Associations of MC1R with BRAF mutations in melanoma have been inconsistent between studies. We sought to determine for 1,227 participants in the international population-based Genes, Environment, and Melanoma (GEM) study whether MC1R and phenotypes were associated with melanoma BRAF/NRAS subtypes. We used logistic regression adjusted by age, sex, and study design features and examined effect modifications. BRAF⁺ were associated with younger age, blond/light brown hair, increased nevi, and less freckling, and NRAS⁺ with older age relative to the wild type (BRAF^-/NRAS^-) melanomas (all P < 0.05). Comparing specific BRAF subtypes to the wild type, BRAF V600E was associated with younger age, blond/light brown hair, and increased nevi and V600K with increased nevi and less freckling (all P < 0.05). MC1R was positively associated with BRAF V600E cases but only among individuals with darker phototypes or darker hair (P_interaction < 0.05) but inversely associated with BRAF V600K (P_trend = 0.006) with no significant effect modification by phenotypes. These results support distinct etiologies for BRAF V600E, BRAF V600K, NRAS⁺, and wild-type melanomas. MC1R's associations with BRAF V600E cases limited to individuals with darker phenotypes indicate that MC1R genotypes specifically provide information about BRAF V600E melanoma risk in those not considered high risk based on phenotype. Our results also suggest that melanin pathways deserve further study in BRAF V600E melanomagenesis.

Importance

NRAS and BRAF mutations in melanoma inform current treatment paradigms, but their role in survival from primary melanoma has not been established. Identification of patients at high risk of melanoma-related death based on their primary melanoma characteristics before evidence of recurrence could inform recommendations for patient follow-up and eligibility for adjuvant trials.

Objective

To determine tumor characteristics and survival from primary melanoma by somatic NRAS and BRAF status.

Design, setting, and participants

A population-based study with a median follow-up of 7.6 years (through 2007), including 912 patients from the United States and Australia in the Genes, Environment, and Melanoma (GEM) Study, with first primary cutaneous melanoma diagnosed in the year 2000 and analyzed for NRAS and BRAF mutations.

Main outcomes and measures

Tumor characteristics and melanoma-specific survival of primary melanoma by NRAS and BRAF mutational status.

Results

The melanomas were 13% NRAS+, 30% BRAF+, and 57% with neither NRAS nor BRAF mutation (wildtype [WT]). In a multivariable model including clinicopathologic characteristics, relative to WT melanoma (with results reported as odds ratios [95% CIs]), NRAS+ melanoma was associated with presence of mitoses (1.8 [1.0-3.3]), lower tumor-infiltrating lymphocyte (TIL) grade (nonbrisk, 0.5 [0.3-0.8]; and brisk, 0.3 [0.5-0.7] [vs absent TILs]), and anatomic site other than scalp/neck (0.1 [0.01-0.6] for scalp/neck vs trunk/pelvis), and BRAF+ melanoma was associated with younger age (ages 50-69 years, 0.7 [0.5-1.0]; and ages >70 years, 0.5 [0.3-0.8] [vs <50 years]), superficial spreading subtype (nodular, 0.5 [0.2-1.0]; lentigo maligna, 0.4 [0.2-0.7]; and unclassified/other, 0.2 [0.1-0.5] [vs superficial spreading]), and presence of mitoses (1.7 [1.1-2.6]) (P < .05 for all). There was no significant difference in melanoma-specific survival (reported as hazard ratios [95% CIs]) for melanoma harboring mutations in NRAS (1.7 [0.8-3.4]) or BRAF (1.5 [0.8-2.9]) compared with WT melanoma, as adjusted for age, sex, site, American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor stage, TIL grade, and study center. However, melanoma-specific survival was significantly poorer for higher-risk (T2b or higher stage) tumors with NRAS (2.9 [1.1-7.7]) or BRAF (3.1 [1.2-8.5]) mutations (P = .04) but not for lower-risk (T2a or lower) tumors with NRAS (0.9 [0.3-3.0]) or BRAF (0.6 [0.2-1.7]) (P = .65), as adjusted for age, sex, site, AJCC tumor stage, TIL grade, and study center.

Conclusions and relevance

Lower TIL grade for NRAS+ melanoma suggests it has a more immunosuppressed microenvironment, which may affect its response to immunotherapies. The approximate 3-fold increased risk of death for higher-risk tumors harboring NRAS or BRAF mutations after adjusting for other prognostic factors compared with WT melanomas indicates that the prognostic implication of these mutations deserves further investigation, particularly in higher–AJCC stage primary melanomas.

