Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29148538›Full record

ReviewModern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc2018

Molecular testing for BRAF mutations to inform melanoma treatment decisions: a move toward precision medicine.

Liang Cheng, Antonio Lopez-Beltran, Francesco Massari, Gregory T MacLennan, Rodolfo Montironi

Open access · hybridAbstract readReview
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Modern pathology : an official journal of the United States and Canadian Academy of Pathology, Inc, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 186 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
186citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
15.3field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

186 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 402 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Network indirect comparison of 3 BRAF + MEK inhibitors for the treatment of advanced BRAF mutated melanoma.Clinical & translational oncology : official publication of the Federation of Spanish Oncology Societies and of the National Cancer Institute of Mexico · 2020
    Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Molecular Underpinnings of Brain Metastases.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  19. Article
  20. Review

126 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 5 institutions in 4 countries.

Liang ChengDepartment of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN, USA.
Antonio Lopez-BeltranUnit of Anatomical Pathology, Faculty of Medicine, Cordoba University, Cordoba, Spain.
Francesco MassariDivision of Oncology, S. Orsola-Malpighi Hospital, Bologna, Italy.
Gregory T MacLennanDepartment of Pathology, Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals Cleveland Medical Center, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Rodolfo MontironiInstitute of Pathological Anatomy and Histopathology, School of Medicine, Polytechnic University of the Marche Region (Ancona), United Hospitals, Ancona, Italy.
Case Western Reserve University · USIndiana University – Purdue University Indianapolis · USMarche Polytechnic University · ITPoliclinico S.Orsola-Malpighi · ITUniversity of Córdoba · ES

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Approximately one-half of advanced (unresectable or metastatic) melanomas harbor a mutation in the BRAF gene, with V600E being the most common mutation. Targeted therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors is associated with significant long-term treatment benefit in patients with BRAF V600-mutated melanoma. Therefore, molecular testing for BRAF mutations is a priority in determining the course of therapy. A literature search was performed using MEDLINE/PubMed and scientific congress databases using the terms 'BRAF,' 'mutation,' and 'cancer/tumor.' These results were filtered to include manuscripts that focused on diagnostic tests for determining BRAF mutation status. Numerous BRAF testing methods were identified, including DNA-based companion diagnostic tests and DNA- and protein-based laboratory-developed tests. Herein we review the characteristics of each method and highlight the strengths and weaknesses that should be considered before use and when interpreting results for each patient. Molecular profiling has shown that mutation load increases with melanoma tumor progression and that unique patterns of genetic changes and evolutionary trajectories for different melanoma subtypes can occur. Discordance in the BRAF mutational status between primary and metastatic lesions, as well as intratumoral heterogeneity, is known to occur. Additionally, the development of acquired resistance to combination BRAF and MEK inhibitor therapy is still a formidable obstacle. Therefore, tumor heterogeneity and the development of acquired resistance have important implications for molecular testing and ultimately the treatment of patients with advanced-stage melanoma. Overall, this information may help community oncologists more accurately and effectively interpret results of diagnostic tests within the context of recent data characterizing melanoma tumor progression.

Indexed as

DNA Mutational AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMelanomaMolecular Targeted TherapyPrecision MedicineProto-Oncogene Proteins B-rafSkin NeoplasmsBRAF protein, humanProto-Oncogene Proteins B-raf

Identifiers

PMID29148538
PMCPMC5758899
OpenAlexW2770795622

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.