AIMS: The aims of the present study were to analyse the usability of an immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis as compared with a frequently used mutation detection analysis, and to examine the extent of intratumour and intertumour heterogeneity of BRAF V600E in primary tumours and their corresponding metastases. In the development of intertumour heterogeneity between the primary tumour and the corresponding metastases, time as a factor was also investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: In total, 227 samples from 224 melanoma patients were analysed with both the Cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test and IHC anti-BRAF V600E staining. In 82 primary tumours and 224 corresponding metastases, the extents of intertumour and intratumour heterogeneity were investigated with IHC staining. In 15 cases, disagreement between IHC analysis and the Cobas test was seen. In all but one of the examined patients, homogeneity between the primary tumour and the corresponding metastasis was found. Except for this one case, no heterogeneity developed over longer periods. CONCLUSION: IHC analysis can be safely used as a BRAF pretreatment screening tool, and no additional test is needed when staining is positive. However, if stains are negative, additional tests are essential for detection of other BRAF mutations. We suggest that using primary melanoma tissues is just as safe as using metastatic tissue for detection of BRAF V600E, as BRAF intertumour heterogeneity is extremely rare. In addition, the time between diagnosis of the primary tumour and diagnosis of the corresponding metastasis seems not to increase the risk of intertumour heterogeneity.
AIMS: The aims of the present study were to analyse the usability of an immunohistochemical (IHC) analysis as compared with a frequently used mutation detection analysis, and to examine the extent of intratumour and intertumour heterogeneity of BRAFV600E in primary tumours and their corresponding metastases. In the development of intertumour heterogeneity between the primary tumour and the corresponding metastases, time as a factor was also investigated. METHODS AND RESULTS: In total, 227 samples from 224 melanomapatients were analysed with both the Cobas 4800 BRAF V600 Mutation Test and IHC anti-BRAFV600E staining. In 82 primary tumours and 224 corresponding metastases, the extents of intertumour and intratumour heterogeneity were investigated with IHC staining. In 15 cases, disagreement between IHC analysis and the Cobas test was seen. In all but one of the examined patients, homogeneity between the primary tumour and the corresponding metastasis was found. Except for this one case, no heterogeneity developed over longer periods. CONCLUSION: IHC analysis can be safely used as a BRAF pretreatment screening tool, and no additional test is needed when staining is positive. However, if stains are negative, additional tests are essential for detection of other BRAF mutations. We suggest that using primary melanoma tissues is just as safe as using metastatic tissue for detection of BRAFV600E, as BRAF intertumour heterogeneity is extremely rare. In addition, the time between diagnosis of the primary tumour and diagnosis of the corresponding metastasis seems not to increase the risk of intertumour heterogeneity.