Mehdi Mazloumi1, Pornpattana Vichitvejpaisal1,2, Lauren A Dalvin1,3, Antonio Yaghy1, Kathryn G Ewens4, Arupa Ganguly4, Carol L Shields1. 1. Ocular Oncology Service, Wills Eye Hospital, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 2. Chulabhorn Hospital, HRH Princess Chulabhorn College of Medical Science, Chulabhorn Royal Academy, Bangkok, Thailand. 3. Department of Ophthalmology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 4. Perelman School of Medicine, Department of Genetics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Abstract
Importance: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) classification is a newly emerging method for prediction of uveal melanoma (UM)-related metastasis and death. Limited information is available regarding the accuracy of the TCGA classification for prediction of metastasis in patients with UM. Objective: To investigate the accuracy of the TCGA classification for predicting UM-related metastasis compared with the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) classification. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with UM treated with plaque radiotherapy at a tertiary referral center from October 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, were evaluated. All patients with tumors classified according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 8th Edition, and who completed pretreatment fine-needle aspiration biopsy sampling for genetic analysis of chromosomes 3 and 8 for TCGA classification were included. Tumors were classified into 4 categories, 17 subcategories, and 4 stages using AJCC classification and further grouped into 4 classes using TCGA classification. Main Outcomes and Measures: Value of TCGA classification vs AJCC classification for predicting UM-related metastasis. Results: Of 642 included patients, 331 (51.6%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 58.0 (13.8) years. There were 642 tumors from 642 patients classified according to both AJCC and TCGA classifications. The mean (range) follow-up time for the entire cohort was 43.7 (1.4-159.2) months. At 5 years, TCGA classification showed higher value for prediction of metastasis (4 TCGA classes: Wald statistic, 94.8; hazard ratio [HR], 2.8; 95% CI, 2.3-3.5; P < .001; 4 AJCC categories: Wald statistic, 67.5; HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 2.1-3.2; P < .001; 17 AJCC subcategories: Wald statistic, 74.3; HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.3; P < .001; 4 AJCC stages: Wald statistic, 67.0; HR, not applicable; P < .001). After entering TCGA and AJCC classifications into a multivariate model, TCGA classification still showed higher value for prediction of metastasis (TCGA classification: Wald statistic, 61.5; HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.9-2.9; P < .001; AJCC classification: Wald statistic, 35.5; HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.4; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that TCGA classification provides accuracy that is superior to AJCC categories, subcategories, and stages for predicting metastasis from UM. When genetic testing is available, TCGA classification can provide a more accurate way to identify patients at high risk of metastasis who might benefit from adjuvant therapy.
Importance: The Cancer Genome Atlas (TCGA) classification is a newly emerging method for prediction of uveal melanoma (UM)-related metastasis and death. Limited information is available regarding the accuracy of the TCGA classification for prediction of metastasis in patients with UM. Objective: To investigate the accuracy of the TCGA classification for predicting UM-related metastasis compared with the American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) classification. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this retrospective cohort study, patients with UM treated with plaque radiotherapy at a tertiary referral center from October 1, 2008, to December 31, 2018, were evaluated. All patients with tumors classified according to the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 8th Edition, and who completed pretreatment fine-needle aspiration biopsy sampling for genetic analysis of chromosomes 3 and 8 for TCGA classification were included. Tumors were classified into 4 categories, 17 subcategories, and 4 stages using AJCC classification and further grouped into 4 classes using TCGA classification. Main Outcomes and Measures: Value of TCGA classification vs AJCC classification for predicting UM-related metastasis. Results: Of 642 included patients, 331 (51.6%) were women, and the mean (SD) age was 58.0 (13.8) years. There were 642 tumors from 642 patients classified according to both AJCC and TCGA classifications. The mean (range) follow-up time for the entire cohort was 43.7 (1.4-159.2) months. At 5 years, TCGA classification showed higher value for prediction of metastasis (4 TCGA classes: Wald statistic, 94.8; hazard ratio [HR], 2.8; 95% CI, 2.3-3.5; P < .001; 4 AJCC categories: Wald statistic, 67.5; HR, 2.6; 95% CI, 2.1-3.2; P < .001; 17 AJCC subcategories: Wald statistic, 74.3; HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 1.2-1.3; P < .001; 4 AJCC stages: Wald statistic, 67.0; HR, not applicable; P < .001). After entering TCGA and AJCC classifications into a multivariate model, TCGA classification still showed higher value for prediction of metastasis (TCGA classification: Wald statistic, 61.5; HR, 2.4; 95% CI, 1.9-2.9; P < .001; AJCC classification: Wald statistic, 35.5; HR, 1.9; 95% CI, 1.5-2.4; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance: These results suggest that TCGA classification provides accuracy that is superior to AJCC categories, subcategories, and stages for predicting metastasis from UM. When genetic testing is available, TCGA classification can provide a more accurate way to identify patients at high risk of metastasis who might benefit from adjuvant therapy.
