Literature DB >> 23922205

Clinical characteristics and outcomes with specific BRAF and NRAS mutations in patients with metastatic melanoma.

Amanda D Bucheit1, Erica Syklawer, John A Jakob, Roland L Bassett, Jonathan L Curry, Jeffrey E Gershenwald, Kevin B Kim, Patrick Hwu, Alexander J Lazar, Michael A Davies.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Hotspot mutations in BRAF and NRAS are the most common somatic events in patients with melanoma. These mutations occur at highly conserved residues, but include several different substitutions. To determine whether specific mutations are clinically important to differentiate, tumor characteristics and clinical outcomes were compared among patients with advanced melanoma with 1) BRAF V600E versus V600K mutations and 2) NRAS exon 1 versus exon 2 mutations.
METHODS: Retrospective clinical and pathologic data were collected for patients with advanced melanoma with BRAF or NRAS mutations. The demographics, tumor characteristics, and clinical outcomes of the patients were compared to identify significant mutation-specific associations.
RESULTS: Among 302 patients with activating BRAF mutations, 76% had BRAF V600E and 24% had V600K substitutions. Compared with V600E, the presence of a V600K mutation was significantly associated with older age (median, 60.0 years vs 44.7 years; P < .001), male sex (80% vs 59%; P = .001), head/neck primary tumor location (30% vs 15%; P = .0026), shorter interval to stage IV disease (0.98 years vs 2.8 years; P = .015), and a shorter overall survival from the time of diagnosis of stage IV disease (median, 2.44 years vs 1.25 years; hazards ratio, 1.68 [P = .014]). Comparison of 136 patients with NRAS exon 1 (18%) and exon 2 (82%) mutations found an association with primary tumor histology (P = .0096) only.
CONCLUSIONS: The presence of different substitutions at BRAF V600 correlates with patient demographics, tumor characteristics, and prognosis. These findings demonstrate the presence of mutation-specific clinical differences between different BRAF genotypes in patients with melanoma, and support the incorporation of this information in patient evaluation and clinical trial design.
© 2013 American Cancer Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BRAF; NRAS; clinical features; melanoma; prognostic factor; stage IV

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23922205     DOI: 10.1002/cncr.28306

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer        ISSN: 0008-543X            Impact factor:   6.860


  38 in total

Review 1.  Universes collide: combining immunotherapy with targeted therapy for cancer.

Authors:  Jennifer A Wargo; Zachary A Cooper; Keith T Flaherty
Journal:  Cancer Discov       Date:  2014-11-13       Impact factor: 39.397

Review 2.  Biology and treatment of BRAF mutant metastatic melanoma.

Authors:  Benjamin Y Kong; Matteo S Carlino; Alexander M Menzies
Journal:  Melanoma Manag       Date:  2016-02-12

3.  Genotyping of cutaneous melanoma.

Authors:  Isabella C Glitza; Michael A Davies
Journal:  Chin Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-09

4.  Associations of MC1R Genotype and Patient Phenotypes with BRAF and NRAS Mutations in Melanoma.

Authors:  Nancy E Thomas; Sharon N Edmiston; Peter A Kanetsky; Klaus J Busam; Anne Kricker; Bruce K Armstrong; Anne E Cust; Hoda Anton-Culver; Stephen B Gruber; Li Luo; Irene Orlow; Anne S Reiner; Richard P Gallagher; Roberto Zanetti; Stefano Rosso; Lidia Sacchetto; Terence Dwyer; Eloise A Parrish; Honglin Hao; David C Gibbs; Jill S Frank; David W Ollila; Colin B Begg; Marianne Berwick; Kathleen Conway
Journal:  J Invest Dermatol       Date:  2017-08-24       Impact factor: 8.551

Review 5.  Targeting the PD-1 pathway: a promising future for the treatment of melanoma.

Authors:  Andrew Mamalis; Manveer Garcha; Jared Jagdeo
Journal:  Arch Dermatol Res       Date:  2014-03-11       Impact factor: 3.017

6.  Distinct Molecular Profiles and Immunotherapy Treatment Outcomes of V600E and V600K BRAF-Mutant Melanoma.

Authors:  Inês Pires da Silva; Kevin Y X Wang; James S Wilmott; Jeff Holst; Matteo S Carlino; John J Park; Camelia Quek; Matthew Wongchenko; Yibing Yan; Graham Mann; Douglas B Johnson; Jennifer L McQuade; Rajat Rai; Richard F Kefford; Helen Rizos; Richard A Scolyer; Jean Y H Yang; Georgina V Long; Alexander M Menzies
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2019-01-10       Impact factor: 12.531

7.  Putative genomic characteristics of BRAF V600K versus V600E cutaneous melanoma.

Authors:  Yuanyuan Li; David M Umbach; Leping Li
Journal:  Melanoma Res       Date:  2017-12       Impact factor: 3.599

8.  Converting biology into clinical benefit: lessons learned from BRAF inhibitors.

Authors:  Jennifer McQuade; Michael A Davies
Journal:  Melanoma Manag       Date:  2015

9.  Complete loss of PTEN protein expression correlates with shorter time to brain metastasis and survival in stage IIIB/C melanoma patients with BRAFV600 mutations.

Authors:  Amanda D Bucheit; Guo Chen; Alan Siroy; Michael Tetzlaff; Russell Broaddus; Denai Milton; Patricia Fox; Roland Bassett; Patrick Hwu; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Alexander J Lazar; Michael A Davies
Journal:  Clin Cancer Res       Date:  2014-08-27       Impact factor: 12.531

10.  Phosphoproteomic Analyses of NRAS(G12) and NRAS(Q61) Mutant Melanocytes Reveal Increased CK2α Kinase Levels in NRAS(Q61) Mutant Cells.

Authors:  Christian Posch; Martina Sanlorenzo; Igor Vujic; Juan A Oses-Prieto; Brian D Cholewa; Sarasa T Kim; Jeffrey Ma; Kevin Lai; Mitchell Zekhtser; Rosaura Esteve-Puig; Gary Green; Shreya Chand; Alma L Burlingame; Renate Panzer-Grümayer; Klemens Rappersberger; Susana Ortiz-Urda
Journal:  J Invest Dermatol       Date:  2016-05-29       Impact factor: 8.551

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.