Gould Rothberg Bonnie E, Bracken Michael B, Rimm David L
Department of Pathology, Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT 06520, USA.
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2009 Apr 1;101(7):452-74. doi: 10.1093/jnci/djp038. Epub 2009 Mar 24.
In the clinical management of early-stage cutaneous melanoma, it is critical to determine which patients are cured by surgery alone and which should be treated with adjuvant therapy. To assist in this decision, many groups have made an effort to use molecular information. However, although there are hundreds of studies that have sought to assess the potential prognostic value of molecular markers in predicting the course of cutaneous melanoma, at this time, no molecular method to improve risk stratification is part of recommended clinical practice. To help understand this disconnect, we conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the published literature that reported immunohistochemistry-based protein biomarkers of melanoma outcome. Three parallel search strategies were applied to the PubMed database through January 15, 2008, to identify cohort studies that reported associations between immunohistochemical expression and survival outcomes in melanoma that conformed to the REMARK criteria. Of the 102 cohort studies, we identified only 37 manuscripts, collectively describing 87 assays on 62 distinct proteins, which met all inclusion criteria. Promising markers that emerged included melanoma cell adhesion molecule (MCAM)/MUC18 (all-cause mortality [ACM] hazard ratio [HR] = 16.34; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 3.80 to 70.28), matrix metalloproteinase-2 (melanoma-specific mortality [MSM] HR = 2.6; 95% CI = 1.32 to 5.07), Ki-67 (combined ACM HR = 2.66; 95% CI = 1.41 to 5.01), proliferating cell nuclear antigen (ACM HR = 2.27; 95% CI = 1.56 to 3.31), and p16/INK4A (ACM HR = 0.29; 95% CI = 0.10 to 0.83, MSM HR = 0.4; 95% CI = 0.24 to 0.67). We further noted incomplete adherence to the REMARK guidelines: 14 of 27 cohort studies that failed to adequately report their methods and nine studies that failed to either perform multivariable analyses or report their risk estimates were published since 2005.
在早期皮肤黑色素瘤的临床管理中,确定哪些患者仅通过手术就能治愈,哪些患者应接受辅助治疗至关重要。为了辅助这一决策,许多研究团队致力于利用分子信息。然而,尽管有数百项研究试图评估分子标志物在预测皮肤黑色素瘤病程中的潜在预后价值,但目前,没有任何一种改善风险分层的分子方法成为推荐的临床实践的一部分。为了帮助理解这种脱节现象,我们对已发表的文献进行了系统综述和荟萃分析,这些文献报道了基于免疫组化的黑色素瘤预后蛋白生物标志物。通过2008年1月15日之前应用于PubMed数据库的三种平行检索策略,以识别符合REMARK标准的队列研究,这些研究报告了黑色素瘤免疫组化表达与生存结果之间的关联。在102项队列研究中,我们仅确定了37篇手稿,共描述了对62种不同蛋白质的87项检测,这些检测均符合所有纳入标准。出现的有前景的标志物包括黑色素瘤细胞粘附分子(MCAM)/MUC18(全因死亡率[ACM]风险比[HR]=16.34;95%置信区间[CI]=3.80至70.28)、基质金属蛋白酶-2(黑色素瘤特异性死亡率[MSM] HR=2.6;95% CI=1.32至5.07)、Ki-67(合并ACM HR=2.66;95% CI=1.41至5.01)、增殖细胞核抗原(ACM HR=2.27;95% CI=1.56至3.31)和p16/INK4A(ACM HR=0.29;95% CI=0.10至0.83,MSM HR=0.4;95% CI=0.24至0.67)。我们还注意到对REMARK指南的不完全遵守情况:自2005年以来发表的27项队列研究中有14项未能充分报告其方法,9项研究未能进行多变量分析或报告其风险估计值。