Search

Purpose: Most of the uvea melanoma (UM) display a near-diploid (normal, -2N) karyotype with only a few chromosomal changes. In contrast to these simple aberrations 18% of the UM samples show a polyploid character (>2N) and this was associated with an unfavorable prognosis. This study attempts to gain insight in the prognostic value of polyploidy in UM., Methods: In 202 patients the ploidy status of the UM was determined using cytogenetic analysis, fluorescence-in-situ-hybridization (FISH), multiplex ligation dependent probe amplification (MLPA), and/or single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) array analysis. Immunohistochemistry was used to determine the BAP1 expression and mutation analyses of BAP1 (coding regions) and the mutation hotspots for the SF3B1, EIF1AX, GNAQ, and GNA11 genes was carried out using Sanger sequencing or whole-exome sequencing., Results: Twenty-three patients had a polyploid UM karyotype (11.4%). Patients with a polyploid tumor had larger tumors (15.61 vs. 13.13 mm, P = 0.004), and more often loss of heterozygosity of chromosome 3 (P = 0.003). No difference in occurrence of mutations between polyploid and diploid tumors was observed for BAP1, SF3B1, EIF1AX, GNAQ, and GNA11. Polyploidy did not affect survival (P = 0.143). BAP1 deficiency was the only significant independent prognostic predictor for patients with polyploid tumors, with a 16-fold increased hazard ratio (HR 15.90, P = 0.009)., Conclusions: The prevalence of mutations in the UM related genes is not different in polyploid UM compared with diploid UM. Moreover, similar to patients with diploid UM, BAP1 mutation is the most significant prognostic predictor of metastasis in patients with polyploid UM.

In uveal melanoma, loss of chromosome 3 and gain of chromosome 8q are associated with a high risk of metastasis. In this study, we validated the use of multiplex ligation-dependent probe amplification (MLPA) in detecting patients at risk for metastatic disease in comparison with the predictive power of fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH). For 64 uveal melanoma samples, the MLPA results of chromosome 3 and 8 were compared with the results obtained by FISH. For seven samples, a single nucleotide polymorphism array was performed to clarify discrepancies. Clinical information together with the histopathology and chromosomal aberrations of chromosomes 1, 3, 6, and 8 were evaluated for correlation with the patients' prognosis. Loss of chromosome 3, loss or gain of 8p, and gain of 8q, found with MLPA, correlated with a significantly lower disease-free survival (P<0.001). On the basis of the clinical outcome, 12 patients would have been classified incorrectly using MLPA results of chromosomes 3 and 8. FISH results led to the same incorrect classification. Four patients with abnormalities of chromosomes 3 and 8 in the tumor, detected with MLPA, are still alive without metastasis. Eight patients without concurrent aberrations of chromosomes 3 and 8 in the tumors died due to metastasis. The sensitivity of MLPA to detect patients at risk for metastatic disease is higher than with the results obtained with FISH (0.795 vs. 0.692). The specificity is equal for both techniques (0.840). MLPA is able to detect patients at risk for metastasis using the results for chromosomes 3 and 8. There is no significant difference in the predictive power of MLPA compared with FISH.

Purpose: To investigate the presence of focal or diffuse heterogeneity of monosomy 3 in uveal melanoma, by using fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)., Methods: Direct interphase FISH in a series of 151 uveal melanomas revealed 82 tumors with loss of chromosome 3. Tumors with monosomy 3 were suspected to be heterogeneous if there were low percentages of monosomy 3, triploid clones, inconsistencies between FISH on centromere 3 and the long arm of chromosome 3, or discrepancies between fine-needle-aspiration biopsies (FNABs) and the main tumor. These tumors (n=16), all choroidal melanomas, were selected and analyzed for intratumor heterogeneity by using FISH on paraffin-embedded tissue sections., Results: Different sections of each tumor were evaluated with FISH: 6 tumors showed monosomy 3 in the same percentage throughout the tumor, and 10 showed multiple clones with different percentages of monosomy 3. However, these tumors did not show focal heterogeneity with respect to chromosome 3 status, and differences in monosomy 3 distribution between the base and apex of the tumor could not be identified., Conclusions: Although a small number of uveal melanomas show heterogeneity for chromosome 3, it does not affect survival. In the presence of triploid clones, the loss of chromosome 3 is more difficult to interpret. In general, tumor biopsies in uveal melanoma provide an accurate prediction of the patient's prognosis.

Purpose: Although studies on uveal melanoma (UM) revealed prognostic significance of chromosomal aberrations, they resulted in classification errors in survival prediction. A robust prognostic classifier with strong predictive value and further insight in genes responsible for poor prognosis were obtained by performing a gene-expression profile in tumors of UM patients for which extensive clinical, histopathologic, cytogenetic, and follow-up data were available. Furthermore, the UM microarray expression data were compared with cytogenetic data., Methods: Gene-expression profiles of 46 UMs were obtained with microchip assays. Data were analyzed with cluster-analysis and predictive analysis of microarrays (PAM) software and validated with real-time PCR. The prognostic significance of UMs with specific molecular signatures was determined. Furthermore, LAP analysis resulted in the identification of differentially expressed chromosomal regions., Results: The primary UMs were classified in two distinct molecular classes with a strong prognostic value (P < 0.001; hazard ratio 7.7). Classifier gene sets for microarray class and disease-free survival were validated with real-time PCR, and the predictive value of the UM class marker set was validated with gene-expression profiles of tumors provided by other institutions, showing a sensitivity of 0.93 and specificity of 1.00 for class II tumors. A locally adaptive statistical procedure identified two regions on the short arm of chromosome 3 with decreased gene-expression in tumors with shorter disease-free survival., Conclusions: Microarray classification outperforms known prognostic indicators for UM, such as clinical, histopathologic, and cytogenetic parameters. In addition, the identified regions with lower expressed genes on 3p could harbor genes that are responsible for the poor prognosis of patients with UM.

