Search

Mutations assessed at VICC.

Activating NRAS mutations are found in 15% to 20% of melanomas. Immune therapies have become a mainstay in advanced melanoma treatment. We sought to evaluate whether tumor genotype (e.g., NRAS mutations) correlates with benefit from immune therapy in melanoma. We identified 229 patients with melanoma treated with immune therapies [IL2, ipilimumab, or anti-programmed cell death-1/ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1)] at three centers and compared clinical outcomes following immune therapy for patients with or without NRAS mutations. Of the 229 patients with melanoma, 60 had NRAS mutation, 53 had BRAF mutation, and 116 had NRAS/BRAF wild type. The NRAS-mutant cohort had superior or a trend to superior outcomes compared with the other cohorts in terms of response to first-line immune therapy (28% vs. 16%, P = 0.04), response to any line of immune therapy (32% vs. 20%, P = 0.07), clinical benefit (response + stable disease lasting ≥24 weeks; 50% vs. 31%, P < 0.01), and progression-free survival (median, 4.1 vs. 2.9 months, P = 0.09). Benefit from anti–PD-1/PD-L1 was particularly marked in the NRAS cohort (clinical benefit rate 73% vs. 35%). In an independent group of patient samples, NRAS-mutant melanoma had higher PD-L1 expression (although not statistically significant) compared with other genotypes (8/12 vs. 9/20 samples with ≥1% expression; 6/12 vs. 6/20 samples with ≥5% expression), suggesting a potential mechanism for the clinical results. This retrospective study suggests that NRAS mutations in advanced melanoma correlate with increased benefit from immune-based therapies compared with other genetic subtypes. If confirmed by prospective studies, this may be explained in part by high rates of PD-L1 expression. Cancer Immunol Res; 3(3); 288–95. ©2015 AACR.

Genes assessed at MGH by SNaPshot Testing1.

Mutations assessed at MSKCC.

Clinical and molecular characteristics of PD-L1 staining cohort.

Here, we present a rare case of a patient who developed multiple primary melanomas within the boundaries of two nevi depigmentosa. The melanomas were excised, and as a preventive measure, the remainder of the nevi depigmentosa were removed. We performed whole-exome sequencing on excised tissue from the nevus depigmentosus, adjacent normal skin, and saliva to explain this intriguing phenomenon. We also performed a GeneTrails Comprehensive Solid Tumor Panel analysis on one of the melanoma tissues. Genetic analysis revealed germline MC1R V92M and TYR R402Q polymorphisms and a MET E168D germline mutation that may have increased the risk of melanoma development. This genetic predisposition, combined with a patient-reported history of substantial sun exposure and sunburns, which were more severe within the boundaries of the nevi depigmentosa due to the lack of photoprotective melanin, produced numerous somatic mutations in the melanocytes of the nevi depigmentosa. Fitting with this paradigm for melanoma development in chronically sun-damaged skin, the patient's melanomas harbored somatic mutations in CDKN2A (splice site), NF1, and ATRX and had a tumor mutation burden in the 90-95th percentile for melanoma.

Background Since 2011, the therapeutic landscape of melanoma has changed dramatically because of the adoption of immune checkpoint inhibitor and targeted therapies. The authors sought to quantify the effects of these changes on short-term treatment costs by comparing the first-year cancer-attributable costs in novel (2011-2015) and historical (2004-2010) treatment eras. Methods The authors estimated the first-year cancer-attributable and out-of-pocket (OOP) costs by cancer stage at diagnosis by using a case-control approach. Patients aged ≥67 years with melanoma results were used to calculate the total direct costs of treatment during the first year after the diagnosis of melanoma in the US Medicare population older than 65 years. Costs were reported in 2018 dollars. Results Costs increased with the stage at diagnosis. Average first-year cancer-attributable costs per patient for stage IV patients increased significantly by 61.7% from $45,952 to $74,297 after the adoption of novel treatments. Per-patient OOP responsibility decreased by almost 30.8% across all stages of cancer but increased by 16.5% for stage IV patients from 2004 ($7646) to 2015 ($8911). The total direct cost of treatment for persons with melanoma older than 65 years increased by $16.03 million (4.93%) from $324.68 million in 2010 to $340.71 million in 2015. The largest increase in yearly total cost, $23.64 million (56.53%), was observed among stage IV patients. Conclusions The direct cost of melanoma increased significantly in the Medicare population, particularly for advanced-stage disease. Prevention and early detection initiatives may reduce the economic burden of melanoma.

