Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND:Patients with thick primary melanomas (≥4 mm) have highly variable survival outcomes. Cell proliferation marker Ki-67 has been identified as promising biomarker in thick melanoma but has not been evaluated since the wide spread adoption of sentinel lymph node biopsy. We revisit its prognostic relevance in the sentinel node era. METHODS:We studied patients with thick (≥4 mm) primary melanoma prospectively enrolled in a clinicopathological biospecimen database from 2002 to 2015, and evaluated the prognostic value of Ki-67 expression while controlling for features included in the existing staging criteria. RESULTS:We analyzed 68 patients who underwent lymph node sampling and who had an available tumor for Ki-67 immunohistochemical (IHC) staining. The median tumor thickness was 6.0 mm; the median follow-up was 2.6 years. In multivariable analysis including nodal status and primary tumor ulceration, Ki-67 expression was an independent predictor of worse recurrence-free survival (HR 2.19, P = 0.024) and overall survival (HR 2.49, P = 0.028). Natural log-transformed tumor thickness (ln [thickness]) was also significantly associated with worse OS (HR 2.39, P = 0.010). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:We identify Ki-67 and ln (thickness) as potential biomarkers for patients with thick melanoma who have undergone nodal staging. If validated in additional studies, these biomarkers could be integrated into the staging criteria to improve risk-stratification.

BACKGROUND:Cancer-testis antigen NY-ESO-1 is a highly immunogenic melanoma antigen which has been incorporated into adjuvant vaccine clinical trials. Three such early-phase trials were conducted at our center among patients with high-risk resected melanoma. We herein report on the pooled long-term survival outcomes of these patients in comparison to historical controls. METHODS:All melanoma patients treated at NYU Langone Health under any of three prospective adjuvant NY-ESO-1 vaccine trials were retrospectively pooled into a single cohort. All such patients with stage III melanoma were subsequently compared to historical control patients identified via a prospective institutional database with protocol-driven follow-up. Survival times were calculated using the Kaplan-Meier method, and Cox proportional hazard models were employed to identify significant prognostic factors and control for confounding variables. RESULTS:A total of 91 patients were treated with an NY-ESO-1 vaccine for the treatment of high-risk resected melanoma. Of this group, 67 patients were stage III and were selected for comparative analysis with 123 historical control patients with resected stage III melanoma who received no adjuvant therapy. Among the pooled vaccine cohort (median follow-up 61 months), the estimated median recurrence-free survival was 45 months, while the median overall survival was not yet reached. In the control cohort of 123 patients (median follow-up 30 months), the estimated median recurrence-free and overall survival were 22 and 58 months, respectively. Within the retrospective stage III cohort, NY-ESO-1 vaccine was associated with decreased risk of recurrence (HR = 0.56, p < 0.01) and death (HR = 0.51, p = 0.01). Upon controlling for sub-stage, the adjuvant NY-ESO-1 clinical trial cohort continued to exhibit decreased risk of recurrence (HR = 0.45, p < 0.01) and death (HR = 0.40, p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS:In this small retrospective cohort of resected stage III melanoma patients, adjuvant NY-ESO-1 vaccine immunotherapy was associated with longer recurrence-free and overall survival relative to historical controls. These data support the continued investigation of adjuvant NY-ESO-1 based immunotherapy regimens in melanoma.

Background: Non-Hispanic African Americans (AA) have a higher incidence of ESRD but lower rates of kidney transplant (KT), and poorer quality of life (QOL) compared to non-Hispanic whites (WH). Disparities persist after adjusting for medical factors (e.g., comorbidity, dialysis). We assessed whether race disparities in QOL would persist in patients evaluated for KT after adjusting for medical and social determinants, including demographic (e.g., age, income), cultural (e.g., perceived discrimination, medical mistrust), psychosocial (e.g., social support, emotional distress), and knowledge (e.g., knowledge, learning activities) factors.
Method(s): We conducted a longitudinal cohort study with 1035 (AA=260; WH=775) patients undergoing KT evaluation at the UPMC Starzl Transplant Institute. Patients completed an interview after initiating KT evaluation to assess social determinants; and another interview after being accepted, rejected, or withdrawing from evaluation, to assess kidney-specific (symptoms/problems, sleep, lifestyle effects, burden, cognitive function, work, sexual function) and general QOL (mental and physical composite scores) using the Kidney Disease QOL scale. We built multivariable regression models to test the hypothesized relationships.
Result(s): Our sample was 38% female, mean age=57, 73% had family income < $50,000, 52% married, 35% public insurance, 27% private, and 38% public/private. Race differences in kidney-specific QOL outcomes were no longer significant when social determinants were included in the model. Instead, psychosocial (e.g., mastery, social support, emotional distress), transplant knowledge (e.g., concerns, learning activities, knowledge), and demographic (e.g., age, sex, income, insurance) factors were significant predictors. For general QOL outcomes, race continued to be a significant predictor even after we identified several significant psychosocial, transplant knowledge, and demographic predictors (all predictors significant at p<.05).
Conclusion(s): A combination of social determinants predicted QOL outcomes for KT patients, which mediated race differences, especially for kidney-specific QOL. Transplant centers may help ensure better QOL in their patients as they await KT by promoting psychosocial support, and ensuring candidates' understanding of KT

