Comparison of mutation profiles in primary melanomas and corresponding nodal naevi using next-generation sequencing.

BACKGROUND: Nodal naevi (NN) represent aggregates of melanocytes within peripheral lymph nodes. NN are relatively often found in patients with malignant melanoma (MM), and may mimic metastatic disease. AIM: To study mutation profiles in MM and NN to find out whether NN descend from a primary MM. METHODS: Next-generation sequencing was performed on formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tissue of 26 pairs of primary MM and corresponding NN detected by sentinel lymph node biopsy, and 29 MM-characteristic genes were investigated. RESULTS: In this study, 90% of mutations were detected exclusively in either MM or NN, but not both, in the same patient; the percentage of identical NN and MM mutations in the same individual was only 10%. The most frequently discovered shared mutations were a C>G substitution in the CDKN2A gene and in-frame deletion in ARID1A. Oncogenic driver mutations were frequently observed in MM but only rarely in NN. About three-quarters of mutations in both MM and NN were characterized by C>T or G>A substitutions. The detected rate of ultraviolet (UV)-related C>T base changes was comparably high in both primary MM (35%) and NN (32%). CONCLUSIONS: Based on our data, it seems that NN descend from previously UV-exposed BRAF wildtype cutaneous melanocytes, rather than from primary MM or arrested progenitor cells.

The predictive and prognostic significance of cell-free DNA concentration in melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma is the leading cause of skin cancer-related deaths worldwide. While there have been significant improvements in the treatment of advanced melanoma in the past decade, biomarker development lagged behind. OBJECTIVES: The majority of liquid biopsy biomarkers rely on the analyses of oncogenic mutations; however, about 20% of melanoma patients are wild type. Therefore, validation of universal predictive and prognostic biomarkers is urgently needed. METHODS: We analysed plasma samples in a discovery cohort (n = 20) and expansion cohort (n = 166) of metastatic melanoma patients and healthy donors (n = 116). Total plasma circulating cell-free DNA (cfDNA) concentrations were measured on the Qubit® platform using assays for single-(ss) and double (ds)-stranded DNA, DNA spectrophotometry and RNase P qPCR. We explored the diagnostic, predictive and prognostic potential of cfDNA concentration by bio-statistical methods and established a cfDNA threshold for risk stratification. RESULTS: Our selected best method was Qubit® dsDNA assay which quantified higher plasma cfDNA concentrations in melanoma patients than in healthy controls (AUC 72%). Measurement of baseline cfDNA concentration revealed that high cfDNA was associated with presence of metastases and higher AJCC stage (P < 0.05). Furthermore, high baseline cfDNA was an indicator of shorter overall survival in patients with oncogenic mutations (HR 2.12, P = 0.0008), and in wild-type patients (HR 5.55, P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: We provide evidence that total cfDNA can be used as a biomarker for melanoma irrespective of the tumour genotype and can provide information on tumour load, risk of progression and risk of death.

GNAQ and GNA11 mutant nonuveal melanoma: a subtype distinct from both cutaneous and uveal melanoma.