ImportanceTherapy for advanced melanoma has transformed during the past decade, but early detection and prognostic assessment of cutaneous melanoma (CM) remain paramount goals. Best practices for screening and use of pigmented lesion evaluation tools and gene expression profile (GEP) testing in CM remain to be defined.ObjectiveTo provide consensus recommendations on optimal screening practices and prebiopsy diagnostic, postbiopsy diagnostic, and prognostic assessment of CM.Evidence ReviewCase scenarios were interrogated using a modified Delphi consensus method. Melanoma panelists (n = 60) were invited to vote on hypothetical scenarios via an emailed survey (n = 42), which was followed by a consensus conference (n = 51) that reviewed the literature and the rationale for survey answers. Panelists participated in a follow-up survey for final recommendations on the scenarios (n = 45).FindingsThe panelists reached consensus (≥70% agreement) in supporting a risk-stratified approach to melanoma screening in clinical settings and public screening events, screening personnel recommendations (self/partner, primary care provider, general dermatologist, and pigmented lesion expert), screening intervals, and acceptable appointment wait times. Participants also reached consensus that visual and dermoscopic examination are sufficient for evaluation and follow-up of melanocytic skin lesions deemed innocuous. The panelists reached consensus on interpreting reflectance confocal microscopy and some but not all results from epidermal tape stripping, but they did not reach consensus on use of certain pigmented lesion evaluation tools, such as electrical impedance spectroscopy. Regarding GEP scores, the panelists reached consensus that a low-risk prognostic GEP score should not outweigh concerning histologic features when selecting patients to undergo sentinel lymph node biopsy but did not reach consensus on imaging recommendations in the setting of a high-risk prognostic GEP score and low-risk histology and/or negative nodal status.Conclusions and RelevanceFor this consensus statement, panelists reached consensus on aspects of a risk-stratified approach to melanoma screening and follow-up as well as use of visual examination and dermoscopy. These findings support a practical approach to diagnosing and evaluating CM. Panelists did not reach consensus on a clearly defined role for GEP testing in clinical decision-making, citing the need for additional studies to establish the clinical use of existing GEP assays.

Introduction: In image interpretation education, many educators have shifted away from traditional methods that involve passive instruction and fragmented learning to interactive ones that promote active engagement and integrated knowledge. By training pattern recognition skills in an effective manner, these interactive approaches provide a promising direction for dermoscopy education. Objectives: A narrative review of the literature was performed to probe emerging directions in medical image interpretation education that may support dermoscopy education. This article represents the second of a two-part review series. Methods: To promote innovation in dermoscopy education, the International Skin Imaging Collaboration (ISIC) assembled an Education Working Group that comprises international dermoscopy experts and educational scientists. Based on a preliminary literature review and their experiences as educators, the group developed and refined a list of innovative approaches through multiple rounds of discussion and feedback. For each approach, literature searches were performed for relevant articles. Results: Through a consensus-based approach, the group identified a number of theory-based approaches, as discussed in the first part of this series. The group also acknowledged the role of motivation, metacognition, and early failures in optimizing the learning process. Other promising teaching tools included gamification, social media, and perceptual and adaptive learning modules (PALMs). Conclusions: Over the years, many dermoscopy educators may have intuitively adopted these instructional strategies in response to learner feedback, personal observations, and changes in the learning environment. For dermoscopy training, PALMs may be especially valuable in that they provide immediate feedback and adapt the training schedule to the individual’s performance.

