September 2016
Volume 57, Issue 12
Open Access
ARVO Annual Meeting Abstract  |   September 2016
AJCC Staging and Chromosome 3 and 8 status complement each other regarding prognostic value in Uveal Melanoma
Author Affiliations & Notes
  • Mehmet Dogrusoz
    Ophthalmology, LUMC, The Hague, Netherlands
  • Mette Bagger
    Ophthalmology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Sjoerd G. van Duinen
    Pathology, LUMC, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Wilma G. M. Kroes
    Clinical Genetics, LUMC, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Stefan Bohringer
    Medical Statistics and Bioinformatics, LUMC, Leiden, Netherlands
  • Gregorius P. M. Luyten
    Ophthalmology, LUMC, The Hague, Netherlands
  • Jens F Kiilgaard
    Ophthalmology, Copenhagen University Hospital - Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark
  • Martine J Jager
    Ophthalmology, LUMC, The Hague, Netherlands
  • Footnotes
    Commercial Relationships   Mehmet Dogrusoz, None; Mette Bagger, None; Sjoerd G. Duinen, None; Wilma G. M. Kroes, None; Stefan Bohringer, None; Gregorius P. Luyten, None; Jens Kiilgaard, None; Martine Jager, None
  • Footnotes
    Support  None
Investigative Ophthalmology & Visual Science September 2016, Vol.57, 5898. doi:
  • Views
  • Share
  • Tools
    • Alerts
      ×
      This feature is available to Subscribers Only
      Sign In or Create an Account ×
    • Get Citation

      Mehmet Dogrusoz, Mette Bagger, Sjoerd G. van Duinen, Wilma G. M. Kroes, Stefan Bohringer, Gregorius P. M. Luyten, Jens F Kiilgaard, Martine J Jager; AJCC Staging and Chromosome 3 and 8 status complement each other regarding prognostic value in Uveal Melanoma. Invest. Ophthalmol. Vis. Sci. 2016;57(12):5898.

      Download citation file:


      © ARVO (1962-2015); The Authors (2016-present)

      ×
  • Supplements
Abstract

Purpose : The chromosomal status as well as the anatomic extent (American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) staging system), can be used to predict prognosis in uveal melanoma (UM). However, the joint effect of the chromosomal status and the anatomic extent on prognostication in UM remains unclear. We hypothesize that combining information on the chromosome 3 and 8 status and the AJCC stage improves prognostication in UM.

Methods : We performed an international retrospective cohort study, including 504 patients treated for UM in two different centers (Leiden University Medical Center, The Netherlands & Copenhagen University Hospital, Denmark) between 1999 and 2015. The median follow-up time was 35 months.
The chromosome 3 and 8 status and the AJCC stage of the tumors were the parameters of interest. Kaplan-Meier survival curves were generated for different combinations of chromosome status and AJCC stage. Death due to UM metastases was chosen as the event and log-rank tests were computed.

Results : In patients with an AJCC stage I tumor, only those with a monosomy 3 as well as chromosome 8 gain died due to UM metastases (p=0.002) (Figure 1A). In stage II tumors, patients with a monosomy 3 as well as chromosome 8 gain had the worst prognosis, while the survival of those with either a normal chromosomal status or only monosomy 3 or chromosome 8 gain was intermediate and comparable (p<0.001) (Figure 1B). The same pattern was observed in stage III tumors (p<0.001) (Figure 1C).
In patients with a normal chromosomal status, none with a stage I tumor died due to metastases, while some deaths occurred in those with stage II and stage III tumors (Figure 1D). The same applied to patients with either a monosomy 3 or chromosome 8 gain (p=0.09) (Figure 1E). In tumors with the genetically worst profile, monosomy 3 as well as chromosome 8 gain, many deaths occurred in stage I and stage II tumors, while those with a stage III tumor had a clearly worse survival (p<0.001) (Figure 1F).

Conclusions : Combining information on the chromosome 3 and 8 status and AJCC stage improves prognostication in UM. These prognostic measures are complementary and combining them provides further stratification of survival, allowing for a more accurate prognostication.

This is an abstract that was submitted for the 2016 ARVO Annual Meeting, held in Seattle, Wash., May 1-5, 2016.

 

×
×

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

Sign in or purchase a subscription to access this content. ×

You must be signed into an individual account to use this feature.

×