Survival Outcomes Of Melanoma Research Articles

High expression of Talin-1 is associated with tumor progression and recurrence in melanoma skin cancer patients

BackgroundTalin-1 as a component of multi-protein adhesion complexes plays a role in tumor formation and migration in various malignancies. This study investigated Talin-1 in protein levels as a potential prognosis biomarker in skin tumors.MethodsTalin-1 was evaluated in 106 skin cancer (33 melanomas and 73 non-melanomas skin cancer (NMSC)) and 11 normal skin formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded (FFPE) tissue samples using immunohistochemical technique on tissue microarrays (TMAs). The association between the expression of Talin-1 and clinicopathological parameters, as well as survival outcomes, were assessed.ResultsOur findings from data minings through bioinformatics tools indicated dysregulation of Talin-1 in mRNA levels for skin cancer samples. In addition, there was a statistically significant difference in Talin-1 expression in terms of intensity of staining, percentage of positive tumor cells, and H-score in melanoma tissues compared to NMSC (P = 0.001, P < 0.001, and P < 0.001, respectively). Moreover, high cytoplasmic expression of Talin-1 was found to be associated with significantly advanced stages (P = 0.024), lymphovascular invasion (P = 0.023), and recurrence (P = 0.006) in melanoma cancer tissues. Our results on NMSC showed a statistically significant association between high intensity of staining and the poor differentiation (P = 0.044). No significant associations were observed between Talin-1 expression levels and survival outcomes of melanoma and NMSC patients.ConclusionOur observations showed that higher expression of Talin1 in protein level may be significantly associated with more aggressive tumor behavior and advanced disease in patients with skin cancer. However, further studies are required to find the mechanism of action of Talin-1 in skin cancers.

Associations between TERT Promoter Mutations and Survival in Superficial Spreading and Nodular Melanomas in a Large Prospective Patient Cohort

Survival outcomes in melanoma and their association with mutations in the telomerase reverse transcriptase gene TERT promoter remain uncertain. In addition, few studies have examined whether these associations are affected by a nearby common germline polymorphism or vary on the basis of melanoma histopathological subtype. We analyzed 408 primary tumors from a prospective melanoma cohort for somatic TERT-124[C>T] and TERT-146[C>T] mutations, the germline polymorphism rs2853669, and BRAFV600 and NRASQ61 mutations. We tested the associations between these variants and clinicopathologic factors and survival outcomes. TERT-124[C>T] wasassociated with thicker tumors, ulceration, mitoses (>0/mm2), nodular histotype, and CNS involvement. In a multivariable model controlling for the American Joint Committee on Cancer stage, TERT-124[C>T] was an independent predictor of shorter recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio= 2.58, P= 0.001) and overall survival (hazard ratio= 2.47, P= 0.029). Patients with the germline variant and TERT-124[C>T]-mutant melanomas had significantly shorter recurrence-free survival than those lacking either or both sequence variants (P < 0.04). The impact of the germline variant appeared to be more pronounced in superficial spreading than in nodular melanoma. No associations were found between survival and TERT-146[C>T], BRAF, or NRAS mutations. These findings strongly suggest that TERT-124[C>T] mutation is a biomarker of aggressive primary melanomas, an effect that may be modulated by rs2853669.

Identification of an m6A Regulators-Mediated Prognosis Signature For Survival Prediction and Its Relevance to Immune Infiltration in Melanoma.

Despite robust evidence for the role of m6A in cancer development and progression, its association with immune infiltration and survival outcomes in melanoma remains obscure. Here, we aimed to develop an m6A-related risk signature to improve prognostic and immunotherapy responder prediction performance in the context of melanoma. We comprehensively analyzed the m6A cluster and immune infiltration phenotypes of public datasets. The TCGA (n = 457) and eleven independent melanoma cohorts (n = 758) were used as the training and validation datasets, respectively. We identified two m6A clusters (m6A-clusterA and m6A-clusterB) based on the expression pattern of m6A regulators via unsupervised consensus clustering. IGF2BP1 (7.49%), KIAA1429 (7.06%), and YTHDC1 (4.28%) were the three most frequently mutated genes. There was a correlation between driver genes mutation statuses and the expression of m6A regulators. A significant difference in tumor-associated immune infiltration between two m6A clusters was detected. Compared with m6A-clusterA, the m6A-clusterB was characterized by a lower immune score and immune cell infiltration but higher mRNA expression-based stemness index (mRNAsi). An m6A-related risk signature consisting of 12 genes was determined via Cox regression analysis and divided the patients into low- and high-risk groups (IL6ST, MBNL1, NXT2, EIF2A, CSGALNACT1, C11orf58, CD14, SPI1, NCCRP1, BOK, CD74, PAEP). A nomogram was developed for the prediction of the survival rate. Compared with the high-risk group, the low-risk group was characterized by high expression of immune checkpoints and immunophenoscore (IPS), activation of immune-related pathways, and more enriched in immune cell infiltrations. The low-risk group had a favorable prognosis and contained the potential beneficiaries of the immune checkpoint blockade therapy and verified by the IMvigor210 cohort (n = 298). The m6A-related signature we have determined in melanoma highlights the relationships between m6A regulators and immune cell infiltration. The established risk signature was identified as a promising clinical biomarker of melanoma.

