ArticleThe British journal of dermatology2020
Does the gene matter? Genotype-phenotype and genotype-outcome associations in congenital melanocytic naevi.
Article in The British journal of dermatology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 67 citations in OpenAlex.
- Molecular pathology in the diagnosis of cutaneous melanoma.Pathologie (Heidelberg, Germany) · 2026Review
- Mitotic Proliferative Nodule Within a Giant Congenital Nevus: One Case Report and Updated Review.Dermatopathology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Gene fusions in melanocytic lesions: an updated comprehensive review.Journal of pathology and translational medicine · 2026Article
- Segmental corymbiform congenital melanocytic naevi: Implications for melanocytic embryology.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2025Article
- A Case Report of Giant Congenital Melanocytic Nevus Complicated by Minimal Change Disease, With Genetic Analysis.Clinical case reports · 2025Article
- Congenital melanocytic naevi initiated by BRAF fusion oncogene with firmness, pruritus and desmoplastic stroma.The British journal of dermatology · 2025Article
- Anti-BCL2 therapy eliminates giant congenital melanocytic nevus by senolytic and immune induction.Signal transduction and targeted therapy · 2025Article
- Review
- Central Nervous System Involvement and Neuroradiological Imaging Insights of Neurocutaneous Melanocytosis in Congenital Melanocytic Nevi.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Genetic abnormalities in congenital melanocytic nevi and their associated melanomas.JAAD case reports · 2024Article
- Skin cancer biology and barriers to treatment: Recent applications of polymeric micro/nanostructures.Journal of advanced research · 2022Review
- Cultured epithelial autografts for the treatment of large-to-giant congenital melanocytic nevus in 31 patients.Regenerative therapy · 2021Article
- The retrospective molecular analysis of large or giant congenital melanocytic nevi in a group of Polish children.Journal of mother and child · 2021Article
- Neurocutaneous melanocytosis-associated malignant melanoma presenting with peritoneal seeding.Pediatric dermatology · 2021Article
- Inherited duplications of PPP2R3B predispose to nevi and melanoma via a C21orf91-driven proliferative phenotype.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2021Article
- Cutaneous Melanomas Arising during Childhood: An Overview of the Main Entities.Dermatopathology (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Review
- A Clinicopathological Analysis of Melanocytic Nevi: A Retrospective Series.Frontiers in medicine · 2021Article
- Final congenital melanocytic naevi colour is determined by normal skin colour and unaltered by superficial removal techniques: a longitudinal study.The British journal of dermatology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors at 3 institutions in 3 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundGenotype-phenotype studies can identify subgroups of patients with specific clinical features or differing outcomes, which can help shape management.
objectivesTo characterize the frequency of different causative genotypes in congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN), and to investigate genotype-phenotype and genotype-outcome associations.
methodsWe conducted a large cohort study in which we undertook MC1R genotyping from blood, and high-sensitivity genotyping of NRAS and BRAF hotspots in 156 naevus biopsies from 134 patients with CMN [male 40%; multiple CMN 76%; projected adult size (PAS) > 20 cm, 59%].
resultsMosaic NRAS mutations were detected in 68%, mutually exclusive with BRAF mutations in 7%, with double wild-type in 25%. Two separate naevi were sequenced in five of seven patients with BRAF mutations, confirming clonality. Five of seven patients with BRAF mutations had a dramatic multinodular phenotype, with characteristic histology distinct from classical proliferative nodules. NRAS mutation was the commonest in all sizes of CMN, but was particularly common in naevi with PAS > 60 cm, implying more tolerance to that mutation early in embryogenesis. Facial features were less common in double wild-type patients. Importantly, the incidence of congenital neurological disease, and apparently of melanoma, was not altered by genotype; no cases of melanoma were seen in BRAF-mutant multiple CMN, however, this genotype is rare.
conclusionsCMN of all sizes are most commonly caused by mutations in NRAS. BRAF is confirmed as a much rarer cause of multiple CMN, and appears to be commonly associated with a multinodular phenotype. Genotype in this cohort was not associated with differences in incidence of neurological disease in childhood. However, genotyping should be undertaken in suspected melanoma, for guidance of treatment. What's already known about this topic? Multiple congenital melanocytic naevi (CMN) have been shown to be caused by NRAS mosaic mutations in 70-80% of cases, by BRAF mosaicism in one case report and by inference in some previous cases. There has been debate about genotypic association with different sizes of CMN, and no data on genotype-outcome. What does this study add? NRAS mosaicism was found in 68%, BRAF in 7% and double wild-type in 25% of cases of CMN. NRAS was the commonest mutation in all sizes of CMN, but was nearly universal in projected adult size > 60 cm. BRAF is often associated with a distinct multinodular clinical/histological phenotype. Adverse outcomes did not differ between genotypes on current numbers.
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.