Long-Term Outcomes in a Multicenter, Prospective Cohort Evaluating the Prognostic 31-Gene Expression Profile for Cutaneous Melanoma
Eddy C Hsueh, James R DeBloom, Jonathan H Lee, Jeffrey J Sussman, Kyle R Covington, Hillary G Caruso, Ann P Quick, Robert W Cook, Craig L Slingluff Jr, Kelly M McMasters, Eddy C Hsueh, James R DeBloom, Jonathan H Lee, Jeffrey J Sussman, Kyle R Covington, Hillary G Caruso, Ann P Quick, Robert W Cook, Craig L Slingluff Jr, Kelly M McMasters
Abstract
Purpose: Current guidelines for postoperative management of patients with stage I-IIA cutaneous melanoma (CM) do not recommend routine cross-sectional imaging, yet many of these patients develop metastases. Methods that complement American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging are needed to improve identification and treatment of these patients. A 31-gene expression profile (31-GEP) test predicts metastatic risk as low (class 1) or high (class 2). Prospective analysis of CM outcomes was performed to test the hypotheses that the 31-GEP provides prognostic value for patients with stage I-III CM, and that patients with stage I-IIA melanoma and class 2 31-GEP results have metastatic risk similar to patients for whom surveillance is recommended.
Materials and methods: Two multicenter registry studies, INTEGRATE (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT02355574) and EXPAND (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier:NCT02355587), were initiated under institutional review board approval, and 323 patients with stage I-III CM and median follow-up time of 3.2 years met inclusion criteria. Primary end points were 3-year recurrence-free survival (RFS), distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS), and overall survival (OS).
Results: The 31-GEP was significant for RFS, DMFS, and OS in a univariate analysis and was a significant, independent predictor of RFS, DMFS, and OS in a multivariable analysis. GEP class 2 results were significantly associated with lower 3-year RFS, DMFS, and OS in all patients and those with stage I-IIA disease. Patients with stage I-IIA CM and a class 2 result had recurrence, distant metastasis, and death rates similar to patients with stage IIB-III CM. Combining 31-GEP results and AJCC staging enhanced sensitivity over each approach alone.
Conclusion: These data provide a rationale for using the 31-GEP along with AJCC staging, and suggest that patients with stage I-IIA CM and a class 2 31-GEP signature may be candidates for more intense follow-up.
Conflict of interest statement
The following represents disclosure information provided by authors of this manuscript. All relationships are considered compensated unless otherwise noted. Relationships are self-held unless noted. I = Immediate Family Member, Inst = My Institution. Relationships may not relate to the subject matter of this manuscript. For more information about ASCO’s conflict of interest policy, please refer to www.asco.org/rwc or ascopubs.org/po/author-center. Open Payments is a public database containing information reported by companies about payments made to US-licensed physicians (Open Payments). Eddy C. Hsueh Speakers' Bureau: Amgen, Castle BiosciencesJeffrey J. Sussman Consulting or Advisory Role: Castle BiosciencesKyle R. Covington Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Gene expression profile tests Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle BiosciencesHillary G. Caruso Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) and CAR-expressing T cells are provided that can specifically target cells that express an elevated level of a target antigen. Likewise, methods for specifically targeting cells that express elevated levels of antigen (eg, cancer cells) with CAR T-cell therapies are provided Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle BiosciencesAnn P. Quick Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle BiosciencesRobert W. Cook Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Castle Biosciences related patents Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle BiosciencesCraig L. Slingluff Consulting or Advisory Role: Immatics, Polynoma, CureVac Research Funding: GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, 3M, Theraclion, Celldex Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Licensing and Ventures Group of the University of Virginia Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Polynoma Uncompensated Relationships: Agenus No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.Eddy C. Hsueh Speakers' Bureau: Amgen, Castle Biosciences Jeffrey J. Sussman Consulting or Advisory Role: Castle Biosciences Kyle R. Covington Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Gene expression profile tests Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Hillary G. Caruso Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) and CAR-expressing T cells are provided that can specifically target cells that express an elevated level of a target antigen. Likewise, methods for specifically targeting cells that express elevated levels of antigen (eg, cancer cells) with CAR T-cell therapies are provided Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Ann P. Quick Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Robert W. Cook Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Castle Biosciences related patents Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Craig L. Slingluff Consulting or Advisory Role: Immatics, Polynoma, CureVac Research Funding: GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, 3M, Theraclion, Celldex Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Licensing and Ventures Group of the University of Virginia Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Polynoma Uncompensated Relationships: Agenus No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.Eddy C. Hsueh Speakers' Bureau: Amgen, Castle Biosciences Jeffrey J. Sussman Consulting or Advisory Role: Castle Biosciences Kyle R. Covington Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Gene expression profile tests Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Hillary G. Caruso Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Chimeric antigen receptors (CARs) and CAR-expressing T cells are provided that can specifically target cells that express an elevated level of a target antigen. Likewise, methods for specifically targeting cells that express elevated levels of antigen (eg, cancer cells) with CAR T-cell therapies are provided Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Ann P. Quick Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Robert W. Cook Employment: Castle Biosciences Stock and Other Ownership Interests: Castle Biosciences Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Castle Biosciences related patents Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Castle Biosciences Craig L. Slingluff Consulting or Advisory Role: Immatics, Polynoma, CureVac Research Funding: GlaxoSmithKline, Merck Sharp & Dohme, 3M, Theraclion, Celldex Patents, Royalties, Other Intellectual Property: Licensing and Ventures Group of the University of Virginia Travel, Accommodations, Expenses: Polynoma Uncompensated Relationships: Agenus No other potential conflicts of interest were reported.
