Sms such as thyroid carcinomas [42], ovarian cancer or adenocarcinomas [43] make it unlikely that actinic damage is a major cause of this mutation. A reason for more frequent BRAFV600E-positive melanomas in younger patients might be that in older patients a higher percentage of melanocytic lesions harboring the mutation already have undergone oncogene driven senescence [44]. When using a more sensitive method (immunohistochemistry) to detect the BRAFV600E phenotype the age difference to wildtype-tumors, especially in nevi, became smaller ?an effect already shown before by Zalaudek et al. [28]. An explanation might be that, of coexisting SR 3029 biological activity subclones in melanocytic tumors [38], those harboring BRAFV600E are more likely to have undergone senescence or regression [44,45] in older patients and are therefore less likely to be detected by methods with lower sensitivity (e.g. Sanger sequencing). A limitation of our study is that it is difficult to differentiate “severe junctional dysplasia” from melanoma in situ and that this generates a bias towards selection of melanomas that are associated with banal or “SC1 chemical information moderately dysplastic” nevi. However, according to our experience, the term “severely dysplastic nevi” expresses diagnostic uncertainty and not biologic uncertainty. If the concept of “dysplasia” is based on the impossibility to differentiate “severe junctional dysplasia” of a nevus from “melanoma in situ” it immunizes itself against falsification, making it a problematic concept from a scientific point of view. In sum we show that the presence of a BRAF- or NRAS mutation, at least in 23148522 the present series, is not biologically relevant in the development of melanomas that arise in association with a nevus. Other, currently unidentified, genetic or epigenetic changes may play a role in the transformation of nevi to melanomas.Histologic assessment of melanoma-associated nevi and control neviCriteria for the presence of a melanoma-associated nevus were used as published before by Stolz et al. [46]. All nevi were rated for the presence of different postulated morphologic features of “dysplastic” nevi [34] with the following definitions: Bridging: Nests of melanocytes within the epidermis spanning two or more rete ridges. Lentiginous or epitheloid cell proliferation: Melanocytes, arranged as variably sized nests and single cells within the epidermis. Cytologic atypia: Presence of enlarged nuclei, hyperchromatic nuclei and/or prominent eosinophilic nucleoli. Fibroplasia: Increased number of fibroblasts and collagen fibres arranged in a linear fashion around rete ridges beneath the epidermal part of the neoplasm. Fibroplasia around dermal nests of melanocytes was disregarded.Laser microdissectionFor laser-capture-microdissection one or multiple 5 -thick sections of the specimen were cut onto membrane slides and stained with Haematoxylin and Eosin. The respective tumor areas were cut using the MMI CellCut Plus – Laser Capture Microdissection Microscope (Molecular Machines Industries, Switzerland). Figure S1.BRAF Exon 15 and NRAS Exon 2 sequencingTissue samples were treated using the QuickExtractTM FFPE DNA Extraction Kit using standard protocols. Primers used for PCR-amplification of the BRAF Exon 15 were forward: 5’TCATAATGCTTGCTCTGATAGGA-3′ and reverse: 5’GGCCAAAAATTTAATCAGTGGA-3′, or forward (shorter amplicon): 5′-TGTTTTCCTTTACTTACTACACCTC-3′ and reverse: 5′-TAATCAGTGGAAAAATAGCCTC-3′. PCR-Primers for NRAS Exon 2 were forward: 5’GATTCTTACAGAAAACAAGTG.Sms such as thyroid carcinomas [42], ovarian cancer or adenocarcinomas [43] make it unlikely that actinic damage is a major cause of this mutation. A reason for more frequent BRAFV600E-positive melanomas in younger patients might be that in older patients a higher percentage of melanocytic lesions harboring the mutation already have undergone oncogene driven senescence [44]. When using a more sensitive method (immunohistochemistry) to detect the BRAFV600E phenotype the age difference to wildtype-tumors, especially in nevi, became smaller ?an effect already shown before by Zalaudek et al. [28]. An explanation might be that, of coexisting subclones in melanocytic tumors [38], those harboring BRAFV600E are more likely to have undergone senescence or regression [44,45] in older patients and are therefore less likely to be detected by methods with lower sensitivity (e.g. Sanger sequencing). A limitation of our study is that it is difficult to differentiate “severe junctional dysplasia” from melanoma in situ and that this generates a bias towards selection of melanomas that are associated with banal or “moderately dysplastic” nevi. However, according to our experience, the term “severely dysplastic nevi” expresses diagnostic uncertainty and not biologic uncertainty. If the concept of “dysplasia” is based on the impossibility to differentiate “severe junctional dysplasia” of a nevus from “melanoma in situ” it immunizes itself against falsification, making it a problematic concept from a scientific point of view. In sum we show that the presence of a BRAF- or NRAS mutation, at least in 23148522 the present series, is not biologically relevant in the development of melanomas that arise in association with a nevus. Other, currently unidentified, genetic or epigenetic changes may play a role in the transformation of nevi to melanomas.Histologic assessment of melanoma-associated nevi and control neviCriteria for the presence of a melanoma-associated nevus were used as published before by Stolz et al. [46]. All nevi were rated for the presence of different postulated morphologic features of “dysplastic” nevi [34] with the following definitions: Bridging: Nests of melanocytes within the epidermis spanning two or more rete ridges. Lentiginous or epitheloid cell proliferation: Melanocytes, arranged as variably sized nests and single cells within the epidermis. Cytologic atypia: Presence of enlarged nuclei, hyperchromatic nuclei and/or prominent eosinophilic nucleoli. Fibroplasia: Increased number of fibroblasts and collagen fibres arranged in a linear fashion around rete ridges beneath the epidermal part of the neoplasm. Fibroplasia around dermal nests of melanocytes was disregarded.Laser microdissectionFor laser-capture-microdissection one or multiple 5 -thick sections of the specimen were cut onto membrane slides and stained with Haematoxylin and Eosin. The respective tumor areas were cut using the MMI CellCut Plus – Laser Capture Microdissection Microscope (Molecular Machines Industries, Switzerland). Figure S1.BRAF Exon 15 and NRAS Exon 2 sequencingTissue samples were treated using the QuickExtractTM FFPE DNA Extraction Kit using standard protocols. Primers used for PCR-amplification of the BRAF Exon 15 were forward: 5’TCATAATGCTTGCTCTGATAGGA-3′ and reverse: 5’GGCCAAAAATTTAATCAGTGGA-3′, or forward (shorter amplicon): 5′-TGTTTTCCTTTACTTACTACACCTC-3′ and reverse: 5′-TAATCAGTGGAAAAATAGCCTC-3′. PCR-Primers for NRAS Exon 2 were forward: 5’GATTCTTACAGAAAACAAGTG.