Background: Unlike other solid tumors, the impact of primary HS on melanoma survival and response to systemic therapy is not well studied. Nodular melanoma (NM) has a worse prognosis than superficial spreading melanoma (SSM), which is usually attributed to thicker primary tumors. Herein, we examine the hypothesis that HS might have an impact on MSS independent of thickness and that NM and SSM exhibit different mutational landscapes that associate with response to checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy (IT) and BRAF targeted therapy (TT) in the metastatic setting. Methods: Primary NM and SSM patients prospectively enrolled at NYU (2002 - 2016) were compared to the most recent SEER cohort (1973 - 2012) and analyzed with respect to MSS. Next-Generation Sequencing (NGS) was performed on a subset of matched tumor-germline pairs, allowing a comparison of the mutational landscape between NM and SSM. In the metastatic setting, survival analyses were used to compare outcomes and responses to treatment across HS. Results: The NYU cohort of 1,621 patients with either NM (n = 510) or SSM (n = 1,111) was representative of the analogous SEER cohort (21,339 NM, 97,169 SSM), with NM presenting as thicker, more ulcerated, and later stage (all p < 0.001). Among the NYU cohort, NM was found to have lower rates of TIL (p = 0.047), higher mitotic index (p < 0.001), and higher rates of NRAS mutation (p < 0.001). In multivariate Cox models, NM was a significant predictor of worse MSS, independent of thickness and stage (p = 0.01). NM had a significantly lower mutational burden across the exome (p < 0.001). Some of the most under-mutated genes noted in NM were NOTCH4, BCL2L12 and RPS6KA6 (all p < 0.01). Among patients treated with TT (n = 56), NM remained a significant predictor of worse MSS (p = 0.004). However, there was no difference in response to IT. Conclusions: NM and SSM show divergent mutational patterns which may contribute to their different clinical behaviors and responses to BRAF targeted therapy. More studies are needed to better understand the key molecular and cellular processes driving such differences. Integration of HS data into prospective clinical trial reporting is needed to better assess its impact on response to treatment

Background: To examine the trends in clinicopathologic features, treatment, and survival of male breast cancer (MBC), utilizing the National Cancer Data Base (NC

Background: Efforts to identify targeted therapies that can improve treatment outcome in metastatic ALM have been unsuccessful. In a previous genomic screening, we identified copy number amplification of the histone methyltransferase EZH2 in 47% of ALM cases, a higher frequency than previously reported in cutaneous melanomas (CM) (5%). Here, we tested the hypothesis that increased EZH2 expression contributes to ALM progression and may confer selective sensitivity to EZH2 inhibition. Methods: EZH2 expression was examined by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in 51 primary (21 stage I, 13 Stage II and 17 Stage III) and 23 metastatic (11 in transit, 8 nodal and 4 visceral) ALM cases with extensive clinicopathological data and protocol-driven follow up. Colony formation and cell proliferation was assessed following treatment of ALM and CM cell lines with three EZH2 inhibitors, including GSK126, currently in clinical trials. The effect of GSK126 on H3K27me3 and downstream EZH2 targets was analyzed by western blotting. Results: EZH2 is commonly overexpressed in both primary (30/51; 65%) and metastatic (20/23; 87%) ALM cases, with a significant increase in mean IHC score between primary and metastatic tumors (1.9 vs. 2.7, respectively, p = 0.047). EZH2 expression increased in 6/10 metastatic ALM tumors compared to their matched primary tumors. ALM tumors with EZH2 gene amplification showed increased EZH2 protein expression; however more cases showed overexpression with no amplification suggesting a potential epigenetic component of EZH2 regulation. GSK126 significantly suppressed ALM colony formation at lower doses compared to CM (1 muM vs. 5 muM, respectively). EZH2 inhibition also increased expression of the downstream tumor suppressor E-cadherin in ALM but not in CM cell lines. Finally, ALM cell lines had significantly lower basal H3K27me3 levels than CM cell lines, suggesting an additional, histone methyltransferase-independent function of EZH2 in ALM. Conclusions: Our data demonstrate thatEZH2 upregulation is common in ALM, and suggest that it may play a role in ALM's metastatic progression that requires further investigation. Selective sensitivity of ALM cell lines to EZH2 inhibitors supports the therapeutic potential of EZH2-targeted therapy in ALM