© 2021 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Figures
References
- Cronin KA, Lake AJ, Scott S, et al. Annual report to the nation on the status of cancer, part I: National cancer statistics: Annual report national cancer statistics Cancer 1242785–28002018
- National Comprehensive Cancer Network . Cutaneous Melanoma (Version 1.2020) 2020.
- Shaikh WR, Dusza SW, Weinstock MA, et al. Melanoma thickness and survival trends in the United States, 1989 to 2009. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2016;108:djv294.
- Whiteman DC, Baade PD, Olsen CM.More people die from thin melanomas (1 mm) than from thick melanomas (>4 mm) in Queensland, Australia J Invest Dermatol 1351190–11932015
- Eggener S, Karsh LI, Richardson T, et al. A 17-gene panel for prediction of adverse prostate cancer pathologic features: Prospective clinical validation and utility Urology 12676–822019
- Chang EM, Punglia RS, Steinberg ML, et al. Cost effectiveness of the oncotype DX genomic prostate score for guiding treatment decisions in patients with early stage prostate cancer Urology 12689–952019
- Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Prospective validation of a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer N Engl J Med 3732005–20142015
- Sparano JA, Gray RJ, Makower DF, et al. Adjuvant chemotherapy guided by a 21-gene expression assay in breast cancer N Engl J Med 379111–1212018
- Giuliano AE, Connolly JL, Edge SB, et al. Breast cancer-major changes in the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition cancer staging manual: Updates to the AJCC breast TNM staging system CA Cancer J Clin 67290–3032017
- Wang M, Wu K, Zhang P, et al. The prognostic significance of the oncotype DX recurrence score in T1-2N1M0 estrogen receptor-positive HER2-negative breast cancer based on the prognostic stage in the updated AJCC 8th edition Ann Surg Oncol 261227–12352019
- Kivela T, Simpson ER, Grossniklaus HE, et al. Uveal melanoma. In: Amin MB, Edge MB, Greene FL, et al., editors. American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) Staging Manual. Volume 8. Cham, Switzerland: Springer; 2017.
- Onken MD, Worley LA, Char DH, et al. Collaborative ocular oncology group report number 1: Prospective validation of a multi-gene prognostic assay in uveal melanoma Ophthalmology 1191596–16032012
- Gerami P, Cook RW, Wilkinson J, et al. Development of a prognostic genetic signature to predict the metastatic risk associated with cutaneous melanoma Clin Cancer Res 21175–1832015
- Gerami P, Cook RW, Russell MC, et al. Gene expression profiling for molecular staging of cutaneous melanoma in patients undergoing sentinel lymph node biopsy J Am Acad Dermatol 72780–785.e32015
- Gastman BR, Gerami P, Kurley SJ, et al. Identification of patients at risk of metastasis using a prognostic 31-gene expression profile in subpopulations of melanoma patients with favorable outcomes by standard criteria J Am Acad Dermatol 80149–157.e42019
- Keller J, Schwartz TL, Lizalek JM, et al. Prospective validation of the prognostic 31‐gene expression profiling test in primary cutaneous melanoma Cancer Med 82205–22122019
- Hsueh EC, DeBloom JR, Lee J, et al. Interim analysis of survival in a prospective, multi-center registry cohort of cutaneous melanoma tested with a prognostic 31-gene expression profile test. J Hematol Oncol. 2017;10:152.
- Podlipnik S, Carrera C, Boada A, et al. Early outcome of a 31-gene expression profile test in 86 AJCC stage IB-II melanoma patients. A prospective multicentre cohort study J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 33857–8622019
- Greenhaw BN, Zitelli JA, Brodland DG.Estimation of prognosis in invasive cutaneous melanoma: An independent study of the accuracy of a gene expression profile test Dermatol Surg 441494–15002018
- Zager JS, Gastman BR, Leachman S, et al. Performance of a prognostic 31-gene expression profile in an independent cohort of 523 cutaneous melanoma patients. BMC Cancer. 2018;18:130.
- Greenhaw BN, Covington KR, Kurley SJ, et al. Molecular risk prediction in cutaneous melanoma: A meta-analysis of the 31-gene expression profile prognostic test in 1,479 patients J Am Acad Dermatol 83745–7532020
- Kumar A, Chakraborty BS.Interim analysis: A rational approach of decision making in clinical trial J Adv Pharm Technol Res 7118–1222016
- Cook RW, Middlebrook B, Wilkinson J, et al. Analytic validity of DecisionDx-Melanoma, a gene expression profile test for determining metastatic risk in melanoma patients. Diagn Pathol. 2018;13:13.
- Kurtz J, Beasley GM, Agnese D, et al. Surveillance strategies in the follow-up of melanoma patients: Too much or not enough? J Surg Res 21432–372017
- von Schuckmann LA, Hughes MCB, Ghiasvand R, et al. Risk of melanoma recurrence after diagnosis of a high-risk primary tumor JAMA Dermatol 155688–6932019
- Gastman BR, Zager JS, Messina JL, et al. Performance of a 31-gene expression profile test in cutaneous melanomas of the head and neck Head Neck 41871–8792019
- Vetto JT, Hsueh EC, Gastman BR, et al. Guidance of sentinel lymph node biopsy decisions in patients with T1-T2 melanoma using gene expression profiling Future Oncol 151207–12172019
- Vallet A, Oriano B, Mortier L, et al. Association of time from primary diagnosis to first distant relapse of metastatic melanoma with progression of disease and survival JAMA Dermatol 155673–6782019
- Tas F, Erturk K.Relapse patterns in patients with local and regional cutaneous melanoma Clin Transl Oncol 21412–4192019
Source: PubMed