| Literature DB >> 28445515 |
Charlotte Welinder1,2, Krzysztof Pawłowski3,4, A Marcell Szasz1,2,5, Maria Yakovleva2, Yutaka Sugihara1, Johan Malm2,4, Göran Jönsson1, Christian Ingvar6, Lotta Lundgren1,7, Bo Baldetorp1, Håkan Olsson1,7,8, Melinda Rezeli9, Thomas Laurell2,9, Elisabet Wieslander1, György Marko-Varga2,9,10.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Metastatic melanoma is still one of the most prevalent skin cancers, which upon progression has neither a prognostic marker nor a specific and lasting treatment. Proteomic analysis is a versatile approach with high throughput data and results that can be used for characterizing tissue samples. However, such analysis is hampered by the complexity of the disease, heterogeneity of patients, tumors, and samples themselves. With the long term aim of quest for better diagnostics biomarkers, as well as predictive and prognostic markers, we focused on relating high resolution proteomics data to careful histopathological evaluation of the tumor samples and patient survival information. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Regional lymph node metastases obtained from ten patients with metastatic melanoma (stage III) were analyzed by histopathology and proteomics using mass spectrometry. Out of the ten patients, six had clinical follow-up data. The protein deep mining mass spectrometry data was related to the histopathology tumor tissue sections adjacent to the area used for deep-mining. Clinical follow-up data provided information on disease progression which could be linked to protein expression aiming to identify tissue-based specific protein markers for metastatic melanoma and prognostic factors for prediction of progression of stage III disease.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28445515 PMCID: PMC5405986 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0176167
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Location of primary tumors on the body of melanoma patients and their route of progression.
Red font represents poor prognosis (“non-survivors”), green font represents good prognosis (“survivors”).
Clinical information of patient characteristics.
Breslow thickness and Clarks refer to primary melanoma feature.
| Tumor | Gender | Age at met | Age at primary | Breslow class | Clark | Stage | Status | OS | DSS |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| MM35 | Male | 55 | 54 | 3 | 4 | 3 | Alive | 7960 | - |
| MM98 | Male | 75 | 73 | 4 | 4 | 3 | Dead | 519 | 519 |
| MM504 | Male | 54 | NA | NA | NA | NA | Dead | 451 | 451 |
| MM687 | Male | 74 | 72 | 1 | 2 | 3 | Dead | 591 | 591 |
| MM787 | Male | 81 | 78 | 2 | 4 | 3 | Dead | 734 | 734 |
| MM812 | Male | 51 | NA | NA | NA | NA | Alive | 5028 | - |
| MM813 | Female | 54 | 54 | 2 | 3 | 3 | Alive | 4913 | - |
| MM825 | Female | 66 | 64 | 2 | 4 | 3 | Alive | 4508 | - |
| MM829 | Male | 55 | 49 | 1 | 2 | 3 | Alive | 4431 | - |
| MM835 | Female | 36 | 32 | 3 | 3 | 3 | Alive | 4353 | - |
NA–not available
OS–Calculated from date of sample collection to 20160622.
DSS–Calculated from date of sample collection to date of dead in melanoma disease.
Fig 2(A) Overall survival of the prognostic groups, “survivors” (group 1) and “non-survivors” (group 2). (B) All ten cases were subjected to rigorous review both on histological and clinical grounds. (C) Those were omitted (lighter grey text), where the tumor content of the examined tissue was low (<10%) or the clinical follow-up data resulted in non-disease-specific outcome measures (one patient in group 2 died without evidence of malignancy). Abbreviations: l: left; r: right; LN met: lymph node metastasis; CNS: central nervous system; tx: therapy. Numbers in brackets mean lymph nodes containing metastatic melanomas / all lymph nodes dissected from either the groin or the axilla: nmetastatic/nall.
Histopathological properties of the melanoma metastases evaluated in this study.
The ten tumors are grouped according to clinicopathological classification.
| GROUPING | Clinicopathologic | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| All | Equivocal | "survivors" | "non-survivors" | ||
| 10 | 4 | 3 | 3 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 7 | 2 | 2 | 2 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | ||
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 10 | 4 | 3 | 3 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 3 | 2 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 6 | 2 | 1 | 2 | ||
| 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 3 | 1 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 4 | 0 | 1 | 1 | ||
| 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 59.4 | 21.3 | 74.6 | 94.6 | ||
| 27.0 | 50.5 | 21.8 | 0.5 | ||
| 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | ||
| 13.7 | 27.8 | 3.5 | 4.8 | ||
* equivocal cases represent those cases, which had tumor tissue of less than 10% on the slides, and one patient who deceased without evidence of malignancy.
Fig 3(A) Volcano plot showing differences in approximate protein abundance between survivors and non-survivors. T-test p-value and mean fold difference shown (protein abundance evaluated as sum of PSMs). (B) As in (A), but only significant proteins shown (p<0.05). (C) Biological relationship network (IPA) for proteins differentiating between survivors and non-survivors (shown in B), and having literature links to melanoma or metastasis. Only significant proteins shown (T-test p-value below 0.01), excluding proteins having no IPA relationships within the presented set.
Fig 4Identified melanoma markers and pathobiological processes in tissue samples of melanoma lymph node metastases.
The graphics displays key upstream regulators found according to analysis based on DAVID and IPA evaluation. The graph displays major regulated canonical pathways and subnetworks resulting in cellular functions and molecular fingerprints providing survival advantage for malignant cells with promotion to further progression and metastasis.