5 research outputs found

    Molecular testing in metastatic basal cell carcinoma

    Get PDF
    Background: Metastatic basal cell carcinoma (mBCC) is a very rare entity, and diagnosis can be challenging. Therapeutic options are limited, and response to targeted therapy is poor. Objective: To demonstrate a clonal relationship between BCCs and their metastases and to explore which hedgehog pathway-related mutations are involved in mBCC. Methods: Genetic analysis was conducted in 10 primary BCCs and their metastases. Genes relevant for BCC development were analyzed in tumor and metastasis material with small molecule molecular inversion probes (smMIPs) for PTCH1, PTCH2, SMO, SUFU, GLI2, and TP53 or with targeted next generation sequencing of the same genes and CDKN2A, CDKN2B, CIC, DAXX, DDX3X, FUBP1, NF1, NF2, PTEN, SETD2, TRAF7, and the TERT promoter. Results: In 8 of 10 patients, identical gene mutations could be demonstrated in the primary tumors and their metastases. A broad spectrum of mutations was found. Four patients had SMO mutations in their tumor or metastasis, or both. All SMO mutations found were known to cause resistance to targeted therapy with vismodegib. Limitations: In 2 patients there was insufficient qualitative DNA available for genetic analysis. Conclusions: Molecular testing can help to identify the origin of a BCC metastasis and may be of prognostic and therapeutic value

    Molecular testing in metastatic basal cell carcinoma

    No full text
    BACKGROUND: Metastatic basal cell carcinoma (mBCC) is a very rare entity, and diagnosis can be challenging. Therapeutic options are limited, and response to targeted therapy is poor. OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate a clonal relationship between BCCs and their metastases and to explore which hedgehog pathway-related mutations are involved in mBCC. METHODS: Genetic analysis was conducted in 10 primary BCCs and their metastases. Genes relevant for BCC development were analyzed in tumor and metastasis material with small molecule molecular inversion probes (smMIPs) for PTCH1, PTCH2, SMO, SUFU, GLI2, and TP53 or with targeted next generation sequencing of the same genes and CDKN2A, CDKN2B, CIC, DAXX, DDX3X, FUBP1, NF1, NF2, PTEN, SETD2, TRAF7, and the TERT promoter. RESULTS: In 8 of 10 patients, identical gene mutations could be demonstrated in the primary tumors and their metastases. A broad spectrum of mutations was found. Four patients had SMO mutations in their tumor or metastasis, or both. All SMO mutations found were known to cause resistance to targeted therapy with vismodegib. LIMITATIONS: In 2 patients there was insufficient qualitative DNA available for genetic analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Molecular testing can help to identify the origin of a BCC metastasis and may be of prognostic and therapeutic value

    Eight years of experience with vismodegib for advanced and multiple basal cell carcinoma patients in the Netherlands: a retrospective cohort study

    No full text
    Background: Vismodegib has been used for the treatment of locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (laBCC) and metastatic BCC (mBCC) since 2011. Most efficacy and safety data are provided by clinical trials. This study evaluates the effectiveness of vismodegib for the treatment of laBCC, mBCC and basal cell nevus syndrome (BCNS) patients, and the tumour characteristics associated with a higher probability of achieving a complete response in the Netherlands. Methods: A retrospective cohort study that included all patients ≥18 years with histologically proven basal cell carcinoma that received ≥1 dose of vismodegib between July 2011 and September 2019 in the Netherlands. Results: In total, 48 laBCC, 11 mBCC and 19 BCNS patients were included. Median progression-free survival was 10.3 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 7.5–22.6) for laBCC, 11.7 (95% CI, 5.2–17.5) for mBCC and 19.1 (95% CI, 7.4–20.2) for BCNS. Larger laBCCs were associated with a lower probability of complete response (hazard ratio (HR) 0.77 per increase in cm, p = 0.02). Of all BCNS patients, 63% received ≥2 treatment sequences with vismodegib; all achieved partial responses. Conclusions: Half of the aBCC patients progress within 1 year after the start of vismodegib treatment. More research is needed to investigate other treatment strategies after vismodegib progression and to evaluate long-term effects of repetitive vismodegib treatment

    Extracellular cues influencing oligodendrocyte differentiation and (re)myelination

    No full text
    corecore