Bijan Safai1,2, Albert G Wu1,2, Carl V Hamby1,2. 1. Dr. Safai is with the Department of Dermatology, Metropolitan Hospital in New York, New York. 2. Mr. Wu and Dr. Hamby are with New York Medical College School of Medicine in Valhalla, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: It is often difficult to accurately predict how a melanoma will progress because melanomas can be so diverse in their genetic and histological makeup. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize the current state and progression of biomedical markers towards their utilization as prognostic indicators for patients with melanoma. METHODS: A literature search of the research repository databases PubMed and GoogleScholar was conducted using the following inclusion criteria: (1) published within the last 10 years, and (2) use of overall survival, disease progression, or clinical outcome as primary endpoints. Search terms included various permutations of "biomarkers," "prognostic," "immunologic," "serologic," "visual," and "melanoma." Results were evaluated for statistical power, results significance, and experimental design integrity. RESULTS: The prognostic capabilities of clinical tests for malignant melanoma have made great strides in the last few years, with several serologic and immunohistochemical biomarkers being preliminarily linked to various measures of clinical prognosis. While clinical feasibility of a single sensitive and specific biomarker remains unfeasible, use of select combinations of tested biomarkers remain viable. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic and prognostic genetic assays have begun to cross over from research to commercial application, giving physicians additional tools during the early stages of diagnosis to optimize and individualize treatments.
BACKGROUND: It is often difficult to accurately predict how a melanoma will progress because melanomas can be so diverse in their genetic and histological makeup. OBJECTIVE: We sought to characterize the current state and progression of biomedical markers towards their utilization as prognostic indicators for patients with melanoma. METHODS: A literature search of the research repository databases PubMed and GoogleScholar was conducted using the following inclusion criteria: (1) published within the last 10 years, and (2) use of overall survival, disease progression, or clinical outcome as primary endpoints. Search terms included various permutations of "biomarkers," "prognostic," "immunologic," "serologic," "visual," and "melanoma." Results were evaluated for statistical power, results significance, and experimental design integrity. RESULTS: The prognostic capabilities of clinical tests for malignant melanoma have made great strides in the last few years, with several serologic and immunohistochemical biomarkers being preliminarily linked to various measures of clinical prognosis. While clinical feasibility of a single sensitive and specific biomarker remains unfeasible, use of select combinations of tested biomarkers remain viable. CONCLUSION: Diagnostic and prognostic genetic assays have begun to cross over from research to commercial application, giving physicians additional tools during the early stages of diagnosis to optimize and individualize treatments.
Authors: Vivi Ann Flørenes; Elisabeth Emilsen; Hiep Phuc Dong; Mette Førsund; Ruth Holm; Ana Slipicevic Journal: Cancer Med Date: 2015-02-07 Impact factor: 4.452
Authors: F Stephen Hodi; Wen-Jen Hwu; Richard Kefford; Jeffrey S Weber; Adil Daud; Omid Hamid; Amita Patnaik; Antoni Ribas; Caroline Robert; Tara C Gangadhar; Anthony M Joshua; Peter Hersey; Roxana Dronca; Richard Joseph; Darcy Hille; Dahai Xue; Xiaoyun Nicole Li; S Peter Kang; Scot Ebbinghaus; Andrea Perrone; Jedd D Wolchok Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-03-07 Impact factor: 44.544
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
Authors: Laura A Taylor; Ronnie M Abraham; Emin Tahirovic; Patricia van Belle; Bin Li; Linfang Huang; David E Elder; Phyllis Gimotty; Xiaowei Xu Journal: Mod Pathol Date: 2017-01-20 Impact factor: 7.842
Authors: Mitchell S Stark; Kerenaftali Klein; Benjamin Weide; Lauren E Haydu; Annette Pflugfelder; Yue Hang Tang; Jane M Palmer; David C Whiteman; Richard A Scolyer; Graham J Mann; John F Thompson; Georgina V Long; Andrew P Barbour; H Peter Soyer; Claus Garbe; Adrian Herington; Pamela M Pollock; Nicholas K Hayward Journal: EBioMedicine Date: 2015-05-12 Impact factor: 8.143