INTRODUCTION: Primary care providers have greater access to patients despite often lacking the appropriate training or time to implement effective skin cancer screenings in their busy practices.(1) Through collaborative efforts with Oregon’s War on Melanoma public health campaign and other primary care trainings, we created “Melanoma Toolkit for Early Detection” (MTED): a training curriculum and resource repository for primary care providers. METHODS AND RESULTS: MTED consisted of three self-paced modules. Each participant completed a pre- and post-test consisting of demographic, confidence, and image identification questions. A subsequent optional 6-month follow-up image identification test was also provided. Of the 96 participants, 40 completed all the modules, the pre, and post-test. On average, scores increased by 6.0 (95% CI: 3.5 to 8.6) percentage points (P

IMPORTANCE: Use of prognostic gene expression profile (GEP) testing in cutaneous melanoma (CM) is rising despite a lack of endorsement as standard of care. OBJECTIVE: To develop guidelines within the national Melanoma Prevention Working Group (MPWG) on integration of GEP testing into the management of patients with CM, including (1) review of published data using GEP tests, (2) definition of acceptable performance criteria, (3) current recommendations for use of GEP testing in clinical practice, and (4) considerations for future studies. EVIDENCE REVIEW: The MPWG members and other international melanoma specialists participated in 2 online surveys and then convened a summit meeting. Published data and meeting abstracts from 2015 to 2019 were reviewed. FINDINGS: The MPWG members are optimistic about the future use of prognostic GEP testing to improve risk stratification and enhance clinical decision-making but acknowledge that current utility is limited by test performance in patients with stage I disease. Published studies of GEP testing have not evaluated results in the context of all relevant clinicopathologic factors or as predictors of regional nodal metastasis to replace sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB). The performance of GEP tests has generally been reported for small groups of patients representing particular tumor stages or in aggregate form, such that stage-specific performance cannot be ascertained, and without survival outcomes compared with data from the American Joint Committee on Cancer 8th edition melanoma staging system international database. There are significant challenges to performing clinical trials incorporating GEP testing with SLNB and adjuvant therapy. The MPWG members favor conducting retrospective studies that evaluate multiple GEP testing platforms on fully annotated archived samples before embarking on costly prospective studies and recommend avoiding routine use of GEP testing to direct patient management until prospective studies support their clinical utility. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: More evidence is needed to support using GEP testing to inform recommendations regarding SLNB, intensity of follow-up or imaging surveillance, and postoperative adjuvant therapy. The MPWG recommends further research to assess the validity and clinical applicability of existing and emerging GEP tests. Decisions on performing GEP testing and patient management based on these results should only be made in the context of discussion of testing limitations with the patient or within a multidisciplinary group.

Background: Benefit–harm tradeoffs of melanoma screening depend on disease risk and treatment efficacy. We developed a model to project outcomes of screening for melanoma in populations with different risks under historic and novel systemic treatments. Methods: Computer simulation model of a screening program with specified impact on overall and advanced-stage incidence. Inputs included meta-analyses of treatment trials, cancer registry data, and a melanoma risk prediction study Results: Assuming 50% reduction in advanced stage under screening, the model projected 59 and 38 lives saved per 100,000 men under historic and novel treatments, respectively. With 10% increase in stage I, the model projects 2.9 and 4.7 overdiagnosed cases per life saved and number needed to be screened (NNS) equal to 1695 and 2632 under historical and novel treatments. When screening was performed only for the 20% of individuals with highest predicted risk, 34 and 22 lives per 100,000 were saved under historic and novel treatments. Similar results were obtained for women, but lives saved were lower. Conclusions: Melanoma early detection programs must shift a substantial fraction of cases from advanced to localized stage to be sustainable. Advances in systemic therapies for melanoma might noticeably reduce benefits of screening, but restricting screening to individuals at highest risk will likely reduce intervention efforts and harms while preserving >50% of the benefit of nontargeted screening. Impact: Our accessible modeling framework will help to guide population melanoma screening programs in an era of novel treatments for advanced disease.