BACKGROUND: GNAQ and GNA11 mutant nonuveal melanoma represent a poorly characterized rare subgroup of melanoma with a gene mutation profile similar to uveal melanoma. OBJECTIVES: To characterize these tumours in terms of clinical behaviour and genetic characteristics. METHODS: Patients with nonuveal GNAQ/11 mutated melanoma were identified from the prospective multicentre tumour tissue registry ADOREG, Tissue Registry in Melanoma (TRIM) and additional cooperating skin cancer centres. Extensive data on patient, tumour and treatment characteristics were collected retrospectively. Targeted sequencing was used to determine tumour mutational burden. Immunohistochemistry staining was performed for programmed death-ligand 1 and BRCA1-associated protein (BAP)1. Existing whole-exome cutaneous and uveal melanoma data were analysed for mutation type and burden. RESULTS: We identified 18 patients with metastatic GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanoma. Tumours had a lower tumour mutational burden and fewer ultraviolet signature mutations than cutaneous melanomas. In addition to GNAQ and GNA11 mutations (nine each), six splicing factor 3b subunit 1 (SF3B1), three eukaryotic translation initiation factor 1A X-linked (EIF1AX) and four BAP1 mutations were detected. In contrast to uveal melanoma, GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas frequently metastasized lymphatically and concurrent EIF1AX, SF3B1 and BAP1 mutations showed no apparent association with patient prognosis. Objective response to immunotherapy was poor with only one partial response observed in 10 treated patients (10%). CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest that GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas are a subtype of melanoma that is both clinically and genetically distinct from cutaneous and uveal melanoma. As they respond poorly to available treatment regimens, novel effective therapeutic approaches for affected patients are urgently needed. What is already known about this topic? The rare occurrence of GNAQ/11 mutations in nonuveal melanoma has been documented. GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas also harbour genetic alterations in EIF1AX, SF3B1 and BAP1 that are of prognostic relevance in uveal melanoma. What does this study add? GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas show metastatic spread reminiscent of cutaneous melanoma, but not uveal melanoma. GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas have a low tumour mutational burden that is higher than uveal melanoma, but lower than cutaneous melanoma. What is the translational message? Primary GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas are a subtype of melanoma that is clinically and genetically distinct from both cutaneous and uveal melanoma. As metastatic GNAQ/11 mutant nonuveal melanomas respond poorly to available systemic therapies, including immune checkpoint inhibition, novel therapeutic approaches for these tumours are urgently needed. Linked Comment: Rafei-Shamsabadi. Br J Dermatol 2020; 183:806-807.

Elevated baseline serum PD-1 or PD-L1 predicts poor outcome of PD-1 inhibition therapy in metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) checkpoint inhibition has recently advanced to one of the most effective treatment strategies in melanoma. Nevertheless, a considerable proportion of patients show upfront therapy resistance and baseline predictive biomarkers of treatment outcome are scarce. In this study we quantified PD-1 and programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) in baseline sera from melanoma patients in relation to therapy response and survival. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sera taken at therapy baseline from a total of 222 metastatic melanoma patients (two retrospectively selected monocentric discovery cohorts, n = 130; one prospectively collected multicentric validation cohort, n = 92) and from 38 healthy controls were analyzed for PD-1 and PD-L1 concentration by sandwich enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. RESULTS: Melanoma patients showed higher serum concentrations of PD-1 (P = 0.0054) and PD-L1 (P < 0.0001) than healthy controls. Elevated serum PD-1 and PD-L1 levels at treatment baseline were associated with an impaired best overall response (BOR) to anti-PD-1 (P = 0.014, P = 0.041), but not to BRAF inhibition therapy. Baseline PD-1 and PD-L1 serum levels correlated with progression-free (PFS; P = 0.0081, P = 0.053) and overall survival (OS; P = 0.055, P = 0.0062) in patients who received anti-PD-1 therapy, but not in patients treated with BRAF inhibitors. By combining both markers, we obtained a strong discrimination between favorable and poor outcome of anti-PD-1 therapy, with elevated baseline serum levels of PD-1 and/or PD-L1 associated with an impaired BOR (P = 0.037), PFS (P = 0.048), and OS (P = 0.0098). This PD-1/PD-L1 combination serum biomarker was confirmed in an independent multicenter validation set of serum samples prospectively collected at baseline of PD-1 inhibition (BOR, P = 0.019; PFS, P = 0.038; OS, P = 0.022). Multivariable Cox regression demonstrated serum PD-1/PD-L1 as an independent predictor of PFS (P = 0.010) and OS (P = 0.003) in patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors. CONCLUSION: Our findings indicate PD-1 and PD-L1 as useful serum biomarkers to predict the outcome of PD-1 inhibition therapy in melanoma patients and to select patients for PD-1-based versus BRAF-based therapy strategies.

