Mucosal melanoma: clinical, histological and <i>c‐kit</i> gene mutational profile of 86 French cases

Cinotti, Élisa; Chevallier, J.; Labeille, B.; Cambazard, F.; Thomas, Luc; Balme, B.; Leccia, Marie‐Thérèse; D’Incan, M.; Vercherin, Paul; Douchet, C.; Rubegni, Pietro; Perrot, Jean

doi:10.1111/jdv.14353

Cited by 32 publications

(24 citation statements)

References 45 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…15 Male gender, tumour thickness, age, ulceration and advanced tumour stage at initial diagnosis are linked to a less favourable prognosis for mucosal melanoma. [14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21] In the current study, age ≥60, anorectal localization, thickness and advanced tumour stage were identified as significant negative prognostic factors for survival according to the univariate analysis. In the multivariate analysis, older age and advanced tumour stage remained independent significant influence factors for survival.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Prognostic factors in 161 patients with mucosal melanoma: a study of German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry

Saraç

Amaral

Keim

et al. 2020

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Mucosal melanoma is a rare malignancy which represents approximately 1% of all melanomas. It is shown that mucosal melanomas have a different biology and less favourable prognosis than its cutaneous counterpart. Objectives Predictive and prognostic factors of survival for mucosal melanoma have not yet been elucidated. The aim of this study was to investigate risk factors affecting the course of mucosal melanoma patients followed in our clinic. Methods One hundred and sixty‐one patients with mucosal melanoma prospectively documented in the German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry (CMMR) were included in this study. Gender, age, localization, stage at first medical examination, tumour thickness and mutational status were documented. The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC), 7th edition was used to define tumour stage. Kaplan–Meier survival curves were evaluated compared with the log‐rank test. Multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to identify significant independent prognostic factors. Results According to the localization, patients were categorized in 44.7% oral–nasal, 28.6% genital, 20.5% anorectal and 6.2% visceral. Genital mucosal melanomas had the most favourable 5‐year OS rate (58.6%) followed by visceral (58.3%) and oral–nasal (39.3%). Anorectal melanomas had the worst OS time (median: 21 ± 4.8 months) and 5‐year survival rate (22.7%). Patients <60 years had a better survival than the older group (P = 0.013). Tumour stage at the time of the first medical examination was also a significant factor for survival (P = 0.001). Gender and mutational status were found to have no effect on survival. Age (<60 years vs. ≥60 years; HR = 2.1) and stage at first medical examination (Stage I vs. Stage IV; HR = 8.2) are shown to be significant independent prognostic factors on multivariate Cox regression analysis, but not localization. Conclusion In this study, we observed that older age and advanced stage have significant negative effects on the survival of mucosal melanoma. Thus, the AJCC staging system is applicable for mucosal melanoma.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 59%

Prognostic factors in 161 patients with mucosal melanoma: a study of German Central Malignant Melanoma Registry

Saraç

Amaral

Keim

et al. 2020

Acad Dermatol Venereol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…KIT mutation is associated with older age, with CSD melanoma, the mucosal and acrolentiginous forms [13]. As an extreme example, recent data from Slovenia, a neighboring country to Hungary, KIT mutation frequency was found to be 1.3% [11] while an analysis from Italy (UV-and non-UV forms) and France (mucosal only) found~10% [14,15]. One explanation for such discrepancies is the composition of the melanoma cohorts: frequently including mucosal melanomas as well.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

KIT Mutation Incidence and Pattern of Melanoma in Central Europe

Doma

Barbai

Beleaua

et al. 2019

Pathol. Oncol. Res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Data on the KIT mutation rate in melanoma in the central European region is missing. Accordingly, in a cohort of 79 BRAF/ NRAS double wild type cutaneous melanoma and 17 mucosal melanoma KIT mutation was assessed by Sanger sequencing of exons 9,11,13,17 and 18. In this cutaneous melanoma cohort KIT mutation frequency was found to be 34/79 (43.04%) with a significantly higher rate in acrolentiginous melanoma (ALM) as compared to UV-induced common variants (20/34, 58.8% versus 14/45, 31.1%, p = 0.014). In the double wild type mucosal melanoma cohort the KIT mutation frequency was found to be comparable (41.2%). The actual frequency of KIT mutation in the original 227 patient cutaneous melanoma cohort was 34/ 227, 14.9%. Exon 11 was the most frequent mutation site (44.7%) followed by exon 9 (21.1%) equally characterizing UVinduced common histotypes and ALM tumors. In mucosal melanoma exon 9 was the most frequently involved exon followed by exon 13 and 17. KIT mutation hotspots were identified in exon 9 (c482/491/492), in exon 11 (c559,c572, c570), in exon 13 (c642), in exon 17 (c822) and in exon 18 (c853). The relatively high KIT mutation rate in cutaneous melanoma in this central-European cohort justifies regular testing of this molecular target in this entity, not only in mucosal variants.

show abstract

“…Moreover, the anatomical features of this area and the frequent deep infiltration explain the difficulty in obtaining disease-free margins after surgical resection, which, to date, represents the treatment of choice for this tumour, associated or not with adjuvant radiotherapy. 2,3 The routine inspection of the oral cavity is mandatory during the dermatological examination to detect early asymptomatic OMM and improve the prognosis of patients with OMM. As dermoscopy improves the diagnostic accuracy of clinical examination, it is necessary to ameliorate this technique in order to overcome the obstacles related to the anatomy of the oral cavity and ensure an examination of its inner part, such as recently suggested by D. Jakhar, MD, and C. Grover, MD.…”

Section: S Caiusmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Reply to mucosal melanoma: clinical and genetic profile Dear Editor, We appreciated the comment of Solovan et al 1 on our article on mucosal melanoma recently published on the JEADV. 2 The relative rarity of mucosal melanoma contributes to the fact that data concerning this tumour are few and deserve to be published. The authors compared the clinical aspects of our and their population very precisely.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%