Ultraviolet radiation (UVR) exposure is the most important modifiable risk factor for skin cancer development. Although sunscreen and sun-protective clothing are essential tools to minimize UVR exposure, few studies have compared the two modalities head-to-head. This study evaluates the UV-protective capacity of four modern, sun-protective textiles and two broad-spectrum, organic sunscreens (SPF 30 and 50). Sun Protection Factor (SPF), Ultraviolet Protection Factor (UPF), Critical Wavelength (CW), and % UVA- and % UVB-blocking were measured for each fabric. UPF, CW, % UVA- and % UVB-blocking were measured for each sunscreen at 2 mg/cm2 (recommended areal density) and 1 mg/cm2 (simulating real-world consumer application). The four textiles provided superior UVR protection when compared to the two sunscreens tested. All fabrics blocked erythemogenic UVR better than the sunscreens, as measured by SPF, UPF, and % UVB-blocking. Each fabric was superior to the sunscreens in blocking full-spectrum UVR, as measured by CW and % UVA-blocking. Our data demonstrate the limitations of sunscreen and UV-protective clothing labeling and suggest the combination of SPF or UPF with % UVA-blocking may provide more suitable measures for broad-spectrum protection. While sunscreen remains an important photoprotective modality (especially for sites where clothing is impractical), these data suggest that clothing should be considered the cornerstone of UV protection.

Importance Dermoscopy education in US dermatology residency programs varies widely, and there is currently no existing expert consensus identifying what is most important for resident physicians to know. Objectives To identify consensus-based learning constructs representing an appropriate foundational proficiency in dermoscopic image interpretation for dermatology resident physicians, including dermoscopic diagnoses, associated features, and representative teaching images. Defining these foundational proficiency learning constructs will facilitate further skill development in dermoscopic image interpretation to help residents achieve clinical proficiency. Design, Setting, and Participants A 2-phase modified Delphi surveying technique was used to identify resident learning constructs in 3 sequential sets of surveys—diagnoses, features, and images. Expert panelists were recruited through an email distributed to the 32 members of the Pigmented Lesion Subcommittee of the Melanoma Prevention Working Group. Twenty-six (81%) opted to participate. Surveys were distributed using RedCAP software. Main Outcomes and Measures Consensus on diagnoses, associated dermoscopic features, and representative teaching images reflective of a foundational proficiency in dermoscopic image interpretation for US dermatology resident physicians. Results Twenty-six pigmented lesion and dermoscopy specialists completed 8 rounds of surveys, with 100% (26/26) response rate in all rounds. A final list of 32 diagnoses and 116 associated dermoscopic features was generated. Three hundred seventy-eight representative teaching images reached consensus with panelists. Conclusions and Relevance Consensus achieved in this modified Delphi process identified common dermoscopic diagnoses, associated features, and representative teaching images reflective of a foundational proficiency in dermoscopic image interpretation for dermatology residency training. This list of validated objectives provides a consensus-based foundation of key learning points in dermoscopy to help resident physicians achieve clinical proficiency in dermoscopic image interpretation.

Early detection of melanoma has several advantages over treatment of late-stage disease. Cure rates are higher, disfigurement is reduced, both short-term and long-term side effects from unnecessary systemic therapies are avoided, and most importantly, a large number of lives of individuals who would never have responded to these treatments in the first place are saved. Early detection is also likely to reduce the overall cost of care because early-stage treatments are far less expensive than those used in advanced disease. Despite the potential benefits of screening and early detection, relatively few prospective interventional studies have been performed to objectively demonstrate effectiveness or quantify the effects. However, multivariate data do show that a basic awareness of skin health and appearance (not requiring specialized knowledge of melanoma features) is associated with early detection of melanoma. The purpose of the War on Melanoma research study is to prospectively test whether a statewide early-detection campaign can improve melanoma outcomes. We will compare three objective metrics before and after the intervention (the education campaign): (1) melanoma knowledge in the general public by survey of a representative population sample; (2) state cancer registry data on stage, mortality, etc.; and (3) cost information from an all-claims, all-payers database. We hypothesize that there will be an increase in melanoma-specific knowledge in the general public, an improved prognosis at the time of diagnosis, and a decrease in melanoma mortality in Oregon compared to two control states (Utah and Washington). We will also quantify the difference in cost of care for melanoma before and after the campaign and will determine if these costs are associated with knowledge levels and/or prognostic/mortality data. These results will provide a model for future early-detection campaigns in other states or for other cancers, by providing evidence for the impact of public health education. Citation Format: Sancy A. Leachman, Jodi Lapidus, Kemal Sonmez, Michael Heath, Brian Detweiler-Bedell, Jerusha Detweiler-Bedell, Elizabeth G. Berry, Elizabeth Stoos. The War on Melanoma: Oregon’s early detection experiment [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR Special Conference on Melanoma: From Biology to Target; 2019 Jan 15-18; Houston, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(19 Suppl):Abstract nr IA11.

