BRAF and MEK Inhibitors and Their Toxicities: A Meta-Analysis

Purpose: This meta-analysis summarizes the incidence of treatment-related adverse events (AE) of BRAFi and MEKi. Methods: A systematic search of Medline/PubMed was conducted to identify suitable articles published in English up to 31 December 2021. The primary outcomes were profiles for all-grade and grade 3 or higher treatment-related AEs, and the analysis of single side effects belonging to both categories. Results: The overall incidence of treatment-related all-grade Aes was 99% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.97–1.00) and 97% for Trametinib (95% CI: 0.92–0.99; I2 = 66%) and Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.94–0.99; I2 = 0%). In combined therapies, the rate was 98% for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.96–0.99; I2 = 77%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.96–1.00). Grade 3 or higher adverse events were reported in 69% of cases for Binimetinib (95% CI: 0.50–0.84; I2 = 71%), 68% for Encorafenib (95% CI: 0.61–0.74), and 72% for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (95% CI: 0.65–0.79; I2 = 84%). The most common grade 1–2 AEs were pyrexia (43%) and fatigue (28%) for Dabrafenib + Trametinib and diarrhea for both Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (52%) and Encorafenib + Binimetinib (34%). The most common AEs of grade 3 or higher were pyrexia, rash, and hypertension for Dabrafenib + Trametinib (6%), rash and hypertension for Encorafenib + Binimetinib (6%), and increased AST and ALT for Vemurafenib + Cobimetinib (10%). Conclusions: Our study provides comprehensive data on treatment-related adverse events of BRAFi and MEKi combination therapies, showing related toxicity profiles to offer a helpful tool for clinicians in the choice of therapy

A group of three miRNAs can act as candidate circulating biomarkers in liquid biopsies from melanoma patients

Background: Staging of melanoma and follow up after melanoma diagnosis aims at predicting risk and detecting progression or recurrence at early stage, respectively in order to timely start and/or change treatment. Tumor thickness according to Breslow, status of the sentinel node and value of the lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) are well-established prognostic markers for metastatic risk, but reliable biomarkers identifying early recurrence or candidates who may benefit best from medical treatment are still warranted. Liquid biopsy has emerged to be a suitable method for identifying biomarkers for early cancer diagnosis, prognosis, therapeutic response prediction, and patient follow-up. Liquid biopsy is a blood- based non-invasive procedure that allows analyzing circulating analytes, including extracellular vesicles. Methods: In this study we have explored the use of 7 miRNAs, namely hsa- miR-149-3p, hsa-miR-150-5p, hsa-miR-21-5p, hsa-miR-200c-3p, hsa-miR-134- 5p, hsa-miR-144-3p and hsa-miR-221-3p in plasma exosomes to discriminate melanoma patients from controls without melanoma in a cohort of 92 individuals. Results and discussion: Our results showed that three out seven miRNAs, namely hsa-miR-200c-3p, hsa-miR-144-3p and hsa-miR-221-3p were differentially expressed in plasma-derived exosomes from melanoma patients and controls. Furthermore, the expression of the three miRNAs may be a promising ancillary tool as a melanoma biomarker, even for discriminating between nevi and melanoma

The combination of dermoscopy and reflectance confocal microscopy increases the diagnostic confidence of amelanotic/hypomelanotic lentigo maligna

