ArticleModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2016
Comparison between melanoma gene expression score and fluorescence in situ hybridization for the classification of melanocytic lesions.
Article in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 71 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Demonstration of 23-Gene Expression Profile Test Utility Within PRAME Immunohistochemistry Results: A Case Series.The American Journal of dermatopathology · 2026Article
- Condensates and cell states: A new paradigm for understanding tumor biology.Biophysical journal · 2026Review
- Predicting theLife (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Assessing spatial sequencing and imaging approaches to capture the molecular and pathological heterogeneity of archived cancer tissues.The Journal of pathology · 2025Article
- Appropriate Statistical Methods to Assess Cross-study Diagnostic 23-Gene Expression Profile Test Performance for Cutaneous Melanocytic Neoplasms.The American Journal of dermatopathology · 2024Article
- A clinical impact study of dermatologists' use of diagnostic gene expression profile testing to guide patient management.Melanoma management · 2024Article
- A Physician's Guide to the Use of Gene Expression Profile Ancillary Diagnostic Testing for Cutaneous Melanocytic Neoplasms.The Journal of clinical and aesthetic dermatology · 2023Review
- Advances in melanoma: epidemiology, diagnosis, and prognosis.Frontiers in medicine · 2023Review
- Dermatologic Disease-Directed Targeted Therapy (DDermatology and therapy · 2022Review
- lncRNA AGAP2-AS1 Facilitates Tumorigenesis and Ferroptosis Resistance through SLC7A11 by IGF2BP2 Pathway in Melanoma.Computational and mathematical methods in medicine · 2022Article
- Molecular Biomarkers for Melanoma Screening, Diagnosis and Prognosis: Current State and Future Prospects.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Review
- MicroRNA Ratios Distinguish Melanomas from Nevi.The Journal of investigative dermatology · 2020Article
- Comparison of melanoma gene expression score with histopathology, fluorescence in situ hybridization, and SNP array for the classification of melanocytic neoplasms.Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc · 2018Article
- Review of diagnostic, prognostic, and predictive biomarkers in melanoma.Clinical & experimental metastasis · 2018Review
- Addressing the challenges of applying precision oncology.NPJ precision oncology · 2017Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Melanoma accounts for most skin cancer-related deaths and has an increasing incidence. Accurate diagnosis and distinction from atypical nevi can be at times difficult using light microscopy alone. Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) and melanoma gene expression score (myPath, Myriad Genetics) have emerged as ancillary tools to further aid in this differential diagnosis. Our aim in this study was to correlate FISH results, gene expression score, consensus histopathologic impression and clinical outcome on a series of 117 challenging melanocytic lesions collected from three separate institutions. The lesions were separated into two groups: 39 histopathologically unequivocal lesions (15 malignant, 24 benign) and 78 challenging lesions interpreted by expert consensus (27 favor malignant, 30 favor benign, and 21 ambiguous). Melanoma-FISH was performed using probes for 6p25, 11q13, 8q24, and 9p21/CEP9 and scored according to established criteria. Analysis by myPath gene expression score was performed and interpreted by the manufacturer as 'benign', 'indeterminate,' or 'malignant'. In the unequivocal group, melanoma-FISH and myPath score showed 97 and 83% agreement with the histopathologic diagnosis, respectively, with 93 and 62% sensitivity, 100 and 95% specificity, and 80% inter-test agreement. In the challenging group, FISH and the myPath score showed 70 and 64% agreement with the histopathologic interpretation, respectively, with 70% inter-test agreement and similar sensitivities and specificities. The inter-test agreement was 73% overall, excluding indeterminate results. Discordant test results occurred in 27/117 cases from both unequivocal and challenging groups. Melanoma-FISH and gene expression score are valuable ancillary tools, though both have limitations and return discordant results in a subset of cases. Follow-up studies with more extensive clinical outcome data are warranted to establish the accuracy of these tests for the classification of melanocytic lesions.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.