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.
Hotspot mutations in the spliceosome gene SF3B1 are reported in ∼20% of uveal melanomas.,SF3B1 is involved in 3′-splice site (3′ss) recognition during RNA splicing; however, the molecular mechanisms of its mutation have remained unclear.,Here we show, using RNA-Seq analyses of uveal melanoma, that the SF3B1R625/K666 mutation results in deregulated splicing at a subset of junctions, mostly by the use of alternative 3′ss.,Modelling the differential junctions in SF3B1WT and SF3B1R625/K666 cell lines demonstrates that the deregulated splice pattern strictly depends on SF3B1 status and on the 3’ss-sequence context.,SF3B1WT knockdown or overexpression do not reproduce the SF3B1R625/K666 splice pattern, qualifying SF3B1R625/K666 as change-of-function mutants.,Mutagenesis of predicted branchpoints reveals that the SF3B1R625/K666-promoted splice pattern is a direct result of alternative branchpoint usage.,Altogether, this study provides a better understanding of the mechanisms underlying splicing alterations induced by mutant SF3B1 in cancer, and reveals a role for alternative branchpoints in disease.,Mutations in the splicing factor SF3B1 are found in uveal melanoma.,Here, Alsafadi et al. use RNA-sequencing data from these cancers and experimental models, and show that mutant SF3B1 promotes alternative branchpoints in a specific gene subset and that the mutant protein gains a new function.