The dermoscopic diagnosis of amelanotic/hypomelanotic lentigo maligna/lentigo maligna melanoma (AHLM/LMM) may be very difficult in its early stages because of lack of pigment. Reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) is an imaging technique that is especially helpful for the diagnosis of lentigo maligna. To determine the diagnostic performances of dermoscopy and RCM in the diagnosis of AHLM/LMMs we evaluated dermoscopic and RCM images of consecutive cases of histopathologically confirmed AHLM/LMMs, amelanotic/hypomelanotic basal cell carcinoma and squamous cell carcinoma (AHBCCs/AHSCCs), amelanotic/hypomelanotic benign lesions (AHBLs), and actinic keratoses (AKs) from five participating centers. Sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, predictive values, and level of diagnosis confidence were calculated for both diagnostic procedures. Both dermoscopy and RCM showed diagnostic performance >97% in the diagnosis of AHLM/LMMs versus AHBCC/AHSCCs and their combination slightly improved diagnostic performance, with accuracy increasing from 98.0% to 99.1%. Similarly, RCM in combination with dermoscopy showed a tiny increase in the diagnostic performance in the diagnosis of AHLM/LMMs versus AHBLs (accuracy increased from 87.2% to 88.8%) and versus AKs (accuracy increased from 91.4% to 93.4%). Although the increase in diagnostic performance due to RCM was modest, the combination of dermoscopy and RCM greatly increased the level of confidence; high confidence in the diagnosis of AHLM/LMMs versus AHBLs increased from 36.2% with dermoscopy alone to 76.6% with dermoscopy plus RMC. Based on our results, dermoscopy and RCM should be complementary to improve not only diagnostic accuracy but also the level of diagnostic certainty in the diagnosis of AHLM/LMMs

More than one shade of pink as a marker of early amelanotic/hypomelanotic melanoma

Amelanotic/hypomelanotic melanoma (AHM) may be difficult to diagnose because of a lack of pigmentation. To evaluate whether dermoscopy can be useful for the diagnosis of early AHM, 133 digital dermoscopic images of lesions histopathologically diagnosed as amelanotic/hypomelanotic superficial spreading melanoma with ≤1 mm thickness (AHSSMs) (n = 27), amelanotic/hypomelanotic non-melanocytic lesions (AHNMLs) (e.g., seborrhoeic keratosis and basal cell carcinoma) (n = 79), and amelanotic/hypomelanotic benign melanocytic lesions (AHBMLs) (e.g., compound and dermal nevi) (n = 27), were dermoscopically assessed by three blinded dermatologists. Using multivariate analysis, we found a significantly increased risk of diagnosing AHSSM versus AHNML and AHBML when the lesion was characterized by the presence of more than one shade of pink (odds ratio [OR] 37.11), irregular dots/globules (OR 23.73), asymmetric pigmentation (OR 8.85), and structureless pattern (OR 7.33). In conclusion, dermoscopy may improve early AHM detection, discriminating AHSSM from amelanotic/hypomelanotic non melanoma lesion

Amelanotic/hypomelanotic lentigo maligna: Dermoscopic and confocal features predicting diagnosis

Background: Amelanotic/hypomelanotic lentigo maligna and lentigo maligna melanoma (AHLM/LMM) may be very difficult to diagnose at an early stage. Objectives: To quantify the predictive value of dermoscopic and reflectance confocal microscopy (RCM) features for AHLM/LMM. Methods: Dermoscopic and RCM images of histopathologically diagnosed AHLM/LMM, amelanotic/hypomelanotic benign lesions (AHBL), and amelanotic/hypomelanotic basal and squamous cell carcinomas (AHBCC/AHSCC) of the head and neck from consecutive patients were retrospectively collected and blindly evaluated by three observers to assess presence or absence of dermoscopic and RCM criteria. Results: Overall, 224 lesions in 216 patients including LM/LMM (n = 55, 24.6%), AHBL (n = 107, 47.8%) and AHBCC/AHSCC (n = 62, 27.7%) were analysed. Multivariable analysis showed that milky-red areas (OR = 5.46; 95% CI: 1.51–19.75), peripheral light brown structureless areas (OR = 19.10; 4.45–81.96), linear irregular vessels (OR = 5.44; 1.45–20.40), and asymmetric pigmented follicles (OR = 14.45; 2.77–75.44) at dermoscopy, and ≥3 atypical cells in five fields (OR = 10.12; 3.00–34.12) and focal follicular localization of atypical cells at dermo-epidermal junction (DEJ) (OR = 10.48; 1.10–99.81) at RCM were significantly independent diagnostic factors for AHLM/LMM vs. AHBL. In comparison with AHBCC/AHSCC, peripheral light brown structureless area (OR = 7.11; 1.53–32.96), pseudonetwork around hair follicles (OR = 16.69; 2.73–102.07), and annular granular structures (OR = 42.36; 3.51–511.16) at dermoscopy and large dendritic (OR = 6.86; 3.15–38.28) and round pagetoid cells (OR = 26.78; 3.15–227.98) at RCM led to a significantly increased risk of diagnosing AHLM/LMM. Conclusions: Amelanotic/hypomelanotic lentigo maligna and lentigo maligna melanoma may have the same dermoscopic features of AHM on other body sites, such as milky red areas, peripheral light brown structureless areas and linear irregular vessels. These features, asymmetric pigmented follicles and at RCM ≥ 3 atypical cells in five fields and focal follicular extension of atypical cells at DEJ may help in recognizing AHLM/LMM even when LM conventional features (e.g., obliteration of hair follicles under dermoscopy and large pagetoid cells under RCM) are absent or present only in very small areas of the lesion