Background: Little is known about the prognostic significance of somatically mutated genes in metastatic melanoma (MM). We have employed a combined clinical and bioinformatics approach on tumor samples from cutaneous melanoma (SKCM) as part of The Cancer Genome Atlas project (TCGA) to identify mutated genes with potential clinical relevance. Methods: After limiting our DNA sequencing analysis to MM samples (n = 356) and to the CANCER CENSUS gene list, we filtered out mutations with low functional significance (snpEFF). We performed Cox analysis on 53 genes that were mutated in ≥3% of samples, and had ≥50% difference in incidence of mutations in deceased subjects versus alive subjects. Results: Four genes were potentially prognostic [RAC1, FGFR1, CARD11, CIITA; false discovery rate (FDR) < 0.2]. We identified 18 additional genes (e.g., SPEN, PDGFRB, GNAS, MAP2K1, EGFR, TSC2) that were less likely to have prognostic value (FDR < 0.4). Most somatic mutations in these 22 genes were infrequent (< 10%), associated with high somatic mutation burden, and were evenly distributed across all exons, except for RAC1 and MAP2K1. Mutations in only 9 of these 22 genes were also identified by RNA sequencing in >75% of the samples that exhibited corresponding DNA mutations. The low frequency, UV signature type and RNA expression of the 22 genes in MM samples were confirmed in a separate multi-institution validation cohort (n = 413). An underpowered analysis within a subset of this validation cohort with available patient follow-up (n = 224) showed that somatic mutations in SPEN and RAC1 reached borderline prognostic significance [log-rank favorable (p = 0.09) and adverse (p = 0.07), respectively]. Somatic mutations in SPEN, and to a lesser extent RAC1, were not associated with definite gene copy number or RNA expression alterations. High (>2+) nuclear plus cytoplasmic expression intensity for SPEN was associated with longer melanoma-specific overall survival (OS) compared to lower (≤ 2+) nuclear intensity (p = 0.048). We conclude that expressed somatic mutations in infrequently mutated genes beyond the well-characterized ones (e.g., BRAF, RAS, CDKN2A, PTEN, TP53), such as RAC1 and SPEN, may have prognostic significance in MM.

IMPORTANCE Previous studies have reported that histopathologically amelanotic melanoma is associated with poorer survival than pigmented melanoma; however, small numbers of amelanotic melanomas, selected populations, lack of centralized pathologic review, or no adjustment for stage limit the interpretation or generalization of results from prior studies.OBJECTIVE To compare melanoma-specific survival between patients with histopathologically amelanotic and those with pigmented melanoma in a large international population-based study.DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Survival analysis with a median follow-up of 7.6 years.The study population comprised 2995 patients with 3486 invasive primary melanomas centrally scored for histologic pigmentation from the Genes, Environment, and Melanoma(GEM) Study, which enrolled incident cases of melanoma diagnosed in 1998 through 2003 from international population-based cancer registries.MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Clinicopathologic predictors and melanoma-specific survival of histologically amelanotic and pigmented melanoma were compared using generalized estimating equations and Cox regression models, respectively.RESULTS Of 3467 melanomas, 275 (8%) were histopathologically amelanotic. Female sex,nodular and unclassified or other histologic subtypes, increased Breslow thickness, presence of mitoses, severe solar elastosis, and lack of a coexisting nevus were independently associated with amelanotic melanoma (each P < .05). Amelanotic melanoma was generally ofa higher American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) tumor stage at diagnosis (odds ratios[ORs] [95%CIs] between 2.9 [1.8-4.6] and 11.1 [5.8-21.2] for tumor stages between T1b and T3b and ORs [95%CIs] of 24.6 [13.6-44.4] for T4a and 29.1 [15.5-54.9] for T4b relative to T1a;P value for trend, <.001) than pigmented melanoma. Hazard of death from melanoma was higher for amelanotic than for pigmented melanoma (hazard ratio [HR], 2.0; 95%CI, 1.4-3.0)(P < .001), adjusted for age, sex, anatomic site, and study design variables, but survival did not differ once AJCC tumor stage was also taken into account (HR, 0.8; 95%CI, 0.5-1.2)(P = .36).CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE At the population level, survival after diagnosis of amelanotic melanoma is poorer than after pigmented melanoma because of its more advanced stage at diagnosis. It is probable that amelanotic melanomas present at more advanced tumor stages because they are difficult to diagnose. The association of amelanotic melanoma with presence of mitoses independently of Breslow thickness and other clinicopathologic characteristics suggests that amelanotic melanomas might also grow faster than pigmented melanomas. New strategies for early diagnosis and investigation of the biological properties of amelanotic melanoma are warranted.

BRAF and NRAS mutations arise early in melanoma development, but their associations with low-penetrance melanoma susceptibility loci remain unknown. In the Genes, Environment and Melanoma Study, 1,223 European-origin participants had their incident invasive primary melanomas screened for BRAF/NRAS mutations and germline DNA genotyped for 47 single-nucleotide polymorphisms identified as low-penetrant melanoma-risk variants. We used multinomial logistic regression to simultaneously examine each single-nucleotide polymorphism's relationship to BRAF V600E, BRAF V600K, BRAF other, and NRAS+ relative to BRAF-/NRAS- melanoma adjusted for study features. IRF4 rs12203592*T was associated with BRAF V600E (odds ratio [OR] = 0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.43-0.79) and V600K (OR = 0.65, 95% CI = 0.41-1.03), but not BRAF other or NRAS+ melanoma. A global test of etiologic heterogeneity (P_global = 0.001) passed false discovery (P_global = 0.0026). PLA2G6 rs132985*T was associated with BRAF V600E (OR = 1.32, 95% CI = 1.05-1.67) and BRAF other (OR = 1.82, 95% CI = 1.11-2.98), but not BRAF V600K or NRAS+ melanoma. The test for etiologic heterogeneity (P_global) was 0.005. The IRF4 rs12203592 associations were slightly attenuated after adjustment for melanoma-risk phenotypes. The PLA2G6 rs132985 associations were independent of phenotypes. IRF4 and PLA2G6 inherited genotypes may influence melanoma BRAF/NRAS subtype development.