British journal of cancer · 2017
Mutation status among patients with sinonasal mucosal melanoma and its impact on survival.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Amit Moran, Tam Samantha, Abdelmeguid Ahmed S, Roberts Dianna B, Takahashi Yoko, Raza Shaan M, Su Shirley Y, Kupferman Michael E, DeMonte Franco, Hanna Ehab Y
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Sinonasal mucosal melanoma (SNMM) comprises <1% of all melanomas and lacks well-characterised molecular markers. Our aim was to determine the frequencies of common mutations and examine their utility as molecular markers in a large series of primary SNMMs.
METHODS: SNMM patients seen at our institution from August 1991 through July 2016 were identified. Genomic DNA was extracted from 66 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumours and screened for mutations by direct sequencing. We investigated the association of mutations with clinicopathological features and survival outcomes.
RESULTS: Overall, 41% (27 out of 66) of the SNMMs harboured mutations. BRAF and KIT mutations were identified in 8% (five patients) and 5% (three patients) of SNMMs, respectively, whereas NRAS mutations were detected in 30% (20 patients) of SNMMs. Mutation rates in these oncogenes were similar between SNMMs located in the paranasal sinuses and those in the nasal cavity (30% and 13%, respectively, P=0.09). In a multivariate analysis, patients with negative margins had significantly better overall survival (hazard ratio 5.43, 95% confidence interval 1.44-21.85, P=0.01) and disease-specific survival (hazard ratio 21.9, 95% confidence interval 3.71-180, P=0.0004). The mutation status of the tumours showed no association with survival outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: In SNNM, mutation status does not affect survival outcomes, but NRAS mutations are relatively frequent and could be targeted in this disease by MEK inhibitors.
METHODS: SNMM patients seen at our institution from August 1991 through July 2016 were identified. Genomic DNA was extracted from 66 formalin-fixed paraffin-embedded tumours and screened for mutations by direct sequencing. We investigated the association of mutations with clinicopathological features and survival outcomes.
RESULTS: Overall, 41% (27 out of 66) of the SNMMs harboured mutations. BRAF and KIT mutations were identified in 8% (five patients) and 5% (three patients) of SNMMs, respectively, whereas NRAS mutations were detected in 30% (20 patients) of SNMMs. Mutation rates in these oncogenes were similar between SNMMs located in the paranasal sinuses and those in the nasal cavity (30% and 13%, respectively, P=0.09). In a multivariate analysis, patients with negative margins had significantly better overall survival (hazard ratio 5.43, 95% confidence interval 1.44-21.85, P=0.01) and disease-specific survival (hazard ratio 21.9, 95% confidence interval 3.71-180, P=0.0004). The mutation status of the tumours showed no association with survival outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS: In SNNM, mutation status does not affect survival outcomes, but NRAS mutations are relatively frequent and could be targeted in this disease by MEK inhibitors.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
AgedDNA Mutational AnalysisDNA, NeoplasmDisease-Free SurvivalFemaleGTP PhosphohydrolasesHumansMaleMelanomaMembrane ProteinsMiddle AgedMucous MembraneMutation RateNasal CavityParanasal Sinus NeoplasmsProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafProto-Oncogene Proteins c-kitRetrospective StudiesSurvival RateTumor Suppressor Protein p53