NF1 mutations in conjunctival melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Conjunctival melanoma is a potentially deadly eye tumour. Despite effective local therapies, tumour recurrence and metastasis remain frequent. The genetics of conjunctival melanomas remain incompletely understood. METHODS: A large cohort of 63 conjunctival melanomas was screened for gene mutations known to be important in other melanoma subtypes by targeted next-generation sequencing. Mutation status was correlated with patient prognosis. RESULTS: Frequent mutations in genes activating the MAP kinase pathway were identified. NF1 mutations were most frequent (n = 21, 33%). Recurrent activating mutations were also identified in BRAF (n = 16, 25%) and RAS genes (n = 12, 19%; 11 NRAS and 1 KRAS). CONCLUSIONS: Similar to cutaneous melanomas, conjunctival melanomas can be grouped genetically into four groups: BRAF-mutated, RAS-mutated, NF1-mutated and triple wild-type melanomas. This genetic classification may be useful for assessment of therapeutic options for patients with metastatic conjunctival melanoma.

High mobility group box 1 is increased in the sera of psoriatic patients with disease progression.

BACKGROUND: Psoriasis vulgaris (PV) is an autoimmune-related chronic inflammatory disease, which appears mostly in skin, but also affects the vascular and metabolic system. The incidence of PV is 2-3% in the general population and there is still no possibility to cure. Trigger factors have been identified to initiate and maintain inflammation in the skin, which is characterized by Th1-, Th17- and Th22- cells. OBJECTIVE: We hypothesize that the damage-associated molecular pattern (DAMP) molecule high mobility group box 1 (HMGB1) plays a role in the pathogenesis of PV. HMGB1 is a DNA-binding protein located in the nucleus, which acquires cytokine-like properties once released from the cell upon necrotic cell death or actively secreted by immune cells in inflammation and cancer. METHODS: We recruited 90 psoriatic patients under and without therapy with mild, intermediate and severe progression of disease, defined by the Psoriasis Area Severity Index. Serum levels of HMGB1 in patients with PV were detected by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). RESULTS: Our results show an increased level of HMGB1 in the sera of patients with PV in comparison to healthy donors. Furthermore, our analyses reveal that HMGB1 levels are significantly increased with disease progression and are downregulated after standard therapies for PV have been conducted. CONCLUSION: Our data provide insights into a possible role of HMGB1 for inflammation in PV.

Differential influence of vemurafenib and dabrafenib on patients' lymphocytes despite similar clinical efficacy in melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Since the majority of melanomas eventually become resistant and progress, combining selective BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) with immunotherapies has been proposed to achieve more durable treatment responses. Here, we explored the impact of selective BRAFi on the hosts' immune system. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Clinical data, whole blood counts (WBC) and serum lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) of 277 vemurafenib- and 65 dabrafenib-treated melanoma patients were evaluated. The frequency and phenotype of lymphocyte subpopulations were determined by flow cytometry while T cell cytokine secretion was measured by multiplex assays. RESULTS: Progression-free survival (PFS) as well as overall survival (OS) were similar in patients treated with either BRAFi. High pretreatment LDH was associated with shorter PFS and OS in both groups. During therapy, peripheral lymphocytes decreased by 24.3% (median, P < 0.0001) in vemurafenib-treated patients but remained unchanged in dabrafenib-treated patients (+1.2%, P = 0.717). Differentiation of peripheral lymphocytes of vemurafenib-treated patients showed a significant decrease in CD4(+) T cells (P < 0.05). Within CD4(+) T cells obtained during treatment, an increase in CCR7(+)CD45RA(+) (naïve) and a decrease in CCR7(+)CD45RA(-) (central memory) populations were found (P < 0.01 for both). Furthermore, secretion of interferon-γ and interleukin-9 by CD4(+) T cells was significantly lower in samples obtained during vemurafenib treatment compared with baseline samples. CONCLUSION: While both compounds have comparable clinical efficacy, vemurafenib but not dabrafenib decreases patients peripheral lymphocyte counts and alters CD4(+) T cell phenotype and function. Thus, selective BRAFi can significantly affect patients' peripheral lymphocyte populations. Fully understanding these effects could be critical for successfully implementing combinatorial therapies of BRAFi with immunomodulatory agents.

