Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common intraocular tumour in adults and despite surgical or radiation treatment of primary tumours, ~50% of patients progress to metastatic disease. Therapeutic options for metastatic UM are limited, with clinical trials having little impact. Here we perform whole-genome sequencing (WGS) of 103 UM from all sites of the uveal tract (choroid, ciliary body, iris). While most UM have low tumour mutation burden (TMB), two subsets with high TMB are seen; one driven by germline MBD4 mutation, and another by ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure, which is restricted to iris UM. All but one tumour have a known UM driver gene mutation (GNAQ, GNA11, BAP1, PLCB4, CYSLTR2, SF3B1, EIF1AX). We identify three other significantly mutated genes (TP53, RPL5 and CENPE).

Purpose To evaluate the feasibility of using circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) for the management of uveal melanoma (UM). Patients and Methods Low-coverage whole-genome sequencing was used to determine somatic chromosomal copy number alterations (SCNAs) in primary UM tumors, ctDNA, and whole-genome amplified CTCs. CTCs were immunocaptured using an antimelanoma-associated chondroitin sulfate antibody conjugated to magnetic beads and immunostained for melanoma antigen recognised by T cells 1 (MART1)/glycoprotein 100 (gp100)/S100 calcium-binding protein β (S100β). ctDNA was quantified using droplet digital polymerase chain reaction assay for mutations in the GNAQ, GNA11, PLCβ4, and CYSLTR2 genes. Results SCNA analysis of CTCs and ctDNA isolated from a patient with metastatic UM showed good concordance with the enucleated primary tumor. In a cohort of 30 patients with primary UM, CTCs were detected in 58% of patients (one to 37 CTCs per 8 mL of blood), whereas only 26% of patients had detectable ctDNA (1.6 to 29 copies/mL). The presence of CTCs or ctDNA was not associated with tumor size or other prognostic markers. However, the frequent detection of CTCs in patients with early-stage UM supports a model in which CTCs can be used to derive tumor-specific SCNA relevant for prognosis. Monitoring of ctDNA after treatment of the primary tumor allowed detection of metastatic disease earlier than 18F-labeled fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in two patients. Conclusion The presence of CTCs in localized UM can be used to ascertain prognostic SCNA, whereas ctDNA can be used to monitor patients for early signs of metastatic disease. This study paves the way for the analysis of CTCs and ctDNA as a liquid biopsy that will assist with treatment decisions in patients with UM.