scholarly journals Genes and biological functions governing intrinsic tumor biology utilized in cutaneous melanoma risk assessment through a clinically available 31-gene expression profile test

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 165
Author(s):  
Sarah J Kurley ◽  
Kyle R Covington ◽  
Kristen M Plasseraud ◽  
Et Al.
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Gene Expression Profile ◽  
Expression Profile ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma ◽  
Tumor Biology ◽  
Biological Functions ◽  
Melanoma Risk

Abstract not available. Disclosures: Study sponsored by Castle Biosciences.

Improvement of risk assessment in cutaneous melanoma (CM) by a prognostic 31-gene expression profile (31-GEP) test over AJCC-based staging alone

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 ◽  
pp. S70
Author(s):  
Giselle Prado ◽  
Robert W Cook ◽  
Kyle R Covington ◽  
Federico A Monzon ◽  
Darrell S Rigel
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Risk Assessment ◽  
Gene Expression Profile ◽  
Expression Profile ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma

Abstract not available. Disclosures: Study sponsored by Castle Biosciences. Copyright 2018 SKIN

scholarly journals Prospective, Multicenter Clinical Impact Evaluation of a 31-Gene Expression Profile Test for Management of Melanoma Patients

2018 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 111-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
Larry D Dillon ◽  
Joseph E Gadzia ◽  
Robert S Davidson ◽  
Michael McPhee ◽  
Kyle R Covington ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Gene Expression Profile ◽  
Expression Profile ◽  
Tumor Biology ◽  
Primary Melanoma ◽  
Risk Class ◽  
Class 1 ◽  
Post Test ◽  
Melanoma Patients ◽  
And Performance

Objective: A 31-gene expression profile (GEP) test that has been clinically validated identifies melanoma patients with low (Class 1) or high (Class 2) risk of metastasis based on primary tumor biology.  This study aimed to prospectively evaluate the test impact on clinical management of melanoma patients.Methods:  Physicians at 16 dermatology, surgical or medical oncology centers examined patients to assess clinical features of the primary melanoma.  Recommendations for clinical follow-up and surveillance were collected.  Following consent of the patient and performance of the GEP test, recommendations for management were again collected, and pre- and post-test recommendations were assessed to determine changes in management resulting from the addition of GEP testing to traditional clinicopathologic risk factors.   Results:  Post-test management plans changed for 49% (122 of 247) of cases in the study when compared to pre-test plans. Thirty-six percent (66 of 181) of Class 1 cases had a management change, compared to 85% (56 of 66) of Class 2 cases.  GEP class was a significant factor for change in care during the study (p<0.001), with Class 1 accounting for 91% (39 of 43) of cases with decreased management intensity, and Class 2 accounting for 72% (49 of 68) of cases with increases.Conclusions: The reported study show that the 31-gene GEP test improves net health outcomes in the management of cutaneous melanoma.  Physicians used test results to guide risk-appropriate changes that match the biological risk of the tumor, including directing more frequent and intense surveillance to high-risk, Class 2 patients.

scholarly journals Molecular risk prediction in cutaneous melanoma: A meta-analysis of the 31-gene expression profile prognostic test in 1,479 patients

2020 ◽  
Vol 83 (3) ◽  
pp. 745-753 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradley N. Greenhaw ◽  
Kyle R. Covington ◽  
Sarah J. Kurley ◽  
Yildiray Yeniay ◽  
Nhat Anh Cao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Gene Expression Profile ◽  
Risk Prediction ◽  
Expression Profile ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Prognostic Test

Performance of a 31-gene expression profile in a previously unreported cohort of 334 cutaneous melanoma patients.

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9581-9581 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jonathan S. Zager ◽  
Jane Messina ◽  
Vernon K. Sondak ◽  
Laura Ferris ◽  
Robert W. Cook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Gene Expression Profile ◽  
Expression Profile ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma ◽  
Melanoma Patients

Performance of a prognostic 31-gene expression profile test in stage III cutaneous melanoma subjects.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9578-9578
Author(s):  
Martin D. Fleming ◽  
Brooke Middlebrook ◽  
Kyle R. Covington ◽  
Pedram Gerami ◽  
Jeffrey D. Wayne ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Gene Expression Profile ◽  
Expression Profile ◽  
Distant Metastasis ◽  
Cutaneous Melanoma ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Melanoma Metastasis ◽  
Stage Iiia ◽  
Class 1

9578 Background: The management of stage III cutaneous melanoma (CM) patients has changed significantly with the introduction of contemporary therapies. A 31-gene expression profile (GEP) test that provides a prediction of low or high risk of melanoma metastasis has been validated as an independent prognosticator of distant metastasis-free (DMFS) and melanoma-specific survival (MSS). We examine the prognostic accuracy of the test in a cohort of stage III, and particularly stage IIIA, subjects from a multicenter validation study. Methods: 207 primary CM tumors from 16 centers were analyzed as part of an IRB-approved study. Quantitative RT-PCR and predictive modeling were performed to classify metastasis and survival risk as Class 1 (low risk) or Class 2 (high risk). Results for Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression survival analysis are reported. Results: Of the 207 subjects with stage III melanoma, 76 were stage IIIA. The table shows 5-year DMFS and MSS rates for all stage III and stage IIIA groups. Patients with Class 2 GEP had significantly worse outcomes compared to Class 1. In univariate analyses, GEP was a significant predictor of DMFS and MSS with a hazard ratio for DMFS of 2.8 (95%-CI; 1.7-4.6) and for MSS of 4.0 (95%-CI; 1.7-9.4) for all stage III, while HR of 2.2 for DMFS (95%-CI; 1.0-4.7) and 4.3 for MSS (95%-CI; 1.2-15.2) were observed for the stage IIIA group. For all stage III cases, Breslow thickness and GEP were significant predictors of DMFS and MSS in multivariate models including ulceration and mitotic rate (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The results support the capability of the GEP to accurately predict stage III distant metastasis and survival, and that the test complements existing prognostic factors. GEP testing may be useful in identifying stage IIIA patients who are appropriate for adjuvant therapies and/or enrollment in clinical trials. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document