↓ Skip to main content

Prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations in melanoma: a German study from routine care

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Cancer, August 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (85th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (93rd percentile)

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
twitter
2 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
119 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
142 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations in melanoma: a German study from routine care
Published in
BMC Cancer, August 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12885-017-3529-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Markus V. Heppt, Timo Siepmann, Jutta Engel, Gabriele Schubert-Fritschle, Renate Eckel, Laura Mirlach, Thomas Kirchner, Andreas Jung, Anja Gesierich, Thomas Ruzicka, Michael J. Flaig, Carola Berking

Abstract

Hotspot mutations of the oncogenes BRAF and NRAS are the most common genetic alterations in cutaneous melanoma. Specific inhibitors of BRAF and MEK have shown significant survival benefits in large phase III trials. However, the prognostic significance of BRAF and NRAS mutations outside of clinical trials remains unclear. The mutational status of BRAF (exon 15) and NRAS (exon 2 and 3) was determined in melanoma samples of 217 patients with pyrosequencing and Sanger sequencing. The genotypes were correlated with clinical outcomes and pathologic features of the primary tumors. Time to disease progression was calculated with the cumulative incidence function. Survival analyses were performed with Kaplan-Meier estimates and Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. Relative survival was calculated with the Ederer-II method. Treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors and immune checkpoint blockade (ICB) was allowed. Mutations in BRAF and NRAS were identified in 40.1 and 24.4% of cases, respectively. Concurrent mutations in both genes were detected in further 2.3%. The remaining 33.2% were wild type for the investigated exons (WT). BRAF mutations were significantly associated with younger age at first diagnosis (p < 0.001) and truncal localization of the culprit primary (p = 0.002). The nodular subtype was most common in the NRAS cohort. In addition, NRAS-mutant melanoma patients showed a higher frequency of nodal relapse (p = 0.013) and development of metastatic disease (p = 0.021). The time to loco-regional nodal relapse was shortest in NRAS-mutant melanoma (p = 0.002). Presence of NRAS mutation was an independent risk factor for disease progression in multivariate analysis (HR 2.01; 95% CI 1.02 - 3.98). BRAF-mutant melanoma patients showed a tendency for better overall and relative survival. Genotype was not a consistent risk factor in multivariate analysis. Instead, positive sentinel lymph node status (HR 2.65; 95% CI 1.15 - 6.10) and treatment with ICB in stage IV disease (HR 0.17; 95% CI 0.06-0.48) were significant multivariate risk factors. NRAS-mutant tumors tended to behave more aggressively particularly in early stages of the disease in this high-risk melanoma population. Treatment with immune checkpoint blockade improved survival in stage IV disease in a real-world setting.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 142 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 142 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 22 15%
Student > Bachelor 18 13%
Researcher 17 12%
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 8%
Other 7 5%
Other 14 10%
Unknown 53 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 32 23%
Medicine and Dentistry 29 20%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 10 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 4 3%
Chemistry 3 2%
Other 11 8%
Unknown 53 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 13. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 January 2019.
All research outputs
#2,426,764
of 23,881,329 outputs
Outputs from BMC Cancer
#446
of 8,483 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#46,906
of 319,746 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Cancer
#10
of 133 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,881,329 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 8,483 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.4. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 319,746 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 133 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 93% of its contemporaries.