Faculty Bibliography

Current surgical treatment of primary melanoma is uniform for all histosubtypes, although certain types of melanoma, such as acral lentiginous melanoma (ALM), have a worse prognosis. No study has explored the effectiveness of standard melanoma treatment guidelines for managing ALM compared with nonacral melanoma (NAM). Study subjects were identified from a prospectively enrolled database of patients with primary melanoma at New York University. Patients with ALM were matched to those with NAM (1:3) by gender and melanoma stage, including substage (ALM, 61; NAM, 183). All patients received standard-of-care treatment. Recurrence and survival outcomes in both cohorts were compared. ALM histologic subtype was an independent negative predictor of recurrence-free survival (hazard ratio [HR], 2.24; P=.001) and melanoma-specific survival (HR, 2.58; P=.001) compared with NAM. Recurrence was significantly more common in patients with ALM than in those with NAM (49% vs 30%; P=.007). For tumors less than 2 mm in thickness, a significantly higher recurrence rate was seen with ALM versus NAM (P=.048). No significant difference was seen in recurrence for tumors greater than 2 mm (P=.12). Notably, the rate of locoregional recurrence was nearly double for ALM compared with NAM (P=.001). The data presented herein reveal a high rate of locoregional failure in ALM compared with NAM when controlling for AJCC stage. These results raise the question of whether ALM may require more aggressive surgical treatment than nonacral cutaneous melanomas of equal thickness, particularly in tumors less than 2 mm thick. Larger multicenter trials are necessary for further conclusions.

Subungual melanoma is a rare but lethal form of melanoma. Amputation at the level of the interphalangeal joint or proximal has been described as appropriate surgical management for all stages of subungal melanoma. In cases of subungual melanoma in situ (SMIS), wide local excision can improve functional and aesthetic outcomes. We reviewed our experience of wide local excision for the treatment of SMIS. Between 2003 and 2010, we treated 9 cases of SMIS. We performed a retrospective review of this series looking at the primary outcomes of recurrence or metastasis. Average age was 40 years (range, 5-65 years). Presenting lesions were on the thumb (5) and index finger (4). All patients underwent definitive reconstruction with a combination of full-thickness skin graft (8) and paronychial advancement flap (6). Reexcision was performed when disease-free margins could not be confirmed. To date, there have been no cases of metastasis or local recurrence in any of our 9 patients (mean follow-up time of more than 4 years). Wide local excision can improve functional and aesthetic outcomes with similar success in rates of local recurrence and metastasis when compared to treatment by amputation in SMIS.

BACKGROUND: Reconstruction in the setting of prior breast irradiation is conventionally considered a higher-risk procedure. Limited data exist regarding nipple-sparing mastectomy in irradiated breasts, a higher-risk procedure in higher-risk patients. METHODS: The authors identified and reviewed the records of 501 nipple-sparing mastectomy breasts at their institution from 2006 to 2013. RESULTS: Of 501 nipple-sparing mastectomy breasts, 26 were irradiated. The average time between radiation and mastectomy was 12 years. Reconstruction methods in the 26 breasts included tissue expander (n = 14), microvascular free flap (n = 8), direct implant (n = 2), latissimus dorsi flap with implant (n = 1), and rotational perforator flap (n = 1). Rate of return to the operating room for mastectomy flap necrosis was 11.5 percent (three of 26). Nipple-areola complex complications included one complete necrosis (3.8 percent) and one partial necrosis (3.8 percent). Complications were compared between this subset of previously irradiated patients and the larger nipple-sparing mastectomy cohort. There was no significant difference in body mass index, but the irradiated group was significantly older (51 years versus 47.2 years; p = 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference with regard to mastectomy flap necrosis (p = 0.46), partial nipple-areola complex necrosis (p = 1.00), complete nipple-areola complex necrosis (p = 0.47), implant explantation (p = 0.06), hematoma (p = 1.00), seroma (p = 1.00), or capsular contracture (p = 1.00). CONCLUSION: In the largest study to date of nipple-sparing mastectomy in irradiated breasts, the authors demonstrate that implant-based and autologous reconstruction can be performed with complications comparable to those of the rest of their nipple-sparing mastectomy patients.

