K G Griewank1. 1. Hautklinik, Universitätsklinikum Essen, Universität Duisburg-Essen, Hufelandstr. 55, 45147, Essen, Deutschland, klaus.griewank@uk-essen.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Technical advances have led to an intricate understanding of genetic alterations occurring in melanomas. Methodological improvements have made it possible to carry out a detailed molecular analysis of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue samples. OBJECTIVES: The currently available molecular genetic assays are presented with their individual strengths and weaknesses as well as their future potential for molecular analysis. METHODS: The available literature, assessments from different experts, as well as personal experiences with the different methods are presented and discussed. RESULTS: The molecular genetic methods introduced in recent years can be helpful in making a distinction between benign and malignant tumors. Additionally, DNA sequencing approaches are essential for stratifying which patients with metastasized tumors will benefit from available targeted therapies. CONCLUSION: Molecular genetic assays are already a key element in terms of diagnosing and treating malignant melanoma. Similar to other methods, genetic assays have their weaknesses and limits, however, some of these will most likely be overcome in the course of future methodological advances. The role of molecular diagnostics as a complementary approach to customary histopathological review by a pathologist is likely to increase in the future.
BACKGROUND: Technical advances have led to an intricate understanding of genetic alterations occurring in melanomas. Methodological improvements have made it possible to carry out a detailed molecular analysis of formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissue samples. OBJECTIVES: The currently available molecular genetic assays are presented with their individual strengths and weaknesses as well as their future potential for molecular analysis. METHODS: The available literature, assessments from different experts, as well as personal experiences with the different methods are presented and discussed. RESULTS: The molecular genetic methods introduced in recent years can be helpful in making a distinction between benign and malignant tumors. Additionally, DNA sequencing approaches are essential for stratifying which patients with metastasized tumors will benefit from available targeted therapies. CONCLUSION: Molecular genetic assays are already a key element in terms of diagnosing and treating malignant melanoma. Similar to other methods, genetic assays have their weaknesses and limits, however, some of these will most likely be overcome in the course of future methodological advances. The role of molecular diagnostics as a complementary approach to customary histopathological review by a pathologist is likely to increase in the future.
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: Richard D Carvajal; Cristina R Antonescu; Jedd D Wolchok; Paul B Chapman; Ruth-Ann Roman; Jerrold Teitcher; Katherine S Panageas; Klaus J Busam; Bartosz Chmielowski; Jose Lutzky; Anna C Pavlick; Anne Fusco; Lauren Cane; Naoko Takebe; Swapna Vemula; Nancy Bouvier; Boris C Bastian; Gary K Schwartz Journal: JAMA Date: 2011-06-08 Impact factor: 56.272
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: Catherine D Van Raamsdonk; Klaus G Griewank; Michelle B Crosby; Maria C Garrido; Swapna Vemula; Thomas Wiesner; Anna C Obenauf; Werner Wackernagel; Gary Green; Nancy Bouvier; M Mert Sozen; Gail Baimukanova; Ritu Roy; Adriana Heguy; Igor Dolgalev; Raya Khanin; Klaus Busam; Michael R Speicher; Joan O'Brien; Boris C Bastian Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2010-11-17 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Timothy R Wilson; Jane Fridlyand; Yibing Yan; Elicia Penuel; Luciana Burton; Emily Chan; Jing Peng; Eva Lin; Yulei Wang; Jeff Sosman; Antoni Ribas; Jiang Li; John Moffat; Daniel P Sutherlin; Hartmut Koeppen; Mark Merchant; Richard Neve; Jeff Settleman Journal: Nature Date: 2012-07-26 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Klaus G Griewank; Richard A Scolyer; John F Thompson; Keith T Flaherty; Dirk Schadendorf; Rajmohan Murali Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2014-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Jedd D Wolchok; Harriet Kluger; Margaret K Callahan; Michael A Postow; Naiyer A Rizvi; Alexander M Lesokhin; Neil H Segal; Charlotte E Ariyan; Ruth-Ann Gordon; Kathleen Reed; Matthew M Burke; Anne Caldwell; Stephanie A Kronenberg; Blessing U Agunwamba; Xiaoling Zhang; Israel Lowy; Hector David Inzunza; William Feely; Christine E Horak; Quan Hong; Alan J Korman; Jon M Wigginton; Ashok Gupta; Mario Sznol Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2013-06-02 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Helen Davies; Graham R Bignell; Charles Cox; Philip Stephens; Sarah Edkins; Sheila Clegg; Jon Teague; Hayley Woffendin; Mathew J Garnett; William Bottomley; Neil Davis; Ed Dicks; Rebecca Ewing; Yvonne Floyd; Kristian Gray; Sarah Hall; Rachel Hawes; Jaime Hughes; Vivian Kosmidou; Andrew Menzies; Catherine Mould; Adrian Parker; Claire Stevens; Stephen Watt; Steven Hooper; Rebecca Wilson; Hiran Jayatilake; Barry A Gusterson; Colin Cooper; Janet Shipley; Darren Hargrave; Katherine Pritchard-Jones; Norman Maitland; Georgia Chenevix-Trench; Gregory J Riggins; Darell D Bigner; Giuseppe Palmieri; Antonio Cossu; Adrienne Flanagan; Andrew Nicholson; Judy W C Ho; Suet Y Leung; Siu T Yuen; Barbara L Weber; Hilliard F Seigler; Timothy L Darrow; Hugh Paterson; Richard Marais; Christopher J Marshall; Richard Wooster; Michael R Stratton; P Andrew Futreal Journal: Nature Date: 2002-06-09 Impact factor: 49.962