Little evidence exists to guide the management of moderately dysplastic nevi excisionally biopsied without residual clinical pigmentation but with positive histologic margins (hereafter referred to as moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins).To determine outcomes and risk for the development of subsequent cutaneous melanoma (CM) from moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins observed for 3 years or more.A multicenter (9 US academic dermatology sites) retrospective cohort study was conducted of patients 18 years or older with moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins and 3 years or more of follow-up data collected consecutively from January 1, 1990, to August 31, 2014. Records were reviewed for patient demographics, biopsy type, pathologic findings, and development of subsequent CM at the biopsy site or elsewhere on the body. The χ2 test, the Fisher exact test, and analysis of variance were used to assess univariate association for risk of subsequent CMs, in addition to multivariable logistic regression models. To confirm histologic grading, each site submitted 5 random representative slide cases for central dermatopathologic review. Statistical analysis was performed from October 1, 2017, to June 22, 2018.Development of CM at a biopsy site or elsewhere on the body where there were moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins.A total of 467 moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins from 438 patients (193 women and 245 men; mean [SD] age, 46.7 [16.1] years) were evaluated. No cases developed into CM at biopsy sites, with a mean (SD) follow-up time of 6.9 (3.4) years. However, 100 patients (22.8%) developed a CM at a separate site. Results of multivariate analyses revealed that history of CM was significantly associated with the risk of development of subsequent CM at a separate site (odds ratio, 11.74; 95% CI, 5.71-24.15; P .001), as were prior biopsied dysplastic nevi (odds ratio, 2.55; 95% CI, 1.23-5.28; P = .01). The results of a central dermatopathologic review revealed agreement in 35 of 40 cases (87.5%). Three of 40 cases (7.5%) were upgraded in degree of atypia; of these, 1 was interpreted as melanoma in situ. That patient remains without recurrence or evidence of CM after 5 years of follow-up.This study suggests that close observation with routine skin surveillance is a reasonable management approach for moderately dysplastic nevi with positive histologic margins. However, having 2 or more biopsied dysplastic nevi (with 1 that is a moderately dysplastic nevus) appears to be associated with increased risk for subsequent CM at a separate site.

Ipilimumab, a novel immune checkpoint inhibitor, is associated with long-term survival in approximately 20% of patients with advanced melanoma and is also being evaluated in the adjuvant setting. With this growing cohort of survivors, long-term health outcomes, chronic toxicities, and functional outcomes among survivors treated with ipilimumab need to be defined. Using retrospective medical record abstraction, we evaluated disease status, chronic immune- and non–immune-related health events, pharmacologic management of symptoms, and functional status in patients with melanoma, with overall survival ≥2 years following ipilimumab treatment at Vanderbilt University. Ninety patients received ipilimumab for metastatic disease or as adjuvant therapy between January 2006 and September 2012, and 33 patients survived ≥2 years, with a median overall survival of 60.1 months. Of these, 24 patients were alive at the last follow-up (73%), with 14 patients free of disease (42%). Gastrointestinal and dermatologic adverse events were frequent but largely transient. By contrast, patients with hypophysitis universally required ongoing corticosteroids, although largely remained asymptomatic with appropriate hormone replacement. Surviving patients generally had excellent performance status (ECOG 0–1 in 23 of 24). Chronic neurologic toxicities caused substantial morbidity and mortality in 2 patients who received whole-brain radiotherapy >5 years before analysis, and in one patient with chronic, painful peripheral neuropathy. No previously undescribed cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, hematologic, or neoplastic safety signals were identified. In conclusion, ipilimumab was associated with largely excellent functional outcomes among long-term survivors. Chronic endocrine dysfunction and occasional neurologic toxicity (primarily associated with whole-brain radiation) were observed in a small number of patients. Cancer Immunol Res; 3(5); 464–9. ©2015 AACR.

