PubMed · 8002824
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
M D Davis, S L Fine, C Kupfer. 1994. The collaborative Ocular Melanoma Study.. https://doi.org/10.1001/archopht.1994.01090180028009
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
To contribute to a better understanding of the role of chromosomal rearrangements in the tumorigenesis of uveal melanoma, we present a case in which a structural aberration of chromosome 3 could indicate the specific region in which an uveal melanoma tumor suppressor gene could be located. We obtained a primary cell culture, characterized by cytogenetic study, through GTG- and CBG-banding techniques by using a mechanical dissection of a tumor sample obtained from an uveal melanoma. Cytogenetic analysis performed in the primary cell culture highlighted the presence of a structural rearrangement involving chromosomes 3 and 22. A t(3;22)(p13;p11) was observed as the only present clonal aberration. The 3p13 breakpoint involved in the aberration observed in our case could be essential in restricting the candidate region for the locus of an uveal melanoma tumor suppressor gene located on chromosome 3.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the sensitivity of echography vs magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or computed tomography (CT) for detecting extraocular extension of choroidal malignant melanoma. DESIGN AND SETTING: Retrospective review at a university referral center. PARTICIPANTS: All patients with histopathologically proven extraocular extension of choroidal malignant melanoma evaluated at the Bascom Palmer Eye Institute, Miami, Fla, between January 1, 1988, and August 31, 1997. INTERVENTIONS: The histopathology records of all patients who underwent enucleation for choroidal malignant melanoma or biopsy of an extraocular nodule during the study period were reviewed. The records and imaging studies of patients who were found to have extraocular extension of choroidal malignant melanoma were then reviewed to determine the sensitivity of preoperative echography vs MRI or CT for detecting extraocular tumor extension. RESULTS: A review of 297 histopathology records identified 13 patients with extraocular extension of choroidal malignant melanoma. Three patients with only microscopic extraocular tumor extension were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 10 patients, all underwent ocular echography preoperatively, 5 underwent orbital MRI, and 2 underwent orbital CT scanning to evaluate for extraocular extension of tumor. Extraocular tumor extension was demonstrated in 10 patients (100%) with echography and in 2 (29%) of 7 patients with MRI (2 of 5 patients) or CT (0 of 2 patients). In no instance did MRI or CT demonstrate extraocular tumor extension that was not identified with echography. CONCLUSION: At this institute, ocular echography is more sensitive than MRI or CT for the detection of extraocular extension of choroidal malignant melanoma.