Cargando…
Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse
SIMPLE SUMMARY: More than 40% of patients initially diagnosed with ‘low risk’ (stage I–II) melanoma eventually develop melanoma recurrence or die as a result of melanoma. While the current standard of care at diagnosis for these patients is watchful waiting, they may benefit from adjuvant systemic t...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
MDPI
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9220976/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35740520 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14122854 |
_version_ | 1784732507528232960 |
---|---|
author | Mulder, Evalyn E. A. P. Johansson, Iva Grünhagen, Dirk J. Tempel, Dennie Rentroia-Pacheco, Barbara Dwarkasing, Jvalini T. Verver, Daniëlle Mooyaart, Antien L. van der Veldt, Astrid A. M. Wakkee, Marlies Nijsten, Tamar E. C. Verhoef, Cornelis Mattsson, Jan Ny, Lars Hollestein, Loes M. Olofsson Bagge, Roger |
author_facet | Mulder, Evalyn E. A. P. Johansson, Iva Grünhagen, Dirk J. Tempel, Dennie Rentroia-Pacheco, Barbara Dwarkasing, Jvalini T. Verver, Daniëlle Mooyaart, Antien L. van der Veldt, Astrid A. M. Wakkee, Marlies Nijsten, Tamar E. C. Verhoef, Cornelis Mattsson, Jan Ny, Lars Hollestein, Loes M. Olofsson Bagge, Roger |
author_sort | Mulder, Evalyn E. A. P. |
collection | PubMed |
description | SIMPLE SUMMARY: More than 40% of patients initially diagnosed with ‘low risk’ (stage I–II) melanoma eventually develop melanoma recurrence or die as a result of melanoma. While the current standard of care at diagnosis for these patients is watchful waiting, they may benefit from adjuvant systemic treatment. The primary aim of this retrospective study was to assess the performance of a clinicopathologic and gene expression (CP-GEP) model, a model originally developed to predict sentinel node metastasis, to identify patients with stage I–II melanoma at risk of disease relapse. This study included Swedish and Dutch patients (18 years of age or older) with a melanoma of the skin without sentinel node metastasis. Using the non-invasive CP-GEP model, the patients could be divided into two groups: high (413 patients) or low risk (122 patients) of recurrence. While these results are promising, optimization of the CP-GEP model is recommended before implementing the model in clinical practice. ABSTRACT: Background: The current standard of care for patients without sentinel node (SN) metastasis (i.e., stage I–II melanoma) is watchful waiting, while >40% of patients with stage IB–IIC will eventually present with disease recurrence or die as a result of melanoma. With the prospect of adjuvant therapeutic options for patients with a negative SN, we assessed the performance of a clinicopathologic and gene expression (CP-GEP) model, a model originally developed to predict SN metastasis, to identify patients with stage I–II melanoma at risk of disease relapse. Methods: This study included patients with cutaneous melanoma ≥18 years of age with a negative SN between October 2006 and December 2017 at the Sahlgrenska University Hospital (Sweden) and Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (The Netherlands). According to the CP-GEP model, which can be applied to the primary melanoma tissue, the patients were stratified into high or low risk of recurrence. The primary aim was to assess the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) of low- and high-risk CP-GEP. A secondary aim was to compare the CP-GEP model with the EORTC nomogram, a model based on clinicopathological variables only. Results: In total, 535 patients (stage I–II) were included. CP-GEP stratification among these patients resulted in a 5-year RFS of 92.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 86.4–96.4) in CP-GEP low-risk patients (n = 122) versus 80.7% (95%CI: 76.3–84.3) in CP-GEP high-risk patients (n = 413; hazard ratio 2.93 (95%CI: 1.41–6.09), p < 0.004). According to the EORTC nomogram, 25% of the patients were classified as having a ‘low risk’ of recurrence (96.8% 5-year RFS (95%CI 91.6–98.8), n = 130), 49% as ‘intermediate risk’ (88.4% 5-year RFS (95%CI 83.6–91.8), n = 261), and 26% as ‘high risk’ (61.1% 5-year RFS (95%CI 51.9–69.1), n = 137). Conclusion: In these two independent European cohorts, the CP-GEP model was able to stratify patients with stage I–II melanoma into two groups differentiated by RFS. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9220976 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | MDPI |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-92209762022-06-24 Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse Mulder, Evalyn E. A. P. Johansson, Iva Grünhagen, Dirk J. Tempel, Dennie Rentroia-Pacheco, Barbara Dwarkasing, Jvalini T. Verver, Daniëlle Mooyaart, Antien L. van der Veldt, Astrid A. M. Wakkee, Marlies Nijsten, Tamar E. C. Verhoef, Cornelis Mattsson, Jan Ny, Lars Hollestein, Loes M. Olofsson Bagge, Roger Cancers (Basel) Article SIMPLE SUMMARY: More than 40% of patients initially diagnosed with ‘low risk’ (stage I–II) melanoma eventually develop melanoma recurrence or die as a result of melanoma. While the current standard of care at diagnosis for these patients is watchful waiting, they may benefit from