Neural infiltration in primary melanoma is a histopathologic feature that has been associated with desmoplastic histopathologic subtype and local recurrence in the literature. We tested the hypothesis that improved detection and characterization of neural infiltration into peritumoral or intratumoral location and perineural or intraneural involvement could have a prognostic relevance. We studied 128 primary melanoma cases prospectively accrued and followed at New York University using immunohistochemical detection with antihuman neurofilament protein and routine histology with hematoxylin and eosin. Neural infiltration, defined as the presence of tumor cells involving or immediately surrounding nerve foci, was identified and characterized using both detection methods. Neural infiltration rate of detection was enhanced by immunohistochemistry for neurofilament in matched-pair design (47% by immunohistochemistry versus 25% by routine histology). Immunohistochemical detection of neural infiltration was significantly associated with ulceration (P = .021), desmoplastic and acral lentiginous histologic subtype (P = .008), and head/neck/hands/feet tumor location (P = .037). Routinely detected neural infiltration was significantly associated with local recurrence (P = .010). Immunohistochemistry detected more intratumoral neural infiltration cases compared with routine histology (30% versus 3%, respectively). Peritumoral and intratumoral nerve location had no impact on clinical outcomes. Using a multivariate model controlling for stage, neither routinely detected neural infiltration nor enhanced immunohistochemical characterization of neural infiltration was significantly associated with disease-free or overall survival. Our data demonstrate that routinely detected neural infiltration is associated with local recurrence in all histologic subtypes but that improved detection and characterization of neural infiltration with immunohistochemistry in primary melanoma does not add to prognostic relevance.

BACKGROUND: Steadily high melanoma mortality rates urge for the availability of novel biomarkers with a more personalized ability to predict melanoma clinical outcomes. Germline risk variants are promising candidates for this purpose; however, their prognostic potential in melanoma has never been systematically tested. METHODS: We examined the effect of 108 melanoma susceptibility single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), associated in recent GWAS with melanoma and melanoma-related phenotypes, on recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS), in 891 prospectively accrued melanoma patients. Cox proportional hazards models (Cox PH) were used to test the associations between 108 melanoma risk SNPs and RFS and OS adjusted by age at diagnosis, gender, tumor stage, histological subtype and other primary tumor characteristics. RESULTS: We identified significant associations for rs7538876 (RCC2) with RFS (HR = 1.48, 95% CI = 1.20-1.83, p = 0.0005) and rs9960018 (DLGAP1) with both RFS and OS (HR = 1.43, 95% CI = 1.07-1.91, p = 0.01, HR = 1.52, 95% CI = 1.09-2.12, p = 0.01, respectively) using multivariable Cox PH models. In addition, we developed a logistic regression model that incorporates rs7538876, rs9960018, primary tumor histological type and stage at diagnosis that has an improved discriminatory ability to classify 3-year recurrence (AUC = 82%) compared to histological type and stage alone (AUC = 78%). CONCLUSIONS: We identified associations between melanoma risk variants and melanoma outcomes. The significant associations observed for rs7538876 and rs9960018 suggest a biological implication of these loci in melanoma progression. The observed predictive patterns of associated variants with clinical end-points suggest for the first time the potential for utilization of genetic risk markers in melanoma prognostication.

