Matthew G Field1, J William Harbour. 1. Ocular Oncology Service, Bascom Palmer Eye Institute and Sylvester Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Miami Miller School of Medicine, Miami, Florida, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an update on the rapidly evolving methods for assessing prognosis and predicting response to targeted molecular therapy in uveal melanoma. RECENT FINDINGS: The techniques for assessing prognosis in uveal melanoma have evolved from simple physical features, such as tumor size, location, and cell morphology, to the slightly more sophisticated counting of chromosomal gains and losses. More recently, gene expression profiling has provided a highly accurate and biologically informative gold standard for molecular prognostication. The latest step in the evolution of molecular testing has been the recent discovery of major driver mutations that allow predictive testing of response to targeted molecular therapies. Mutations in GNAQ and GNA11 are early events that promote cell proliferation, and these mutations are sensitive to MAPK kinase, PKC, and AKT inhibitors. Mutations in BAP1, SF3B1, and EIF1AX are later events that are largely mutually exclusive. Mutations in BAP1 are strongly associated with metastasis, whereas those in SF3B1 and EIF1AX are associated with good prognosis. Uveal melanomas with BAP1 mutations demonstrate sensitivity to epigenetic modulators, such as histone deacetylase inhibitors. Clinical trials are now available to evaluate the efficacy of these targeted molecular agents in patients with uveal melanoma. SUMMARY: Molecular prognostic testing and enrollment of high-risk patients into clinical trials of targeted molecular therapy are rapidly becoming the standard of care in the management of uveal melanoma.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To provide an update on the rapidly evolving methods for assessing prognosis and predicting response to targeted molecular therapy in uveal melanoma. RECENT FINDINGS: The techniques for assessing prognosis in uveal melanoma have evolved from simple physical features, such as tumor size, location, and cell morphology, to the slightly more sophisticated counting of chromosomal gains and losses. More recently, gene expression profiling has provided a highly accurate and biologically informative gold standard for molecular prognostication. The latest step in the evolution of molecular testing has been the recent discovery of major driver mutations that allow predictive testing of response to targeted molecular therapies. Mutations in GNAQ and GNA11 are early events that promote cell proliferation, and these mutations are sensitive to MAPK kinase, PKC, and AKT inhibitors. Mutations in BAP1, SF3B1, and EIF1AX are later events that are largely mutually exclusive. Mutations in BAP1 are strongly associated with metastasis, whereas those in SF3B1 and EIF1AX are associated with good prognosis. Uveal melanomas with BAP1 mutations demonstrate sensitivity to epigenetic modulators, such as histone deacetylase inhibitors. Clinical trials are now available to evaluate the efficacy of these targeted molecular agents in patients with uveal melanoma. SUMMARY: Molecular prognostic testing and enrollment of high-risk patients into clinical trials of targeted molecular therapy are rapidly becoming the standard of care in the management of uveal melanoma.
Authors: J William Harbour; Michael D Onken; Elisha D O Roberson; Shenghui Duan; Li Cao; Lori A Worley; M Laurin Council; Katie A Matatall; Cynthia Helms; Anne M Bowcock Journal: Science Date: 2010-11-04 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Marcel Martin; Lars Maßhöfer; Petra Temming; Sven Rahmann; Claudia Metz; Norbert Bornfeld; Johannes van de Nes; Ludger Klein-Hitpass; Alan G Hinnebusch; Bernhard Horsthemke; Dietmar R Lohmann; Michael Zeschnigk Journal: Nat Genet Date: 2013-06-23 Impact factor: 38.330
Authors: Michael D Onken; Lori A Worley; Meghan D Long; Shenghui Duan; M Laurin Council; Anne M Bowcock; J William Harbour Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2008-08-21 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Walter van Gils; Elisabeth M Lodder; Hanneke W Mensink; Emine Kiliç; Nicole C Naus; Hennie T Brüggenwirth; Wilfred van Ijcken; Dion Paridaens; Gregorius P Luyten; Annelies de Klein Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2008-06-14 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Bjoern Schneider; Katrin Riedel; Andrey Zhivov; Maja Huehns; Heike Zettl; Rudolf F Guthoff; Anselm Jünemann; Andreas Erbersdobler; Annette Zimpfer Journal: Pathol Oncol Res Date: 2017-12-05 Impact factor: 3.201
Authors: Willeke A M Blokx; Katrin Rabold; H Jorn Bovenschen; Marjolijn J L Ligtenberg; Arjen R Mensenkamp; Gesina van Lijnschoten; Wendy A G van Zelst-Stams; Patricia J T A Groenen Journal: Virchows Arch Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 4.064
Authors: Chandrani Chattopadhyay; Dae Won Kim; Dan S Gombos; Junna Oba; Yong Qin; Michelle D Williams; Bita Esmaeli; Elizabeth A Grimm; Jennifer A Wargo; Scott E Woodman; Sapna P Patel Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-03-15 Impact factor: 6.860