J William Harbour1. 1. Department of Ophthalmology and Visual Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, Missouri 63110, USA. harbour@wustl.edu
Abstract
PURPOSE: To critically assess the status of molecular prognostic testing and its use for individualized patient care in uveal melanoma. DESIGN: Perspective, literature review, evidence assessment, and commentary. METHODS: Evaluation of selected articles from the literature and the authors' clinical and laboratory studies. RESULTS: The most accurate molecular tests for predicting metastatic death in patients with uveal melanoma currently involve automated techniques for assessing deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) copy number alterations and gene expression profiling. Most tests reported in the literature to date do not provide adequate scientific and statistical validation to be used outside of an ethically supervised investigational environment. CONCLUSIONS: Many cytogenetic and molecular prognostic tests for uveal melanoma have been reported, yet few have reached the standards required for routine clinical testing. Clinicians must understand the statistical and scientific limitations of the tests they are using, and appropriate ethical oversight is essential until such time that validated testing instruments are available that are performed in a standardized clinical testing environment. Well-controlled prospective studies are necessary to identify the most accurate, widely accessible, and affordable tests for routine clinical use.
PURPOSE: To critically assess the status of molecular prognostic testing and its use for individualized patient care in uveal melanoma. DESIGN: Perspective, literature review, evidence assessment, and commentary. METHODS: Evaluation of selected articles from the literature and the authors' clinical and laboratory studies. RESULTS: The most accurate molecular tests for predicting metastatic death in patients with uveal melanoma currently involve automated techniques for assessing deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) copy number alterations and gene expression profiling. Most tests reported in the literature to date do not provide adequate scientific and statistical validation to be used outside of an ethically supervised investigational environment. CONCLUSIONS: Many cytogenetic and molecular prognostic tests for uveal melanoma have been reported, yet few have reached the standards required for routine clinical testing. Clinicians must understand the statistical and scientific limitations of the tests they are using, and appropriate ethical oversight is essential until such time that validated testing instruments are available that are performed in a standardized clinical testing environment. Well-controlled prospective studies are necessary to identify the most accurate, widely accessible, and affordable tests for routine clinical use.
Authors: S E Coupland; N Bechrakis; A Schüler; I Anagnostopoulos; M Hummel; N Bornfeld; H Stein Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 1998-08 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: J A Royds; R M Sharrard; M A Parsons; J Lawry; R Rees; D Cottam; B Wagner; I G Rennie Journal: Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol Date: 1992 Impact factor: 3.117
Authors: Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman; Benjamin N Christopher; Mohammed F Faramawi; Khaled Said-Ahmed; Carol Cole; Andrew McFaddin; Abhik Ray-Chaudhury; Nyla Heerema; Frederick H Davidorf Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2011-04-15 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Benjamin N Christopher; Colleen M Cebulla; Paul E Wakely; Frederick H Davidorf; Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman Journal: Exp Eye Res Date: 2011-09-17 Impact factor: 3.467
Authors: T Huibertus van Essen; Sake I van Pelt; Mieke Versluis; Inge H G Bronkhorst; Sjoerd G van Duinen; Marina Marinkovic; Wilma G M Kroes; Claudia A L Ruivenkamp; Shruti Shukla; Annelies de Klein; Emine Kiliç; J William Harbour; Gregorius P M Luyten; Pieter A van der Velden; Rob M Verdijk; Martine J Jager Journal: Br J Ophthalmol Date: 2014-08-21 Impact factor: 4.638
Authors: Albert Liao; Pardeep Mittal; David H Lawson; Jenny J Yang; Eszter Szalai; Hans E Grossniklaus Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2017-11-06 Impact factor: 12.079