Purpose: Well-established risk factors for breast cancer include family history (FH), BRCA mutations and biopsies with atypical hyperplasia (AH) or lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS). Several mathematical models, including the Gail and Tyrer-Cuzick models, have been developed to quantify a patient's risk for developing breast cancer. These models all differ in the list of variables and risk factors that are included in risk calculations. As a result, there is no single model that best estimates the risk for all high risk patients. The purpose of this study is to examine the application of the Gail and Tyrer-Cuzick models in a contemporary cohort of women who are enrolled in a comprehensive high-risk breast cancer database. Methods: The institutional High Risk Breast Cancer Consortium (HRBCC) was established in January 2011. Patients who were at high risk for developing breast cancer based on family history (maternal and paternal), BRCA mutations, AH and LCIS were eligible to enroll in the database. The following variables were included in this analysis: age, family history, genetic testing results, reproductive history, AH, LCIS, Gail and Tyrer-Cuzick scores, risk reduction strategies, and outcomes. All clinical data are obtained from detailed questionnaires filled out by patients who consent to the database studies and from a review of electronic medical records. Descriptive statistics were performed. Results: A total of 604 women were enrolled between 1/2011-2/2016. The median age was 51 years (range 20-87). The majority of women were Caucasian (83%). 52% had a strong FH, 13% were BRCA1 and 2 positive, 48% had AH, and 22% had LCIS. 47% of patients in our high risk program were not eligible for Gail model analysis (age <35 years, BRCA mutation carriers, history of LCIS). Only one patient was not eligible for Tyrer-Cuzick model calculation based on age >84 years. For patients who were eligible for Gail model analysis, 26 (8%) women did not meet criteria (5-year risk >=1.7%) for being designated as high risk for breast cancer. 34 (6%) of our patients did not have Tyrer- Cuzick scores over 20% (criterion for high risk). Notably, majority of the patients (69%) who were not defined as high-risk based on Gail scores >=1.7% or Tyrer-Cuzick scores >=20%, had a strong family history of breast cancer. Only 14 (2%) patients developed breast cancer during our study period, and the majority (93%) of the cancers were early stage (stage 0, I). Conclusions: Our institutional high-risk database includes women who are at high risk based on well-established risk factors for developing breast cancer (FH, BRCA mutations, AH, LCIS). Current mathematical models including the Gail and Tyrer-Cuzick models did not capture the increased risk of breast cancer in 8% of our population. While the models are helpful, in clinical practice they are not necessarily the be-all and end-all. Using heuristic risk factors is more time efficient and comprehensive risk assessment allows the clinicians and patients to better understand risk. Identifying patients as high risk and enrolling them in a high-risk database and program allow us to capture long term follow up, recommend surveillance for early detection, and better understand the effectiveness of different risk reduction and management strategies for this population

Background/Objective: In a time when clinicians are attempting to identify a cohort of patients with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) who will benefit most from post-lumpectomy radiation therapy (RT), tools have been developed to quantify patients' risk for in-breast recurrence. These tools have not yet been integrated into standard use. At our institution, the recommendation for RT after lumpectomy for DCIS is guided by established clinicopathologic factors and reviewed by a multi-disciplinary group. The purpose of this study was to compare the clinicopathologic characteristics and outcomes of postlumpectomy DCIS patients with and without RT at our institution. Methods: The Institutional Breast Cancer Database was queried for all women who were diagnosed with DCIS from 2010-2016. Variables included age, method of presentation, risk factors, tumor and treatment characteristics, and ipsilateral breast tumor recurrence (IBTR). Statistical analyses included Pearson's Chi Square and Fisher's Exact Tests. Results: Of 480 women with pure DCIS and no prior history of breast cancer, 350 (73%) underwent lumpectomy. The median follow-up was 4 years, and median age was 60 years. Two hundred thirty-six (67%) women underwent RT following lumpectomy. Compared to women who did not undergo RT, these women were younger (p=0.003), had larger tumor size (p=0.0008), higher grade (p=0.0006), and comedo features (p=0.03). Women who underwent post-lumpectomy RT had an IBTR rate of 2% vs. 4% (p=0.32) with no RT. The 10 patients with early IBTR in both groups were younger (median age 54 years), and all had intermediate- or high-grade DCIS. Of the 114 patients who did not undergo adjuvant RT, 70 (61%) met the RTOG 9804 criteria for omission of adjuvant RT. Of the 44 patients who did not receive adjuvant RT and did not meet RTOG 9804 criteria, 20 declined RT, and 24 were not referred. Conclusions: Within a relatively short follow-up period, we found a very low overall rate (3%) of IBTR for our patients who underwent lumpectomy for DCIS. These results are consistent with previously published trials on post-lumpectomy RT in DCIS. RT at our institution is recommended based on wellestablished clinicopathologic factors and multidisciplinary care. Considering the low recurrence rates, we recommend continuing the current trend of using published criteria and multidisciplinary review. It remains to be seen to what extent the newly developed recurrence tools, such as Oncotype DX Breast DCIS ScoreTM, will improve upon these short-term recurrence rates