TERT promoter mutations in ocular melanoma distinguish between conjunctival and uveal tumours.

BACKGROUND: Recently, activating mutations in the TERT promoter were identified in cutaneous melanoma. We tested a cohort of ocular melanoma samples for similar mutations. METHODS: The TERT promoter region was analysed by Sanger sequencing in 47 uveal (ciliary body or choroidal) melanomas and 38 conjunctival melanomas. RESULTS: Mutations of the TERT promoter were not identified in uveal melanomas, but were detected in 12 (32%) conjunctival melanomas. Mutations had a UV signature and were identical to those found in cutaneous melanoma. CONCLUSION: Mutations of TERT promoter with UV signatures are frequent in conjunctival melanomas and favour a pathogenetic kinship with cutaneous melanomas. Absence of these mutations in uveal melanomas emphasises their genetic distinction from cutaneous and conjunctival melanomas.

MGMT gene promoter methylation correlates with tolerance of temozolomide treatment in melanoma but not with clinical outcome.

BACKGROUND: Despite limited clinical efficacy, treatment with dacarbazine or temozolomide (TMZ) remains the standard therapy for metastatic melanoma. In glioblastoma, promoter methylation of the counteracting DNA repair enzyme O(6)-methylguanine-DNA-methyltransferase (MGMT) correlates with survival of patients exposed to TMZ in combination with radiotherapy. For melanoma, data are limited and controversial. METHODS: Biopsy samples from 122 patients with metastatic melanoma being treated with TMZ in two multicenter studies of the Dermatologic Cooperative Oncology Group were investigated for MGMT promoter methylation. We used the COBRA (combined bisulphite restriction analysis) technique to determine aberrant methylation of CpG islands in small amounts of genomic DNA isolated from paraffin-embedded tissue sections. To detect aberrant methylation, bisulphite-treated DNA was amplified by PCR, enzyme restricted, and visualised by gel electrophoresis. RESULTS: Correlation with clinical data from 117 evaluable patients in a best-response evaluation indicated no statistically significant association between MGMT promoter methylation status and response. A methylated MGMT promoter was observed in 34.8% of responders and 23.4% of non-responders (P=0.29). In addition, no survival advantage for patients with a methylated MGMT promoter was detectable (P=0.79). Interestingly, we found a significant correlation between MGMT methylation and tolerance of therapy. Patients with a methylated MGMT promoter had more severe adverse events, requiring more TMZ dose reductions or discontinuations (P=0.007; OR 2.7 (95% CI: 1.32-5.7)). Analysis of MGMT promoter methylation comparing primaries and different metastases over the clinical course revealed no statistical difference (P=0.49). CONCLUSIONS: In advanced melanoma MGMT promoter, methylation correlates with tolerance of therapy, but not with clinical outcome.

Dacarbazine (DTIC) versus vaccination with autologous peptide-pulsed dendritic cells (DC) in first-line treatment of patients with metastatic melanoma: a randomized phase III trial of the DC study group of the DeCOG.