Population survival impact of new targeted and immune based therapies for metastatic or unresectable melanoma

IntroductionNew classes of drugs for metastatic or unresectable melanoma (MM) have shown improved survival in randomized trials (e.g., anti-CTLA-4, anti-PD-1, BRAF/MEK inhibitors). We sought to describe uptake of these new drugs and their impact on population-based survival outcomes of MM.&#x0D; Objectives and ApproachWe sought to describe uptake of these new drugs and their impact on population-based survival outcomes of MM. This was a retrospective, population-based cohort study of all treated MM in Ontario 2007-2015. Administrative data sources from the Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences (ICES) were utilized. Within ICES, cutaneous and non-cutaneous primaries were identified in the Ontario Cancer Registry. Administrative sources from Cancer Care Ontario, Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care, and Canadian Institute for Health Information identified patients treated with palliative systemic therapy, radiotherapy and metastatectomy. Temporal trends in utilization and survival were investigated. Survival by drug class was described.&#x0D; ResultsWe identified 2,793 MM patients. First treatment was systemic therapy (46%), radiotherapy (41%) or metastatectomy (14%). MM patient number increased from 270 in 2007 to 418 in 2015. Systemic treatment rose from 125 MM first treated in 2007 to 343 in 2015. New drug treatments increased from &lt;6% of reported first-line regimens in 2007 to 82\% in 2015. 1-year and 2-year overall survival (OS) was 28% and 15% respectively for all MM in 2007-2009, rising to 46% and 35% for 2014-2015 (logrank p&lt;0.001; adjusted hazard ratio (AHR) 0.56, 95% confidence interval (CI): (0.49,0.63)). Survival gains were largely in the subset treated primarily systemically, where new drugs were increasingly utilized (2-year OS 16% 2007-2009 vs. 44% 2014-2015 logrank p&lt;0.001; AHR 0.46, 95% CI: (0.38,0.56)).&#x0D; Conclusion/ImplicationsUtilization of systemic therapy for MM has increased considerably in routine practice during 2007-2015; at least some of this increase relates to use of novel agents since 2011. In line with randomized trial findings, new drug adoption was associated with substantial increases in population-based MM survival.

Durable benefit and the potential for long-term survival with immunotherapy in advanced melanoma.

Historically, the median overall survival for patients with stage IV melanoma was less than 1 year and the 5-year survival rate was ∼10%. Recent advances in therapy have raised 5-year survival expectations to ∼20%. Notably, a subset of melanoma patients who receive immunotherapy with high-dose interleukin-2, and now ipilimumab, can achieve long-term survival of at least 5 years. A major goal in melanoma research is to increase the number of patients who experience this overall survival benefit. In this review, we discuss the attributes of immunotherapy and newer targeted agents, and consider how combination strategies might improve the chances of achieving durable benefit and long-term survival. We also discuss three areas that we believe will be critical to making further advances in melanoma treatment. To better understand the clinical profile of patients who achieve long-term survival with immunotherapy, we first present data from ipilimumab clinical trials in which a subset of patients experienced durable responses. Second, we discuss the limitations of traditional metrics used to evaluate the benefits of immunotherapies. Third, we consider emerging issues that clinicians are currently facing when making treatment decisions regarding immunotherapy. A better understanding of these novel treatments may improve survival outcomes in melanoma, increase the number of patients who experience this overall survival benefit, and inform the future use of these agents in the treatment of other cancer types.

Tissue Biomarkers for Prognosis in Cutaneous Melanoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

In the clinical management of early-stage cutaneous melanoma, it is critical to determine which patients are cured by surgery alone and which should be treated with adjuvant therapy. To assist in this decision, many groups have made an effort to use molecular information. However, although there are hundreds of studies that have sought to assess the potential prognostic value of molecular markers in predicting the course of cutaneous melanoma, at this time, no molecular method to improve risk stratification is part of recommended clinical practice. To help understand this disconnect, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature that reported immunohistochemistry-based protein biomarkers of melanoma outcome. Three parallel search strategies were applied to the PubMed database through January 15, 2008, to identify cohort studies that reported associations between immunohistochemical expression and survival outcomes in melanoma that conformed to the REMARK criteria. Of the 102 cohort studies, we identified only 37 manuscripts, collectively describing 87 assays on 62 distinct proteins, which met all inclusion criteria. Promising markers that emerged included melanoma cell adhesion molecule (MCAM)/MUC18 (all-cause mortality [ACM] hazard ratio [HR] = 16.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.80 to 70.28), matrix metalloproteinase-2 (melanoma-specific mortality [MSM] HR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.32 to 5.07), Ki-67 (combined ACM HR = 2.66; 95% CI = 1.41 to 5.01), proliferating cell nuclear antigen (ACM HR = 2.27; 95% CI = 1.56 to 3.31), and p16/INK4A (ACM HR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.83, MSM HR = 0.4; 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.67). We further noted incomplete adherence to the REMARK guidelines: 14 of 27 cohort studies that failed to adequately report their methods and nine studies that failed to either perform multivariable analyses or report their risk estimates were published since 2005.