Authors: Carol L Shields; Emil Anthony T Say; Murat Hasanreisoglu; Jarin Saktanasate; Brendan M Lawson; Jeffrey E Landy; Anjali U Badami; Meera D Sivalingam; Arman Mashayekhi; Jerry A Shields; Arupa Ganguly Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2017-01-31 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: Louis Cai; Manuel Paez-Escamilla; Scott D Walter; Bercin Tarlan; Christina L Decatur; Barbara M Perez; J William Harbour Journal: Am J Ophthalmol Date: 2018-08-06 Impact factor: 5.258
Authors: Pornpattana Vichitvejpaisal; Lauren A Dalvin; Mehdi Mazloumi; Kathryn G Ewens; Arupa Ganguly; Carol L Shields Journal: Ophthalmology Date: 2019-04-24 Impact factor: 12.079
Authors: A Gordon Robertson; Juliann Shih; Christina Yau; Ewan A Gibb; Junna Oba; Karen L Mungall; Julian M Hess; Vladislav Uzunangelov; Vonn Walter; Ludmila Danilova; Tara M Lichtenberg; Melanie Kucherlapati; Patrick K Kimes; Ming Tang; Alexander Penson; Ozgun Babur; Rehan Akbani; Christopher A Bristow; Katherine A Hoadley; Lisa Iype; Matthew T Chang; Andrew D Cherniack; Christopher Benz; Gordon B Mills; Roel G W Verhaak; Klaus G Griewank; Ina Felau; Jean C Zenklusen; Jeffrey E Gershenwald; Lynn Schoenfield; Alexander J Lazar; Mohamed H Abdel-Rahman; Sergio Roman-Roman; Marc-Henri Stern; Colleen M Cebulla; Michelle D Williams; Martine J Jager; Sarah E Coupland; Bita Esmaeli; Cyriac Kandoth; Scott E Woodman Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2018-01-08 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Carol L Shields; Minoru Furuta; Archana Thangappan; Saya Nagori; Arman Mashayekhi; David R Lally; Cecilia C Kelly; Danielle S Rudich; Anand V Nagori; Oojwala A Wakade; Sonul Mehta; Lauren Forte; Andrew Long; Elaina F Dellacava; Bonnie Kaplan; Jerry A Shields Journal: Arch Ophthalmol Date: 2009-08
Authors: Cassandra C Skinner; James J Augsburger; Bret D Augsburger; Zelia M Correa Journal: Invest Ophthalmol Vis Sci Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 4.799
Authors: Wojtek Drabarek; Job van Riet; Josephine Q N Nguyen; Kyra N Smit; Natasha M van Poppelen; Rick Jansen; Eva Medico-Salsench; Jolanda Vaarwater; Frank J Magielsen; Tom Brands; Bert Eussen; Thierry P P van den Bosch; Robert M Verdijk; Nicole C Naus; Dion Paridaens; Annelies de Klein; Erwin Brosens; Harmen J G van de Werken; Emine Kilic Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-02-08 Impact factor: 6.639