BACKGROUND: This randomized phase III trial was designed to demonstrate the superiority of autologous peptide-loaded dendritic cell (DC) vaccination over standard dacarbazine (DTIC) chemotherapy in stage IV melanoma patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: DTIC 850 mg/m2 intravenously was applied in 4-week intervals. DC vaccines loaded with MHC class I and II-restricted peptides were applied subcutaneously at 2-week intervals for the first five vaccinations and every 4 weeks thereafter. The primary study end point was objective response (OR); secondary end points were toxicity, overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: At the time of the first interim analysis 55 patients had been enrolled into the DTIC and 53 into the DC-arm (ITT). OR was low (DTIC: 5.5%, DC: 3.8%), but not significantly different in the two arms. The Data Safety & Monitoring Board recommended closure of the study. Unscheduled subset analyses revealed that patients with normal serum LDH and/or stage M1a/b survived longer in both arms than those with elevated serum LDH and/or stage M1c. Only in the DC-arm did those patients with (i) an initial unimpaired general health status (Karnofsky = 100) or (ii) an HLA-A2+/HLA-B44- haplotype survive significantly longer than patients with a Karnofsky index <100 (P = 0.007 versus P = 0.057 in the DTIC-arm) or other HLA haplotypes (P = 0.04 versus P = 0.57 in DTIC-treated patients). CONCLUSIONS: DC vaccination could not be demonstrated to be more effective than DTIC chemotherapy in stage IV melanoma patients. The observed association of overall performance status and HLA haplotype with overall survival for patients treated by DC vaccination should be tested in future trials employing DC vaccines.

Lack of clinical efficacy of imatinib in metastatic melanoma.

This two-centre phase-II trial aimed at investigating the efficacy of imatinib in metastasised melanoma patients in correlation to the tumour expression profile of the imatinib targets c-kit and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGF-R). The primary study end point was objective response according to RECIST, secondary end points were safety, overall and progression-free survival. In all, 18 patients with treatment-refractory advanced melanoma received imatinib 800 mg day(-1). In 16 evaluable patients no objective responses could be observed. The median overall survival was 3.9 months, the median time to progression was 1.9 months. Tumour biopsy specimens were obtained from 12 patients prior to imatinib therapy and analysed for c-kit, PDGF-Ralpha and -Rbeta expression by immunohistochemistry. In four cases, cell lines established from these tumour specimens were tested for the antiproliferative effects of imatinib and for functional mutations of genes encoding the imatinib target molecules. The tumour specimens stained positive for CD117/c-kit in nine out of 12 cases (75%), for PDGF-Ralpha in seven out of 12 cases (58%) and for PDGF-Rbeta in eight out of 12 cases (67%). The melanoma cell lines showed a heterogenous expression of the imatinib target molecules without functional mutations in the corresponding amino-acid sequences. In vitro imatinib treatment of the cell lines showed no antiproliferative effect. In conclusion, this study did not reveal an efficacy of imatinib in advanced metastatic melanoma, regardless of the expression pattern of the imatinib target molecules c-kit and PDGF-R.

Comparison of S100 protein and MIA protein as serum marker for malignant melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Detection of S100 beta in serum has been shown to be a significant prognostic marker for malignant melanoma in earlier studies. Melanoma inhibiting activity (MIA) has recently been detected as a new serum marker for malignant melanoma. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the present study, serum levels of S100 beta protein and MIA were measured over a time period of up to 18 months in 271 serum samples from 65 melanoma patients at different stages of disease, during chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. In addition, 46 sera of control patients were analysed. The aim of this study was to compare both potential markers. S100 beta was measured using the immunoluminometric assay LIA-mat Sangtec (Byk Sangtec Diagnostica) with a cut-off level of 0.12 microgram/l. MIA was determined by the MIA ELISA kit (Roche) using a cut-off level of 6.5 ng/ml. RESULTS: In 53 patients a direct correlation of S-100 values and clinical course could be observed (81.5%), whereas in 48 patients MIA-values and clinical course (73.8%) showed an association. S100 beta levels were incorrectly elevated in 5 out of 25 sera, "false positive" (20%)) and were in 8 out of 40 sera not elevated despite the detection of metastases "false negative" (20%)). Assessing the MIA levels, 2 out of 25 probes were false positive (8%) and 13 out of 40 probes false negative(32.5%). CONCLUSION: Our data strongly suggest that S100 and MIA represent serum tumor markers that are valuable both in therapy-monitoring and in detection of tumour progression.