A small multimarker panel using simple immunohistochemistry methods is an adjunct to stage for cutaneous melanoma prognosis.

Melanoma is an aggressive cancer. Outcomes can vary significantly for lesions within the same pathological stage - a problem of increasing relevance with the promise of adjuvant treatments on the basis of immune checkpoint modulators and targeted therapies. The use of a panel of prognostic molecular biomarkers as an adjunct to stage represents a possible solution. Immunohistochemistry-based biomarkers offer greater potential for translation into clinical practice than biomarkers utilizing more complex methods. Many immunohistochemistry-based biomarkers have been identified through discovery studies, but rigorous validation of these is scarce. We take the first steps towards validating a combination of three such biomarkers in a prognostic panel - 5hmC, ki-67 and p16. Immunohistochemistry was performed on a cohort of 50 melanomas to determine the expression of 5hmC, ki-67 and p16. 5hmC and p16 showed statistically significant differences in metastasis-free survival between low-score and high-score groups, whereas the use of all three biomarkers together with stage could predict the 5-year metastasis risk more accurately than stage alone. Our results suggest that the use of multimarker panels to improve the accuracy of prognostic predictions is feasible and worthy of further study. We have shown that a small immunohistochemistry-based panel utilizing simple, inexpensive, reproducible methods can be an effective adjunct to stage in prognostic prediction. A follow-up study consisting of a large cohort of melanomas is now indicated to continue the development of the prognostic panel.

Current and future delivery of diagnostic electron microscopy in the UK: results of a national survey.

AIMS: Electron microscopy (EM) remains essential to delivering several specialist areas of diagnosis, especially the interpretation of native renal biopsies. However, there is anecdotal evidence of EM units struggling to survive, for a variety of reasons. The authors sought to obtain objective evidence of the extent and the causes of this problem. METHODS: An online survey was undertaken of Fellows of the Royal College of Pathologists who use EM in diagnosis. RESULTS: A significant number of EM units anticipate having to close and hence outsource their EM work in the coming years. Yet most existing units are working to full capacity and would be unable to take on the substantial amounts of extra work implied by other units outsourcing their needs. Equipment and staffing are identified by most EM units as the major barriers to growth and are also the main reasons cited for units facing potential closure. CONCLUSIONS: In the current financial climate it seems unlikely that units will be willing to make the large investment in equipment and staff needed to take on extra work, unless they can be reasonably confident of an acceptable financial return as a result of increased external referral rates. The case is thus made for a degree of national coordination of the future provision of this specialist service, possibly through the National Commissioning Group or the new National Commissioning Board. Without this, the future of diagnostic EM services in the UK is uncertain. Its failure would pose a threat to good patient care.