Activating NRAS mutations are found in 15% to 20% of melanomas. Immune therapies have become a mainstay in advanced melanoma treatment. We sought to evaluate whether tumor genotype (e.g., NRAS mutations) correlates with benefit from immune therapy in melanoma. We identified 229 patients with melanoma treated with immune therapies [IL2, ipilimumab, or anti-programmed cell death-1/ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1)] at three centers and compared clinical outcomes following immune therapy for patients with or without NRAS mutations. Of the 229 patients with melanoma, 60 had NRAS mutation, 53 had BRAF mutation, and 116 had NRAS/BRAF wild type. The NRAS-mutant cohort had superior or a trend to superior outcomes compared with the other cohorts in terms of response to first-line immune therapy (28% vs. 16%, P = 0.04), response to any line of immune therapy (32% vs. 20%, P = 0.07), clinical benefit (response + stable disease lasting ≥24 weeks; 50% vs. 31%, P < 0.01), and progression-free survival (median, 4.1 vs. 2.9 months, P = 0.09). Benefit from anti–PD-1/PD-L1 was particularly marked in the NRAS cohort (clinical benefit rate 73% vs. 35%). In an independent group of patient samples, NRAS-mutant melanoma had higher PD-L1 expression (although not statistically significant) compared with other genotypes (8/12 vs. 9/20 samples with ≥1% expression; 6/12 vs. 6/20 samples with ≥5% expression), suggesting a potential mechanism for the clinical results. This retrospective study suggests that NRAS mutations in advanced melanoma correlate with increased benefit from immune-based therapies compared with other genetic subtypes. If confirmed by prospective studies, this may be explained in part by high rates of PD-L1 expression. Cancer Immunol Res; 3(3); 288–95. ©2015 AACR.

Background Teledermatology may improve dermatologic care access in underserved areas and expand the clinical experience of dermatologists-in-training. The potential for teledermatology to supplement global health curricula in dermatology residency education has not been explored. Methods An international virtual grand rounds (VGR) curriculum was created based on teledermatology cases from Kabul, Afghanistan. The learning objectives included understanding the diagnosis and management of skin diseases in unfamiliar resource-limited settings and highlighting socioeconomic, cross-cultural, and ethical issues. A 17-item, Likert scale questionnaire was used to assess the effectiveness of the curriculum, including specific Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) competencies, as well as interest in global health and teledermatology. Results The survey was completed by 85 of 118 VGR attendees (72% response rate). Most respondents considered the curriculum valuable to their education (mean 4.5 on a 5-point Likert scale; standard deviation, 0.5), learned more about diagnosis and treatment of skin diseases in international settings (4.5; 0.6) and in the US (4.1; 0.8), and learned more about socioeconomic, cultural, and ethical issues in skin health (4.6; 0.5). The majority also reported being more interested in global dermatology (4.1; 0.8) and would recommend VGR to a colleague (4.5; 0.6). Conclusion This pilot curriculum provided an innovative platform to enhance undergraduate and graduate medical education in international dermatology. International teledermatology education may be used to address multiple ACGME core competencies and increase resident awareness of sociocultural determinants of skin health.

Prognostic gene expression profiling (GEP) tests for cutaneous melanoma (CM) are not recommended in current guidelines outside of a clinical trial. However, their use is becoming more prevalent and some practitioners are using GEP tests to guide patient management. Thus, there is an urgent need to bridge this gap between test usage and clinical guideline recommendations by obtaining high-quality evidence to guide us toward best practice use of GEP testing in CM patients. We focus here on the opportunities and uncertainties associated with prognostic GEP testing in CM, review how GEP testing was incorporated into clinical care guidelines for uveal melanoma and breast cancer and discuss the role of clinical trials to determine best use in patients with CM.