The loss of chromosome 1p and chromosome 3 is associated with metastatic disease and decreased survival of uveal melanoma (UM) patients. The p53 homologues, p73 and p63, are located on chromosomes 1p and 3q, respectively. Both are able to activate p53 target genes, resulting in growth arrest, apoptosis and differentiation. N-terminally truncated isoforms of these genes may act as dominant negative inhibitors of wild-type p53 and transactivating activity. Although, p53 is frequently involved in several malignancies it does not play a major role in UM. Altered expression has been reported for both p63 and p73 in various malignancies. In this study, fluorescent in-situ hybridization was performed to identify gains or losses of p63 and p73 loci in UM. The expression of the different p63 and p73 isoforms was evaluated by reverse transcriptase PCR followed by Southern blot analysis. Furthermore, the expression pattern of the various DeltaTAp73 transcripts was analysed in seven primary UMs and 11 UM-derived cell lines using isoform-specific real-time PCR. Our results indicated that the isoform p73Deltaex2/3 was abundantly expressed and a relative loss of the p73 locus was associated with the upregulation of p73Deltaex2 and TAp73 transcripts. N-terminal transactivation forms of both p73 and p63 were observed in primary and metastasis-derived cell lines, as well as in primary melanomas, but in only one of the cell lines a DeltaNp63 mRNA transcript was observed. Our data suggest a potential function of p73 deletion transcripts in UM progression.

Uveal melanoma (UM) is the most common primary intraocular malignancy in adults. Loss of the long arm and gain of the short arm of chromosome 6 are frequently observed chromosomal aberrations in UM, together with loss of chromosome 1p36, loss of chromosome 3 and gain of chromosome 8. This suggests the presence of one or more oncogenes on 6p and tumor suppressor genes at 6q that are involved in UM development. Both regions, however, have not been well defined yet. Furthermore in other neoplasms gain of 6p and loss of 6q are frequently occurring events. In this case report, we describe the delineation of a partial gain on chromosome 6p and a partial deletion on 6q in a UM with the objective to pinpoint smaller candidate regions on chromosome 6 involved in UM development. Conventional cytogenetics, comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) and fluorescence in-situ hybridization (FISH) were used to delineate regions of loss and gain on chromosome 6 in this UM patient. With conventional cytogenetics a deleted region was found on chromosome 6q that was further delineated to a region ranging from 6q16.1 to 6q22 using CGH and FISH. A region of gain from 6pter to 6p21.2 was also demarcated with CGH and FISH. No other deletions or amplifications on recurrently involved chromosomes were found in this patient. This study indicates the presence of one or more tumor suppressor genes on chromosomal region 6q16.1-6q22 and the presence of one or more oncogenes on chromosomal region 6pter-6p21.2, which are likely to be important in UM and other tumors.

Purpose: Concurrent loss of chromosome arm 1p, region 36, and chromosome 3 leads to decreased disease-free survival in patients with uveal melanoma. A candidate tumor-suppressor gene APITD1 is located on the critical region on chromosome arm 1p, and it was therefore hypothesized that lower expression levels of this gene could lead to decreased survival in patients, with concurrent loss of a region on chromosome arm 1p and chromosome 3. Using neuroblastoma cells, which, like uveal melanoma, originate from neural crest cells, a former study showed that APITD1 has cell growth and/or cell death properties. In this study, APITD1 expression was analyzed to determine whether it corresponds with the DNA copy number and is related to survival in uveal melanoma., Methods: To detect whether loss in the copy number of APITD1 results in lowered mRNA expression of the gene, FISH analysis was combined with real-time PCR. In addition, the effect of APITD1 expression on survival was studied by using Kaplan-Meier survival analysis., Results: Expression of APITD1 mRNA was not related to DNA copy number (P = 0.956) or chromosome 3 status (P = 0.958). Kaplan-Meier survival analysis showed very similar survival curves for tumors with high and low APITD1 expression, with a log-rank significance value of P = 0.9682., Conclusions: These results indicate that APITD1 is not the tumor suppressor gene on 1p36 responsible for the negative prognostic effect in uveal melanoma with concurrent loss of chromosome arm 1p, region 36, and chromosome 3.

An activating mutation has been recently observed in cutaneous melanoma in a downstream component of RAS-BRAF. The most common mutation, occurring in 80% of cutaneous melanoma samples, is a T-to-A transition resulting in a single amino acid substitution (V599E). Since cutaneous and uveal melanoma (UM) have a common origin, we aimed to establish whether activation of the BRAF proto-oncogene is also an important factor in the development of UM. Exons 11 through 18 of the BRAF gene were screened from 33 primary UMs and 11 UM cell lines. Genomic polymerase chain reaction products were evaluated using single-strand conformation polymorphism analysis, followed by sequencing of aberrant products. The most common mutation, T1796A in the kinase domain of BRAF, was not observed in any of the primary UM samples. This mutation was also absent in 10 of the 11 UM cell lines. In one of the UM cell lines, OCM1, the T1796A mutation was present. We conclude that, in contrast to cutaneous melanoma, BRAF does not appear to be involved in the pathogenesis of UM.