 45%, P < .001), distant metastasis-free survival (95% vs 53%, P < .001), and melanoma-specific survival (98% vs 73%, P < .001) than patients with a high-risk i31-ROR result. A combined i31-SLNB/ROR analysis identified 44% of patients who could forego sentinel lymph node biopsy while maintaining high survival rates (>98%) or were restratified as being at a higher or lower risk of recurrence or death.

LIMITATIONS

Multicenter, retrospective study.

CONCLUSION

Integrating clinicopathologic features with the 31-GEP optimizes patient risk stratification compared to clinicopathologic features alone.

Integrating the melanoma 31-gene expression profile test with surgical oncology practice within national guideline and staging recommendations

Aim: Define changes in clinical management resulting from the use of the prognostic 31-gene expression profile (31-GEP) test for cutaneous melanoma in a surgical oncology practice. Patients & methods: Management plans for 112 consecutively tested patients with stage I-III melanoma were evaluated for duration and number of clinical visits, blood work and imaging. Results: 31-GEP high-risk (class 2; n = 46) patients received increased management compared with low-risk (class 1; n = 66) patients. Test results were most closely associated with follow-up and imaging. Of class 1 patients, 65% received surveillance intensity within guidelines for stage I-IIA patients; 98% of class 2 patients received surveillance intensity equal to stage IIB-IV patients. Conclusion: We suggest clinical follow-up and metastatic screening be adjusted according to 31-GEP test results.

Clinical validation of a prognostic 11-gene expression profiling score in prospectively collected FFPE tissue of patients with AJCC v8 stage II cutaneous melanoma

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant therapies have been approved for patients with AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) stage III and stage IV cutaneous melanoma (CM) after complete resection. These therapies might also be indicated for patients with high-risk stage II CM.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We included patients diagnosed with stage II melanoma between 2000 and 2016 and for which primary tumour tissue was available. The prognostic value of the 11-gene expression profiling score (GEPS) was evaluated as a dichotomized parameter (GEPS ≤0 vs. >0). Endpoints of the analysis were melanoma specific survival (MSS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and relapse-free survival (RFS).

RESULTS

GEPS was determined in 245 patients ranging between -0.7 and 3.53. A total of 111 females and 134 males were included; the median follow-up was 41 months. Kaplan Meier analyses showed statistically significant survival differences between patients with high GEPS (n = 154) and low GEPS (n = 91) for MSS (p = 0.018), DMFS (p = 0.005) and RFS (p = 0.009). The 5-year and 10-year MSS was 92% in the low-GEPS and 82% and 67% in the high-GEPS group, respectively. Multivariate Cox regression analysis showed independent significance for MSS of GEPS (HR = 1.55; p = 0.006), tumor thickness (HR = 1.21; p < 0.001) and age (HR1.05; p = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

GEPS was validated as independent prognostic factor for MSS in stage II CM and could be used for therapeutic decisions when systemic therapies become available in stage II CM.

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.

Operable Melanoma: Screening, Prognostication, and Adjuvant and Neoadjuvant Therapy

The importance of reducing the numbers of patients with late-stage melanoma, identifying which patients are most likely to progress, and treating these patients at the earliest possible stage cannot be overemphasized. Improved screening of patients prior to diagnosis has the advantage of identifying early-stage disease that is for the most part treatable by surgical methods. The process of melanoma screening is rapidly evolving through population-based programs, mobile health technologies, and advanced imaging tools. For patients with newly diagnosed melanoma, accurately estimating disease prognosis has important implications for management and follow-up. Prognostic factors are individual host- or tumor-related factors or molecules that correlate with genetic predisposition and clinical course. These include clinical covariates and host and tumor proteomic/genomic markers that allow the prognostic subclassification of patients. Adjuvant therapy for high-risk surgically resected melanoma targets residual micrometastatic disease with the goal of reducing the risk of relapse and mortality. In the United States, three regimens have achieved regulatory approval for adjuvant therapy, including high-dose interferon alpha, pegylated interferon alpha, and ipilimumab at 10 mg/kg. Phase III trials have reported benefits in relapse-free survival (all regimens) and overall survival (high-dose interferon alpha and ipilimumab). The management of locally/regionally advanced melanoma may benefit from neoadjuvant therapy, which is the subject of several ongoing studies. Recent studies have shown promising clinical activity and yielded important biomarker findings and mechanistic insights.

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.