Objectives: Age is an understudied factor when considering treatment options for melanoma. Here, we examine the impact of age on primary melanoma treatment in a prospective cohort of patients. Methods: We used logistic regression models to examine the associations between age and initial treatment, using recurrence and melanoma-specific survival as endpoints. Results: 444 primary melanoma patients were categorized into three groups by age at diagnosis: 19-45 years (24.3%), 46-70 (50.2%), and 71-95 (25.5%). In multivariate models, older patients experienced a higher risk of recurrence (hazard ratio 3.34, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.53-7.25; p < 0.01). No significant differences were observed in positive biopsy margin rates or extent of surgical margins across age groups. Patients in the middle age group were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy than those in the older group (odds ratio 2.78, 95% CI 1.19-6.45; p = 0.02) and showed a trend to longer disease-free survival when receiving adjuvant therapy (p = 0.09). Conclusion: Our data support age as an independent negative prognostic factor in melanoma. Our data suggest that age does not affect primary surgical treatment but may affect decisions of whether or not patients receive postoperative treatment(s). Further work is needed to better understand the biological variables affecting treatment decisions and efficacy in older patients.

Background: Patients with metastatic melanoma are eligible for BRAF inhibitor therapy if the BRAF V600E mutation can be identified in their tumor specimen. Patients lacking an available specimen for genotyping are unable to receive inhibitor therapy. We developed two mutation-specific genotyping platforms and tested their ability to detect BRAF and NRAS mutations in archived plasma and tumor samples to determine the potential utility of blood-based tumor genotyping in melanoma. Methods: We analyzed a group of 96 patients with stage III or IV melanoma, prospectively enrolled and followed in the NYU Melanoma Biorepository program. Each patient had a plasma sample and one or more tumor samples available for analysis. We used a combination of allele-specific PCR (Taqman) and SNaPshot assays to identify BRAF V600 and NRAS Q61 mutations in the tumor and plasma samples. Results: Among the 96 patients, 51 had stage III disease at the time of analysis; 45 had stage IV disease. Seventy-two patients had 2 or more tumor samples available for analysis, for a total of 204 tumors analyzed. In total, 52/96 (54%) patients had one or more BRAF or NRAS mutant tumors, including one patient with separate BRAF and NRAS mutant tumors (BRAF, n=35 (36%); NRAS, n=18 (19%)). We successfully amplified plasma DNA from 39/52 (75%) patients with tumor-associated mutations. Among those patients with amplifiable plasma DNA we detected mutations in 7 (18%) patients including 3 BRAF V600E, one V600K, 2 NRAS Q61K and one Q61L. Plasma-based mutations matched tumor-associated mutations in all 7 patients. All 7 patients had active disease at the time of blood draw. There were 32 patients with tumor-associated mutations in which a mutation could not be detected in the plasma. Only 15 of those 32 (47%) had active disease at the time of blood draw. There were no mutations detected in the plasma of the 44 patients whose tumors lacked BRAF or NRAS mutations. Conclusions: These data suggest that plasma-based detection of BRAF and NRAS mut!

Background: Although patient age at diagnosis is not currently included in guidelines for treatment of primary melanoma, several lines of evidence suggest that patient age is an important, yet understudied, factor when considering treatment options. Here, we attempt to address the limited knowledge of the impact of age on primary melanoma treatment. Methods: In a prospectively enrolled and followed-up cohort of melanoma patients at NYU, we used logistic regression models to evaluate the association between patient age at diagnosis, tumor baseline characteristics, including BRAF and NRAS mutation status, and likelihood of receiving and responding to adjuvant therapy. We examined adjuvant therapy effectiveness using recurrence and melanoma-specific survival as endpoints. Results: 444 primary melanoma patients were included in the study (median follow-up: 6.3 years; age range: 19-95 years). Age was categorized into three groups spanning the range of age at presentation: younger (19-45 years; 24%), middle (46-70 years; 50%), and older (71-95 years; 26%). Older patients were significantly more likely to have advanced stage, nodular subtype (P < 0.01, both variables), and BRAF wildtype tumors (P = 0.04). Controlling for these factors as well as gender, older patients experienced a higher risk of recurrence (HR older vs. younger 3.34, 95% CI 1.53-7.25; P < 0.01). Of the 128/444 (29%) patients who were eligible for adjuvant treatment (clinical stage IIB), only 67/128 (52%) received treatment. Using a propensity score that accounts for stage at presentation, patients in the middle age group were more likely to receive adjuvant therapy than those in the older group (OR 2.61, 95% CI 1.12-6.08; P = 0.03). In addition, a trend suggesting benefit from adjuvant therapy (defined as longer melanoma-specific survival) was observed only in the middle age group (P = 0.07). Conclusions: Our data suggest that older melanoma patients, despite having a significantly worse prognosis, are less likely to receive and bene!