Role of the EGF +61A>G polymorphism in melanoma pathogenesis: an experience on a large series of Italian cases and controls

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>A single nucleotide polymorphism (61A>G) in the epidermal growth factor (<it>EGF</it>) gene has been implicated in both melanoma pathogenesis and increased melanoma risk. To further evaluate this association, we conducted a case-control study in a clinic-based Italian population.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Individuals with less than 10 (N = 127) or more than 100 (N = 128) benign nevi, and patients with cutaneous melanoma (N = 418) were investigated for the <it>EGF </it>+61A>G polymorphism, using an automated sequencing approach.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Overall, no difference in <it>EGF </it>genotype frequencies was observed among subjects with different number of nevi as well as when non-melanoma healthy controls were compared with the melanoma patients. However, a heterogeneous distribution of the frequencies of the G/G genotype was detected among cases and controls originating from North Italy (21.1 and 18.3%, respectively) vs. those from South Italy (12.6 and 17.1%, respectively).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Our findings further suggest that <it>EGF </it>+61A>G polymorphism may have a limited impact on predisposition and/or pathogenesis of melanoma and its prevalence may vary in different populations.</p

The role of sentinel node tumor burden in modeling the prognosis of melanoma patients with positive sentinel node biopsy: an Italian melanoma intergroup study (N = 2,086)

Background The management of melanoma patients with metastatic melanoma in the sentinel nodes (SN) is evolving based on the results of trials questioning the impact of completion lymph node dissection (CLND) and demonstrating the efficacy of new adjuvant treatments. In this landscape, new prognostic tools for fine risk stratification are eagerly sought to optimize the therapeutic path of these patients. Methods A retrospective cohort of 2,086 patients treated with CLND after a positive SN biopsy in thirteen Italian Melanoma Centers was reviewed. Overall survival (OS) was the outcome of interest; included independent variables were the following: age, gender, primary melanoma site, Breslow thickness, ulceration, sentinel node tumor burden (SNTB), number of positive SN, non-sentinel lymph nodes (NSN) status. Univariate and multivariate survival analyses were performed using the Cox proportional hazard regression model. Results The 3-year, 5-year and 10-year OS rates were 79%, 70% and 54%, respectively. At univariate analysis, all variables, except for primary melanoma body site, were found to be statistically significant prognostic factors. Multivariate Cox regression analysis indicated that older age (P &lt; 0.0001), male gender (P = 0.04), increasing Breslow thickness (P &lt; 0.0001), presence of ulceration (P = 0.004), SNTB size (P &lt; 0.0001) and metastatic NSN (P &lt; 0.0001) were independent negative predictors of OS. Conclusion The above results were utilized to build a nomogram in order to ease the practical implementation of our prognostic model, which might improve treatment personalization

Dermoscopic evaluation of nodular melanoma

Importance: Nodular melanoma (NM) is a rapidly progressing potentially lethal skin tumor for which early diagnosis is critical