BRAF mutation testing in melanoma: results from a German observational multicenter study.
Adolescent
Adult
Age Factors
Aged
Aged, 80 and over
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ genetics
DNA Mutational Analysis
/ standards
Female
Gene Expression Regulation, Neoplastic
Germany
Humans
Male
Melanoma
/ genetics
Middle Aged
Mutation
Mutation Rate
Neoplasm Staging
Phenotype
Predictive Value of Tests
Prospective Studies
Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf
/ genetics
Quality Control
Risk Factors
Skin Neoplasms
/ genetics
Young Adult
BRAF mutation
Melanoma
Multiple logistic regression
Mutational analysis
Quality control
Journal
Virchows Archiv : an international journal of pathology
ISSN: 1432-2307
Titre abrégé: Virchows Arch
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 9423843
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jan 2019
Jan 2019
Historique:
received:
10
05
2018
accepted:
22
10
2018
revised:
01
10
2018
pubmed:
9
11
2018
medline:
30
1
2019
entrez:
9
11
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Quality control of BRAF mutation testing methods used in routine practice is crucial for optimal treatment selection. In this prospective study, we assessed the impact of patient/sample characteristics on BRAF mutation testing results in patients with melanoma, during clinical practice. Data were collected on routine testing practices and documented mutation status in patients with melanoma stages IIIB, IIIC, or IV across 28 diagnostic pathology centers in Germany. Patient/sample data collected included: patient age, location of primary melanoma and metastases, origin of sample, melanoma subtype, and quality of tissue. Statistical influence of patient/sample characteristics on BRAF mutation rate was assessed using multiple logistic regression analyses and statistical models developed to predict the probability of BRAF mutations for individual patient cohorts. Data/samples from 642 patients with melanoma were analyzed. BRAF mutations were documented in 241/642 patients (37.5%). The primary statistical model to predict BRAF mutation rates included: age (continuous), origin of sample, method of mutation analysis, and quality of tissue. Analyses of post hoc collected data identified major deviations between documented mutation rates included in this study vs. routinely recorded mutation rates for three centers. When samples from these centers were excluded, the influence of testing method was no longer statistically significant. The final model included patient age, origin of sample (including metastasis location), and quality of tissue. Once validated in an independent population, this type of model could allow pathology centers to compare the performance of their testing methods with what would be expected based on patient, tumor, and sample characteristics.
Identifiants
pubmed: 30406424
doi: 10.1007/s00428-018-2480-4
pii: 10.1007/s00428-018-2480-4
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
BRAF protein, human
EC 2.7.11.1
Proto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf
EC 2.7.11.1
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Multicenter Study
Observational Study
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
71-78Références
Nature. 2002 Jun 27;417(6892):949-54
pubmed: 12068308
Br J Cancer. 2003 May 6;88(9):1403-5
pubmed: 12778069
Cancer Cell. 2004 Oct;6(4):313-9
pubmed: 15488754
Br J Dermatol. 2011 Apr;164(4):776-84
pubmed: 21166657
J Clin Oncol. 2011 Apr 1;29(10):1239-46
pubmed: 21343559
N Engl J Med. 2011 Jun 30;364(26):2507-16
pubmed: 21639808
Cancer. 2012 Aug 15;118(16):4014-23
pubmed: 22180178
Clin Cancer Res. 2012 Jun 15;18(12):3242-9
pubmed: 22535154
Pathology. 2012 Jun;44(4):357-9
pubmed: 22614711
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Jul 10;30(20):2522-9
pubmed: 22614978
Lancet. 2012 Jul 28;380(9839):358-65
pubmed: 22735384
Cell. 2012 Jul 20;150(2):251-63
pubmed: 22817889
J Mol Diagn. 2013 Nov;15(6):790-5
pubmed: 23994118
Appl Immunohistochem Mol Morphol. 2014 Oct;22(9):648-51
pubmed: 25046227
Ann Oncol. 2015 Sep;26 Suppl 5:v126-32
pubmed: 26314774
PLoS One. 2016 Apr 25;11(4):e0153576
pubmed: 27111917
Asia Pac J Clin Oncol. 2016 Dec;12(4):403-408
pubmed: 27488807