Literature DB >> 25228337

Accurate detection of BRAF p.V600E mutations in challenging melanoma specimens requires stringent immunohistochemistry scoring criteria or sensitive molecular assays.

Kevin E Fisher1, Cynthia Cohen2, Momin T Siddiqui2, John F Palma3, Edward H Lipford4, John W Longshore4.   

Abstract

Malignant melanoma patients require BRAF mutation testing prior to initiating BRAF inhibitor therapy. Molecular testing remains the diagnostic gold standard, but recent work suggests that BRAF immunohistochemistry (IHC) confers comparable results. Sample attributes and scoring criteria that may affect BRAF IHC interpretation, however, are poorly defined. We investigated formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded samples with variable challenging interpretative attributes: metastases, core needle biopsies, sample tissues less than 60 mm(2), samples with greater than 50% necrosis, and/or samples with greater than 10% melanin pigmentation. Three pathologists independently scored 122 BRAF V600E IHC-labeled melanoma samples for percentage (0%-100%) of staining intensity (0-3+). Interscorer BRAF IHC discrepancies were resolved by consensus review. Lenient (≥1+, >0%) and stringent (≥2+, ≥10%) IHC scoring criteria were compared to BRAF V600 mutation (cobas) results (n = 118). Specimens with greater than 10% melanin pigmentation and metastatic samples produced the majority of interobserver IHC and IHC/cobas scoring discrepancies. Consensus review using stringent scoring criteria decreased the number of discrepant results, yielded very good interobserver reproducibility, and improved specificity and positive predictive value for BRAF p.V600E detection. BRAF p.V600K mutations accounted for 57.1% of false-negative IHC results when stringent, consensus criteria scoring were used. The cobas test detected 75.0% (8/12) of BRAF IHC-negative BRAF p.V600K mutations confirmed by next-generation sequencing. Molecular BRAF testing is the preferred screening test for BRAF inhibitor therapy eligibility because of superior sensitivity in challenging interpretative melanoma specimens. However, BRAF V600E IHC has excellent specificity and positive predictive value when stringent, consensus scoring criteria are implemented. To decrease IHC scoring discrepancies, pathologists should interpret metastatic and pigmented samples with caution.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  BRAF; Comparison; Criteria; Immunohistochemistry; Melanoma; Molecular; V600E

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25228337     DOI: 10.1016/j.humpath.2014.07.014

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Pathol        ISSN: 0046-8177            Impact factor:   3.466


  14 in total

1.  The use of BRAF V600E mutation-specific immunohistochemistry in pediatric Langerhans cell histiocytosis.

Authors:  Leomar Y Ballester; Miguel D Cantu; Karen P H Lim; Stephen F Sarabia; Lizmery Suarez Ferguson; C Renee Webb; Carl E Allen; Kenneth L McClain; Carrie A Mohila; Jyotinder N Punia; Angshumoy Roy; Dolores H López-Terrada; M John Hicks; Kevin E Fisher
Journal:  Hematol Oncol       Date:  2017-02-20       Impact factor: 5.271

2.  Comparison of Five Different Assays for the Detection of BRAF Mutations in Formalin-Fixed Paraffin Embedded Tissues of Patients with Metastatic Melanoma.

Authors:  Claire Franczak; Julia Salleron; Cindy Dubois; Pierre Filhine-Trésarrieu; Agnès Leroux; Jean-Louis Merlin; Alexandre Harlé
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 4.074

3.  Clinical Validation and Implementation of a Targeted Next-Generation Sequencing Assay to Detect Somatic Variants in Non-Small Cell Lung, Melanoma, and Gastrointestinal Malignancies.

Authors:  Kevin E Fisher; Linsheng Zhang; Jason Wang; Geoffrey H Smith; Scott Newman; Thomas M Schneider; Rathi N Pillai; Ragini R Kudchadkar; Taofeek K Owonikoko; Suresh S Ramalingam; David H Lawson; Keith A Delman; Bassel F El-Rayes; Malania M Wilson; H Clifford Sullivan; Annie S Morrison; Serdar Balci; N Volkan Adsay; Anthony A Gal; Gabriel L Sica; Debra F Saxe; Karen P Mann; Charles E Hill; Fadlo R Khuri; Michael R Rossi
Journal:  J Mol Diagn       Date:  2016-01-20       Impact factor: 5.568

Review 4.  BRAF Heterogeneity in Melanoma.

Authors:  Takamichi Ito; Yuka Tanaka; Maho Murata; Yumiko Kaku-Ito; Kazuhisa Furue; Masutaka Furue
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2021-02-08

5.  NRAS (Q61R), BRAF (V600E) immunohistochemistry: a concomitant tool for mutation screening in melanomas.

Authors:  Arnaud Uguen; Matthieu Talagas; Sebastian Costa; Laura Samaison; Laure Paule; Zarrin Alavi; Marc De Braekeleer; Cédric Le Marechal; Pascale Marcorelles
Journal:  Diagn Pathol       Date:  2015-07-25       Impact factor: 2.644

6.  Is immunohistochemistry of BRAF V600E useful as a screening tool and during progression disease of melanoma patients?

Authors:  Laura Schirosi; Sabino Strippoli; Francesca Gaudio; Giusi Graziano; Ondina Popescu; Michele Guida; Giovanni Simone; Anita Mangia
Journal:  BMC Cancer       Date:  2016-11-18       Impact factor: 4.430

7.  Increased expression of EHMT2 associated with H3K9me2 level contributes to the poor prognosis of gastric cancer.

Authors:  Ping Chen; Qi Qian; Zhiyuan Zhu; Xiaohui Shen; Shenling Yu; Zhenghong Yu; Rui Sun; Yiping Li; Didi Guo; Hong Fan
Journal:  Oncol Lett       Date:  2020-06-05       Impact factor: 2.967

8.  Detection of BRAF Mutations Using a Fully Automated Platform and Comparison with High Resolution Melting, Real-Time Allele Specific Amplification, Immunohistochemistry and Next Generation Sequencing Assays, for Patients with Metastatic Melanoma.

Authors:  Alexandre Harlé; Julia Salleron; Claire Franczak; Cindy Dubois; Pierre Filhine-Tressarieu; Agnès Leroux; Jean-Louis Merlin
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2016-04-25       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 9.  Diagnostic Immunohistochemistry in Cutaneous Neoplasia: An Update.

Authors:  Leigh A Compton; George F Murphy; Christine G Lian
Journal:  Dermatopathology (Basel)       Date:  2015-04-08

10.  Melanoma-Derived BRAF(V600E) Mutation in Peritumoral Stromal Cells: Implications for in Vivo Cell Fusion.

Authors:  Zsuzsanna Kurgyis; Lajos V Kemény; Tünde Buknicz; Gergely Groma; Judit Oláh; Ádám Jakab; Hilda Polyánka; Kurt Zänker; Thomas Dittmar; Lajos Kemény; István B Németh
Journal:  Int J Mol Sci       Date:  2016-06-21       Impact factor: 5.923

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.