Early Detection and Prognostic Assessment of Cutaneous Melanoma: Consensus on Optimal Practice and the Role of Gene Expression Profile Testing.

Importance: Therapy for advanced melanoma has transformed during the past decade, but early detection and prognostic assessment of cutaneous melanoma (CM) remain paramount goals. Best practices for screening and use of pigmented lesion evaluation tools and gene expression profile (GEP) testing in CM remain to be defined. Objective: To provide consensus recommendations on optimal screening practices and prebiopsy diagnostic, postbiopsy diagnostic, and prognostic assessment of CM. Evidence Review: Case scenarios were interrogated using a modified Delphi consensus method. Melanoma panelists (n = 60) were invited to vote on hypothetical scenarios via an emailed survey (n = 42), which was followed by a consensus conference (n = 51) that reviewed the literature and the rationale for survey answers. Panelists participated in a follow-up survey for final recommendations on the scenarios (n = 45). Findings: The panelists reached consensus (≥70% agreement) in supporting a risk-stratified approach to melanoma screening in clinical settings and public screening events, screening personnel recommendations (self/partner, primary care provider, general dermatologist, and pigmented lesion expert), screening intervals, and acceptable appointment wait times. Participants also reached consensus that visual and dermoscopic examination are sufficient for evaluation and follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions deemed innocuous. The panelists reached consensus on interpreting reflectance confocal microscopy and some but not all results from epidermal tape stripping, but they did not reach consensus on use of certain pigmented lesion evaluation tools, such as electrical impedance spectroscopy. Regarding GEP scores, the panelists reached consensus that a low-risk prognostic GEP score should not outweigh concerning histologic features when selecting patients to undergo sentinel lymph node biopsy but did not reach consensus on imaging recommendations in the setting of a high-risk prognostic GEP score and low-risk histology and/or negative nodal status. Conclusions and Relevance: For this consensus statement, panelists reached consensus on aspects of a risk-stratified approach to melanoma screening and follow-up as well as use of visual examination and dermoscopy. These findings support a practical approach to diagnosing and evaluating CM. Panelists did not reach consensus on a clearly defined role for GEP testing in clinical decision-making, citing the need for additional studies to establish the clinical use of existing GEP assays.

Melanoma susceptibility genes and risk assessment.

Familial melanoma accounts for approximately a tenth of all melanoma cases. The most commonly known melanoma susceptibility gene is the highly penetrant CDKN2A (p16INK4a) locus, which is transmitted in an autosomal dominant fashion and accounts for approximately 20-50 % of familial melanoma cases. Mutated p16INK4a shows impaired capacity to inhibit the cyclin D1-CDK4 complex, allowing for unchecked cell cycle progression. Mutations in the second protein coded by CDKN2A, p14ARF, are much less common and result in proteasomal degradation of p53 with subsequent accumulation of DNA damage as the cell progresses through the cell cycle without a functional p53-mediated DNA damage response. Mutations in CDK4 that impair the inhibitory interaction with p16INK4a also increase melanoma risk but these mutations are extremely rare. Genes of the melanin biosynthetic pathway, including MC1R and MITF, have also been implicated in melanomagenesis. MC1R variants were traditionally thought to increase risk for melanoma secondary to intensified UV-mediated DNA damage in the setting of absent photoprotective eumelanin. Accumulation of pheomelanin, which appears to have a carcinogenic effect regardless of UV exposure, may be a more likely mechanism. Impaired SUMOylation of the E318K variant of MITF results in increased transcription of genes that confer melanocytes with a pro-malignant phenotype. Mutations in the tumor suppressor BAP1 enhance the metastatic potential of uveal melanoma and predispose to cutaneous/ocular melanoma, atypical melanocytic tumors, and other internal malignancies (COMMON syndrome). Genome-wide association studies have identified numerous low-risk alleles. Although several melanoma susceptibility genes have been identified, risk assessment tools have been developed only for the most common gene implicated with hereditary melanoma, CDKN2A. MelaPRO, a validated model that relies on Mendelian inheritance and Bayesian probability theories, estimates carrier probability for CDKN2A and future risk of melanoma taking into account a patient's family and past medical history of melanoma. Genetic testing for CDKN2A mutations is currently available but the Melanoma Genetics Consortium recommends offering such testing to patients only in the context of research protocols because clinical utility is uncertain.

Urgent access to a specialty care melanoma clinic is associated with a higher rate of melanoma detection.

BACKGROUND: As melanoma rates increase, and the supply of dermatologists remains suboptimal to meet demand for services, detection of early melanoma has become an increasingly difficult challenge. Some authors advocate for shifting dermatologic resources from routine appointments to urgent visits for those with lesions concerning for melanoma. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the potential of an urgent access track (UAT) embedded within a pigmented lesion clinic to improve early melanoma detection. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of patient records from a tertiary care hospital's pigmented lesion clinic and the associated UAT. Results of procedures for all 4495 patient visits to the routine track and all 316 visits to the UAT during the 21-month study period were included, as were detailed chart reviews of all UAT patient visits. RESULTS: UAT visits were more than 4 times as likely (4.1% vs 1.0%) to yield a diagnosis of melanoma as routine track visits (odds ratio 4.24; 95% confidence interval 2.28-7.88; P < .0001), and almost 25 times as likely (2.2% vs 0.1%) to yield a diagnosis of metastatic melanoma (odds ratio 25.4; 95% confidence interval 7.4-87.4; P < .0001). LIMITATIONS: This was a preliminary analysis with only limited data extracted from the routine track pigmented lesion clinic patient visits. CONCLUSION: This initial analysis of UAT strategy suggests that UATs have potential to detect patients with earlier melanomas; further research is needed to specifically delineate how resources should be best allocated between routine surveillance and urgent care to maximize melanoma early detection and survival.

Selection criteria for genetic assessment of patients with familial melanoma.

Approximately 5% to 10% of melanoma may be hereditary in nature, and about 2% of melanoma can be specifically attributed to pathogenic germline mutations in cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor 2A (CDKN2A). To appropriately identify the small proportion of patients who benefit most from referral to a genetics specialist for consideration of genetic testing for CDKN2A, we have reviewed available published studies of CDKN2A mutation analysis in cohorts with invasive, cutaneous melanoma and found variability in the rate of CDKN2A mutations based on geography, ethnicity, and the type of study and eligibility criteria used. Except in regions of high melanoma incidence, such as Australia, we found higher rates of CDKN2A positivity in individuals with 3 or more primary invasive melanomas and/or families with at least one invasive melanoma and two or more other diagnoses of invasive melanoma and/or pancreatic cancer among first- or second-degree relatives on the same side of the family. The work summarized in this review should help identify individuals who are appropriate candidates for referral for genetic consultation and possible testing.