Patients diagnosed with melanoma and tested with DecisionDx-Melanoma had a 27 percent improvement in melanoma-specific survival compared to untested patients.

Melanoma patients tested with DecisionDx-Melanoma plus traditional clinicopathologic factors showed improved survival compared to patients tested with only traditional clinicopathologic factors available to determine their treatment and follow-up plan, according to data presented the 18th European Association of Dermato Oncology (EADO) Congress, being held virtually and in Seville, Spain, April 21-23, 2022.

“Once again, the real-world data analyzed as part of our collaboration with NCI has shown the potential for a strong survival benefit in patients whose melanoma management plans included personalized test results provided by DecisionDx-Melanoma,” says Derek Maetzold, president and chief executive officer of Castle Biosciences, news release. “We are committed to improving health through innovative tests that guide patient care. This study data demonstrated the ability of our test to help patients and clinicians in informing disease management and treatment plans that have the potential to improve patient survival.”

As part of Castle’s collaboration with NCI, patient data, including melanoma-specific survival (MSS), overall survival (OS) and additional clinicopathologic information provided by the SEER registries, was linked to data for patients with Stage I-III CM who had been tested with DecisionDx-Melanoma.

To assess if patients tested with DecisionDx-Melanoma had higher survival rates than patients who were not tested with DecisionDx-Melanoma, a group of tested patients (n=3,261) was matched to a group of patients who did not receive DecisionDx-Melanoma test results as part of their clinical care (n=10,863); the matching was based on 11 clinicopathologic and socioeconomic variables using a 1:3 ratio. The untested patients and their clinicians had only the traditional clinicopathologic features upon which to develop a melanoma treatment plan. Matching cases were limited to diagnoses in 2016 and forward to account for potential access to adjuvant therapy. In the study, patients tested with DecisionDx-Melanoma had improved survival compared to untested patients, with a 27% (hazard ratio (HR)=0.73, p=0.028) and 21% (HR=0.79, p=0.006) MSS and OS survival benefit, respectively. This suggests that DecisionDx-Melanoma test results can aid in providing more risk-aligned treatment plans for improved patient outcomes.

Additionally, similar to previously published retrospective and prospective studies, DecisionDx-Melanoma was able to accurately and independently risk-stratify patients for MSS and OS. Moreover, the data indicated that a DecisionDx-Melanoma Class 2B result was a significant and independent predictor of MSS (HR= 8.51, p<0.001) and OS (HR= 2.48, p<0.001), and conferred the highest risk of all clinicopathologic factors included in multivariable analyses that included age, ulceration status, Breslow thickness and sentinel lymph node status.

Overall, the study data showed that the precise, personalized test results provided by DecisionDx-Melanoma have the potential to improve patient survival when used as part of a melanoma management plan. In the study, patients tested with DecisionDx-Melanoma, whose clinicians also had the benefit of the patient’s clinicopathologic factors traditionally used to assess metastatic risk, had improved survival compared to patients with only traditional clinicopathologic factors available to determine their treatment and follow-up plan.