Introduction: Dermoscopic understanding of naevus characteristics is essential baseline knowledge for identifying early malignant changes.

Dermoscopic understanding of naevus characteristics is essential baseline knowledge for identifying early malignant changes.This cross-sectional study includes 34 patients (56% female, mean age 48 years) at high risk of melanoma (personal or a first degree family member with history of melanoma) and 31 moderate/low melanoma risk volunteers (55% female, mean age 37 years) recruited at the Princess Alexandra Hospital, Brisbane, between October 2009 and March 2010. Participants received full body and individual dermoscopic imaging of clinically significant naevi (≥2 mm on the back of male/female and lower limbs of female and ≥5 mm at other body sites). Dermoscopic patterns of naevi were compared between people at high versus moderate/low melanoma risk according to age and body site.In both high and moderate/low risk groups, globular naevi predominated on the head/neck and abdomen/chest, reticular and non-specific naevi on the back, and non-specific pattern on the upper and lower limbs. Non-specific naevi were the most common in all age groups. In both risk groups, globular naevi were more frequent in the younger age bracket, and reticular naevi were more frequent in the older age bracket. Mixed naevus patterns were infrequent and were more common in the younger age brackets of both risk groups.Our preliminary data shows that dermoscopic naevus patterns were similar for age and body site in people at different levels of melanoma risk, suggesting high melanoma risk does not influence dermoscopic naevus patterns.

9019 Background: NRAS mutant (mut) MM comprises a distinct, molecularly defined cohort of this disease that appears to have a poor prognosis compared to other genetic subsets. In contrast to BRAF mut MM, there are no effective small molecule inhibitors specifically targeting NRAS. Immune based therapy (IT) has become a mainstay in MM treatment, especially in BRAF wild type (WT) patients (pts). Biomarkers to predict which pts will benefit from IT have not been validated. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether genetic subtype (specifically NRAS) has a role in predicting benefit from IT in BRAF WT MM. Methods: We identified 173 pts from 3 institutions who underwent clinical genotyping (exome or PCR based) for NRAS and BRAF mutation from 1/09 – 8/12 and were treated with IT (defined as IL-2, ipilimumab (ipi), or anti-PD-1 (nivolumab, MK3475)/ PD-L1 (MPDL3280A)). Only BRAF WT pts were included. Primary endpoints were response rate (RR) and clinical benefit rate (CBR), defined as RR + stable disease lasting >24 wks to IT (best response as assessed by treating clinicians in any line of IT). Secondary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) from first line IT. Results: Of the 173 pts, 59 had NRAS mut MM compared to 114 WT/WT (no mutation in NRAS or BRAF). Improved clinical outcomes were seen in the NRAS mut compared to WT/WT cohort in terms of RR (32% vs. 18%, p=0.042), and CBR (49% vs. 30%, p=0.012). Improvements in PFS and OS did not reach statistical significance. By specific IT, NRAS mutation predicted benefit compared to WT/WT for anti-PD-1/PD-L1 (RR 78% vs. 19%, p=0.002; CBR 78% vs. 29%, p=0.013, n=30) and ipi (RR 18% vs. 12%, p=0.315; CBR 41% vs. 22%, p=0.018, n=137). No significant differences were observed with IL-2 (RR 33% vs. 28%, p=0.730; CBR 33% vs. 39%, p=0.741, n=33). Conclusions: This study demonstrates that pts with NRAS mut MM achieve increased clinical benefit from IT compared to pts with BRAF/NRAS WT MM. A larger, prospective analysis is necessary to validate and expand on these results, including those with BRAF mut and KIT mut MM. However, our data suggest that NRAS mutation status may be a biomarker of response to IT in MM and that molecularly targeted immunotherapy may be feasible.