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.
Treatment of BRAF‐mutant melanomas with MAP kinase pathway inhibitors is paradigmatic of the promise of precision cancer therapy but also highlights problems with drug resistance that limit patient benefit.,We use live‐cell imaging, single‐cell analysis, and molecular profiling to show that exposure of tumor cells to RAF/MEK inhibitors elicits a heterogeneous response in which some cells die, some arrest, and the remainder adapt to drug.,Drug‐adapted cells up‐regulate markers of the neural crest (e.g., NGFR), a melanocyte precursor, and grow slowly.,This phenotype is transiently stable, reverting to the drug‐naïve state within 9 days of drug withdrawal.,Transcriptional profiling of cell lines and human tumors implicates a c‐Jun/ECM/FAK/Src cascade in de‐differentiation in about one‐third of cell lines studied; drug‐induced changes in c‐Jun and NGFR levels are also observed in xenograft and human tumors.,Drugs targeting the c‐Jun/ECM/FAK/Src cascade as well as BET bromodomain inhibitors increase the maximum effect (E max) of RAF/MEK kinase inhibitors by promoting cell killing.,Thus, analysis of reversible drug resistance at a single‐cell level identifies signaling pathways and inhibitory drugs missed by assays that focus on cell populations.