Background Familial clustering of melanoma suggests a shared genetic predisposition among family members, but only 10%-40% of familial cases carry a pathogenic variant in a known high-risk melanoma... Show moreBackground Familial clustering of melanoma suggests a shared genetic predisposition among family members, but only 10%-40% of familial cases carry a pathogenic variant in a known high-risk melanoma susceptibility gene. We investigated whether a melanoma-specific Polygenic Risk Score (PRS) is associated with melanoma risk in patients with genetically unexplained familial melanoma. Methods Dutch familial melanoma cases (n=418) were genotyped for 46 SNPs previously identified as independently associated with melanoma risk. The 46-SNP PRS was calculated and standardised to 3423 healthy controls (sPRS) and the association between PRS and melanoma risk was modelled using logistic regression. Within the case series, possible differences were further explored by investigating the PRS in relation to (1) the number of primary melanomas in a patient and (2) the extent of familial clustering of melanoma. Results The PRS was significantly associated with melanoma risk, with a per-SD OR of 2.12 (95% CI 1.90 to 2.35, p<0.001), corresponding to a 5.70-fold increased risk (95% CI 3.93 to 8.28) when comparing the top 90th to the middle 40-60th PRS percentiles. The mean PRS was significantly higher in cases with multiple primary melanomas than in cases with a single melanoma (sPRS 1.17 vs 0.71, p=0.001). Conversely, cases from high-density melanoma families had a lower (but non-significant) mean PRS than cases from low-density families (sPRS 0.60 vs 0.94, p=0.204). Conclusion Our work underlines the significance of a PRS in determining melanoma susceptibility and encourages further exploration of the diagnostic value of a PRS in genetically unexplained melanoma families. Show less
Rijsbergen, M.; Rijneveld, R.; Todd, M.; Feiss, G.L.; Kouwenhoven, S.T.P.; Quint, K.D.; ... ; Poelgeest, M.I.E. van 2020
Aims To assess safety and tolerability and explore pharmacodynamics and efficacy of omiganan in external anogenital warts (AGW) and vulvar high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL).... Show moreAims To assess safety and tolerability and explore pharmacodynamics and efficacy of omiganan in external anogenital warts (AGW) and vulvar high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesions (HSIL). Methods Two randomized controlled trials in patients with external AGW and vulvar HSIL were conducted. Patients received topical omiganan 2.5% or placebo gel once daily for 12 weeks with a follow-up of 12 weeks. Safety and tolerability were monitored and pharmacodynamics and clinical efficacy of omiganan were assessed by analysing lesion count, size and viral load. Self-reported pain, itch and quality of life were assessed by an electronic diary and questionnaire. Results Twenty-four AGW and 12 vulvar HSIL patients were enrolled. All patients had a high treatment adherence (99%). No serious adverse events occurred and all adverse events (n =27) were mild, transient and self-limiting. The treatment groups were not different in terms of safety and tolerability, lesion count and size, and patient-reported outcomes pain, itch and quality of life. Human papillomavirus load significantly reduced after 12 weeks of treatment with omiganan compared to placebo (-96.6%; 95% confidence interval -99.9 to -7.4%;P =.045) in AGW patients only. Conclusion Topical omiganan appears to be safe in patients with AGW and vulvar HSIL and reduced human papillomavirus load after 12 weeks of treatment in AGW patients. Show less