adjuvant systemic treatment. The primary aim of this retrospective study was to assess the performance of a clinicopathologic and gene expression (CP-GEP) model, a model originally developed to predict sentinel node metastasis, to identify patients with stage I–II melanoma at risk of disease relapse. This study included Swedish and Dutch patients (18 years of age or older) with a melanoma of the skin without sentinel node metastasis. Using the non-invasive CP-GEP model, the patients could be divided into two groups: high (413 patients) or low risk (122 patients) of recurrence. While these results are promising, optimization of the CP-GEP model is recommended before implementing the model in clinical practice. ABSTRACT: Background: The current standard of care for patients without sentinel node (SN) metastasis (i.e., stage I–II melanoma) is watchful waiting, while >40% of patients with stage IB–IIC will eventually present with disease recurrence or die as a result of melanoma. With the prospect of adjuvant therapeutic options for patients with a negative SN, we assessed the performance of a clinicopathologic and gene expression (CP-GEP) model, a model originally developed to predict SN metastasis, to identify patients with stage I–II melanoma at risk of disease relapse. Methods: This study included patients with cutaneous melanoma ≥18 years of age with a negative SN between October 2006 and December 2017 at the Sahlgrenska University Hospital (Sweden) and Erasmus MC Cancer Institute (The Netherlands). According to the CP-GEP model, which can be applied to the primary melanoma tissue, the patients were stratified into high or low risk of recurrence. The primary aim was to assess the 5-year recurrence-free survival (RFS) of low- and high-risk CP-GEP. A secondary aim was to compare the CP-GEP model with the EORTC nomogram, a model based on clinicopathological variables only. Results: In total, 535 patients (stage I–II) were included. CP-GEP stratification among these patients resulted in a 5-year RFS of 92.9% (95% confidence interval (CI): 86.4–96.4) in CP-GEP low-risk patients (n = 122) versus 80.7% (95%CI: 76.3–84.3) in CP-GEP high-risk patients (n = 413; hazard ratio 2.93 (95%CI: 1.41–6.09), p < 0.004). According to the EORTC nomogram, 25% of the patients were classified as having a ‘low risk’ of recurrence (96.8% 5-year RFS (95%CI 91.6–98.8), n = 130), 49% as ‘intermediate risk’ (88.4% 5-year RFS (95%CI 83.6–91.8), n = 261), and 26% as ‘high risk’ (61.1% 5-year RFS (95%CI 51.9–69.1), n = 137). Conclusion: In these two independent European cohorts, the CP-GEP model was able to stratify patients with stage I–II melanoma into two groups differentiated by RFS. MDPI 2022-06-09 /pmc/articles/PMC9220976/ /pubmed/35740520 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14122854 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article Mulder, Evalyn E. A. P. Johansson, Iva Grünhagen, Dirk J. Tempel, Dennie Rentroia-Pacheco, Barbara Dwarkasing, Jvalini T. Verver, Daniëlle Mooyaart, Antien L. van der Veldt, Astrid A. M. Wakkee, Marlies Nijsten, Tamar E. C. Verhoef, Cornelis Mattsson, Jan Ny, Lars Hollestein, Loes M. Olofsson Bagge, Roger Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse |
title | Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse |
title_full | Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse |
title_fullStr | Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse |
title_full_unstemmed | Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse |
title_short | Using a Clinicopathologic and Gene Expression (CP-GEP) Model to Identify Stage I–II Melanoma Patients at Risk of Disease Relapse |
title_sort | using a clinicopathologic and gene expression (cp-gep) model to identify stage i–ii melanoma patients at risk of disease relapse |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9220976/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35740520 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/cancers14122854 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mulderevalyneap usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT johanssoniva usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT grunhagendirkj usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT tempeldennie usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT rentroiapachecobarbara usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT dwarkasingjvalinit usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT ververdanielle usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT mooyaartantienl usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT vanderveldtastridam usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT wakkeemarlies usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT nijstentamarec usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT verhoefcornelis usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT mattssonjan usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT nylars usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT hollesteinloesm usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse AT olofssonbaggeroger usingaclinicopathologicandgeneexpressioncpgepmodeltoidentifystageiiimelanomapatientsatriskofdiseaserelapse |