Related Experiment Video For BRAF
Updated: Oct 1, 2025
Analysis of Lymph Node Volume by Ultra-High-Frequency Ultrasound Imaging in the Braf/Pten Genetically Engineered Mouse Model of Melanoma
Published on: September 8, 2021
Pathologist initiated reflex BRAF mutation testing in metastatic melanoma: experience at a specialist melanoma
Alison J Potter1, Andrew J Colebatch2, Robert V Rawson3
1Melanoma Institute Australia, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Tissue Pathology and Diagnostic Oncology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital and NSW Health Pathology, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Faculty of Medicine, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Charles Perkins Centre, The University of Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Abstract:
Testing for BRAF mutations in metastatic melanoma is pivotal to identifying patients suitable for targeted therapy and influences treatment decisions regarding single agent versus combination immunotherapy. Knowledge of BRAF V600E immunohistochemistry (IHC) results can streamline decisions during initial oncology consultations, prior to DNA-based test results. In the absence of formal guidelines that require pathologist initiated ('reflex') BRAF mutation testing, our institution developed a local protocol to perform BRAF V600E IHC on specimens from all stage III/IV melanoma patients when the status is otherwise unknown. This study was designed to evaluate the application of this protocol in a tertiary referral pathology department. A total of 408 stage III/IV melanoma patients had tissue specimens accessioned between 1 January and 31 March in three consecutive years (from 2019 to 2021), reported by 32 individual pathologists. The BRAF mutation status was established by pathologists in 87% (352/408) of cases. When a prior BRAF mutation status was previously known, as confirmed in linked electronic records (202/408), this status had been communicated by the clinician on the pathology request form in 1% of cases (3/202). Pathologists performed BRAF V600E IHC in 153 cases (74% of cases where the status was unknown, 153/206) and testing was duplicated in 5% of cases (20/408). Reflex BRAF IHC testing was omitted in 26% of cases (53/206), often on specimens with small volume disease (cytology specimens or sentinel node biopsies) despite adequate tissue for testing. Incorporating BRAF IHC testing within routine diagnostic protocols of stage III/IV melanoma was both feasible and successful in most cases. Communication of a patient's BRAF mutation status via the pathology request form will likely improve implementation of pathologist initiated BRAF mutation testing and may result in a reduction of duplicate tests. To improve pathologist reflex testing rates, we advocate for the use of an algorithmic approach to pathologist initiated BRAF mutation testing utilising both IHC and DNA-based methodologies for stage III/IV melanoma patients.
