Performance of a 31-gene expression profile (GEP) test for metastatic risk prediction in cutaneous melanomas (CM) of the head and neck.

Authors

null

John T. Vetto

Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR

John T. Vetto , Sancy Ann Leachman , Brooke Middlebrook , Kyle R. Covington , Jeffrey D. Wayne , Pedram Gerami , Jonathan S. Zager

Organizations

Knight Cancer Institute, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, OR, Castle Biosciences, Inc., Friendswood, TX, Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, Northwestern University, Chicago, IL, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: Accurate prognostication of distant metastatic risk using sentinel lymph node (SLN) biopsy for CM can be challenging in melanomas of the head and neck due to a higher false negative rate compared to other anatomical areas. A GEP signature that predicts metastatic risk based on primary tumor biology, providing a binary outcome of Class 1 (low risk of metastasis) or Class 2 (high risk), was previously described. The prognostic capabilities of the GEP independently and in combination with SLN status in a cohort of patients with primary head and neck CM are assessed here. Methods: All samples and clinical data were collected under an IRB-approved multicenter protocol. qPCR analysis was used to assess expression of the gene signature (Class 1 vs. Class 2). Distant metastasis-free survival (DMFS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS) were assessed. Results: 157 subjects with primary CMs in the head and neck region were identified. 110 of 157 subjects had a SLN biopsy performed. Median age was 65 years (range 25-89) and median Breslow depth was 1.6 mm (range 0.2-15.0 mm). In 71 SLN-negative patients, 18 of 27 (67%) distant metastatic events were GEP Class 2. Overall, 73% (47 of 64) distant metastases, and 88% (22 of 25) deaths due to CM were called Class 2. By comparison, sensitivities for DMFS and MSS were 41% (26 of 64) and 52% (13 of 25), respectively, using SLN biopsy alone, and increased to 80% (51 of 64) and 88% (22 of 25), respectively, when combining the SLN status and GEP class. Kaplan-Meier 5-year DMFS and MSS rates based on SLN status alone or in combination with GEP are shown in the table. Conclusions: These data support the ability of the GEP test to accurately identify low- and high-risk cases of head and neck melanoma. The results strongly support the role of GEP testing to enhance current staging by better predicting the risk of distant metastasis and death for patients with melanoma in an anatomic region that is associated with a higher SLN biopsy false negative rate.

5-year DMFS5-year MSS
SLN– (n = 71)64%88%
SLN+ (n = 39)28%61%
Class 1 (n = 79)81%96%
Class 2 (n = 78)37%68%
Class 1/SLN- (n = 41)80%92%
Class 1/SLN+ (n = 7)43%100%
Class 2/SLN- (n = 30)42%82%
Class 2/SLN+ (n = 32)24%50%

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2017 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Poster Session

Session Title

Melanoma/Skin Cancers

Track

Melanoma/Skin Cancers

Sub Track

Biologic Correlates

Citation

J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl; abstr 9576)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.9576

Abstract #

9576

Poster Bd #

184

Abstract Disclosures