Background: Small reported studies have provided some evidence implicating immune related genes in melanoma susceptibility and prognosis; however candidate selection of these prior efforts has been limited. In this study, we performed an analysis of germline variants in immuno-modulatory genes for their association with melanoma survival in a well characterized cohort of prospectively accrued melanoma patients. Methods: Germline DNA isolated from blood samples of 817 melanoma patients was genotyped for 94 SNPs tagging 55 immuno-modulatory genes using Sequenom iPLEX. Cox models were used to test associations between each SNP and recurrence-free and overall survival (RFS and OS), with adjustments for age, gender, subtype, thickness, ulceration, and anatomic site. ROC curves were constructed from different SNP/clinical covariate combinations and the area under the curve (AUC) was used to assess their utility in the classification of 3-year recurrence. Results: The SNP rs2796817 in TGFB2 had strong associations with both RFS (HR=3.8, CI 95%: 1.3-11, p=0.02) and OS (HR=5.5, CI 95%: 1.6-19, p=0.029). Other interesting associations with OS came from IRF8 (rs4843861, HR=0.62, CI 95%: 0.39-0.99, p=0.017), CCL5 (rs4796120, HR=7.6, CI 95%: 2.3-25, p=0.035), and CD8A (rs3810831, HR=2.4, CI 95%: 0.91-6.2, p=0.048). A multivariate model including stage, subtype, and one of the SNPs (rs3810831 from CD8A), was shown to improve the AUC when compared to a model including only stage and subtype (0.77 vs. 0.79). Conclusions: We identified several immune-related loci associated with melanoma RFS and OS. The strongest association, rs2796817, maps in TGFB2, which among other functions suppresses IL-2 dependent T-cell growth. In addition to other associations found in the study these findings provide evidence for the involvement of immuno-modulatory genes in melanoma prognosis and suggest further investigations of immune related genes in disease progression. This is currently underway in the second stage validation an!

Background: PP6C binds to regulatory units toaffect a number of important pathways including cell proliferation and DNA repair. Recently two independent groups reported for the first time the presence of somatic mutations in the PPP6C gene in ~10% of short term cultures and limited number of human melanoma tissues. However, the clinical or biological relevance of PPP6C mutations in melanoma patients is unknown. Our objectives were to examine the clinical relevance of PPP6C mutations in a well characterized cohort of melanoma specimens linked to extensive, prospectively-collected clinical information and to explore the functional consequence of different categories of mutations. Methods: Sanger dideoxy sequencing was performed on PCR-amplified DNA from macro-dissected FFPE tumors. Associations between PPP6C mutations and baseline characteristics, recurrence, survival, and BRAF/ NRAS mutational status were examined. The impact of mutations on binding PP6C regulatory units was assessed as well as the effect on additional downstream pathways. Results: 308 primary melanoma patients (118 Stage I, 92 Stage II, and 98 Stage III) were examined (median follow up: 5.3 years). 50 PPP6C mutations in 33 patients (10.7%) were identified with 11 tumors harboring more than one mutation. One mutation (R301C) was identified in 6 patients. PPP6C mutations occurred with similar frequencies across stages and showed no association with BRAF or NRAS mutations.Mutations were categorized into 3 groups: Mutations resulting in premature stop codon (n=9), those occurring in the active site (n=16) and others (n=8). 8/9 (89%) patients with stop mutations recurred and developed visceral metastases. Functional studies revealed that PPP6C mutants also behaved differently; some PPP6C mutations led to decreased binding to regulatory subunits, others, including the R301C mutation did not. Conclusions: Our data suggest that PPP6C mutation is an early event in melanoma progression and independent of BRAF or NRAS mutations. Data also!