Undifferentiated and Dedifferentiated Metastatic Melanomas Masquerading as Soft Tissue Sarcomas: Mutational Signature Analysis and Immunotherapy Response

The distinction between undifferentiated melanoma (UM) or dedifferentiated melanoma (DM) from undifferentiated or unclassifiable sarcoma can be difficult and requires the careful correlation of clinical, pathologic, and genomic findings. In this study, we examined the utility of mutational signature...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Modern pathology 2023-08, Vol.36 (8), p.100165-100165, Article 100165
Hauptverfasser: Kasago, Israel S., Chatila, Walid K., Lezcano, Cecilia M., Febres-Aldana, Christopher A., Schultz, Nikolaus, Vanderbilt, Chad, Dogan, Snjezana, Bartlett, Edmund K., D’Angelo, Sandra P., Tap, William D., Singer, Samuel, Ladanyi, Marc, Shoushtari, Alexander N., Busam, Klaus J., Hameed, Meera
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:The distinction between undifferentiated melanoma (UM) or dedifferentiated melanoma (DM) from undifferentiated or unclassifiable sarcoma can be difficult and requires the careful correlation of clinical, pathologic, and genomic findings. In this study, we examined the utility of mutational signatures to identify patients with UM/DM with particular attention as to whether this distinction matters for treatment because the survival of patients with metastatic melanoma has dramatically improved with immunologic therapy, whereas durable responses are less frequent in sarcomas. We identified 19 cases of UM/DM that were initially reported as unclassified or undifferentiated malignant neoplasm or sarcoma and submitted for targeted next-generation sequencing analysis. These cases were confirmed as UM/DM by harboring melanoma driver mutations, UV signature, and high tumor mutation burden. One case of DM showed melanoma in situ. Meanwhile, 18 cases represented metastatic UM/DM. Eleven patients had a prior history of melanoma. Thirteen of 19 (68%) of the tumors were immunohistochemically completely negative for 4 melanocytic markers (S100, SOX10, HMB45, and MELAN-A). All cases harbored a dominant UV signature. Frequent driver mutations involved BRAF (26%), NRAS (32%), and NF1 (42%). In contrast, the control cohort of undifferentiated pleomorphic sarcomas (UPS) of deep soft tissue exhibited a dominant aging signature in 46.6% (7/15) without evidence of UV signature. The median tumor mutation burden for DM/UM vs UPS was 31.5 vs 7.0 mutations/Mb (P < .001). A favorable response to immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy was observed in 66.6% (12/18) of patients with UM/DM. Eight patients exhibited a complete response and were alive with no evidence of disease at the last follow-up (median 45.5 months). Our findings support the usefulness of the UV signature in discriminating DM/UM vs UPS. Furthermore, we present evidence suggesting that patients with DM/UM and UV signatures can benefit from immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy.
ISSN:0893-3952
1530-0285
1530-0285
DOI:10.1016/j.modpat.2023.100165