3
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Treatment of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Special Populations

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) may develop in patients with dysregulated immune activation (pre-existing autoimmune diseases or immunosuppression due to hematopoietic/solid organ transplant recipients), patients with a compromised immune function (long-term immunosuppression), and patients carrying chronic viral infections, or those affected by lymphoproliferative diseases. It should be also considered that patients presenting with immunosuppression have a high incidence of cSCC (65–250-times higher than general population), highlighting the central role played by the immune system in the development of cSCC. All these cases must be considered as “special populations” for treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), as the safety and activity of these drugs have not been studied on these specific cases, since these patients were excluded from clinical trials leading to approval of ICIs. It is therefore important to gain as much information as possible from the analysis of real-life data, to derive an indication to be adopted in everyday clinical setting. Moreover, therapeutic alternatives other than ICIs are scarce, mainly consisting in chemotherapy and anti-EGFR agents, whose activity is lower than immunotherapy and whose toxicity (particularly with chemotherapy) are not sustainable by this frail population. Here, we describe the current evidence of treatment with ICIs in special populations and conclude that it is necessary to find a balance between treatment risks (toxicities) and benefits (efficacy), as well as engaging a multidisciplinary team of experts to thoroughly manage and treat these patients.

          Related collections

          Most cited references47

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Nivolumab versus chemotherapy in patients with advanced melanoma who progressed after anti-CTLA-4 treatment (CheckMate 037): a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial.

          Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, can result in durable responses in patients with melanoma who have progressed after ipilimumab and BRAF inhibitors. We assessed the efficacy and safety of nivolumab compared with investigator's choice of chemotherapy (ICC) as a second-line or later-line treatment in patients with advanced melanoma. In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients at 90 sites in 14 countries. Eligible patients were 18 years or older, had unresectable or metastatic melanoma, and progressed after ipilimumab, or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor if they were BRAF(V 600) mutation-positive. Participating investigators randomly assigned (with an interactive voice response system) patients 2:1 to receive an intravenous infusion of nivolumab 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks or ICC (dacarbazine 1000 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks or paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2) combined with carboplatin area under the curve 6 every 3 weeks) until progression or unacceptable toxic effects. We stratified randomisation by BRAF mutation status, tumour expression of PD-L1, and previous best overall response to ipilimumab. We used permuted blocks (block size of six) within each stratum. Primary endpoints were the proportion of patients who had an objective response and overall survival. Treatment was given open-label, but those doing tumour assessments were masked to treatment assignment. We assessed objective responses per-protocol after 120 patients had been treated with nivolumab and had a minimum follow-up of 24 weeks, and safety in all patients who had had at least one dose of treatment. The trial is closed and this is the first interim analysis, reporting the objective response primary endpoint. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01721746. Between Dec 21, 2012, and Jan 10, 2014, we screened 631 patients, randomly allocating 272 patients to nivolumab and 133 to ICC. Confirmed objective responses were reported in 38 (31·7%, 95% CI 23·5-40·8) of the first 120 patients in the nivolumab group versus five (10·6%, 3·5-23·1) of 47 patients in the ICC group. Grade 3-4 adverse events related to nivolumab included increased lipase (three [1%] of 268 patients), increased alanine aminotransferase, anaemia, and fatigue (two [1%] each); for ICC, these included neutropenia (14 [14%] of 102), thrombocytopenia (six [6%]), and anaemia (five [5%]). We noted grade 3-4 drug-related serious adverse events in 12 (5%) nivolumab-treated patients and nine (9%) patients in the ICC group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Nivolumab led to a greater proportion of patients achieving an objective response and fewer toxic effects than with alternative available chemotherapy regimens for patients with advanced melanoma that has progressed after ipilimumab or ipilimumab and a BRAF inhibitor. Nivolumab represents a new treatment option with clinically meaningful durable objective responses in a population of high unmet need. Bristol-Myers Squibb. Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Pembrolizumab versus investigator-choice chemotherapy for ipilimumab-refractory melanoma (KEYNOTE-002): a randomised, controlled, phase 2 trial.

            Patients with melanoma that progresses on ipilimumab and, if BRAF(V600) mutant-positive, a BRAF or MEK inhibitor or both, have few treatment options. We assessed the efficacy and safety of two pembrolizumab doses versus investigator-choice chemotherapy in patients with ipilimumab-refractory melanoma.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Incidence estimate of nonmelanoma skin cancer in the United States, 2006.

              To estimate the incidence of nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) in the US population in 2006 and secondarily to indicate trends in numbers of procedures for skin cancer treatment. A descriptive analysis of population-based claims and US Census Bureau data combined with a population-based cross-sectional survey using multiple US government data sets, including the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Fee-for-Service Physicians Claims databases, to calculate totals of skin cancer procedures performed for Medicare beneficiaries in 1992 and from 1996 to 2006 and related parameters. The National Ambulatory Medical Care Service database was used to estimate NMSC-related office visits. We combined these to estimate totals of new skin cancer diagnoses and affected individuals in the overall US population. The total number of procedures for skin cancer in the Medicare fee-for-service population increased by 76.9% from 1 158 298 in 1992 to 2 048 517 in 2006. The age-adjusted procedure rate per year per 100 000 beneficiaries increased from 3514 in 1992 to 6075 in 2006. From 2002 to 2006 (the years for which the databases allow procedure linkage to patient demographics and diagnoses), the number of procedures for NMSC in the Medicare population increased by 16.0%. In this period, the number of procedures per affected patient increased by 1.5%, and the number of persons with at least 1 procedure increased by 14.3%. We estimate the total number of NMSCs in the US population in 2006 at 3 507 693 and the total number of persons in the United States treated for NMSC at 2 152 500. The number of skin cancers in Medicare beneficiaries increased dramatically over the years 1992 to 2006, due mainly to an increase in the number of affected individuals. Using nationally representative databases, we provide evidence of much higher overall totals of skin cancer diagnoses and patients in the US population than previous estimates. These data give the most complete evaluation to date of the underrecognized epidemic of skin cancer in the United States.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Dermatol Pract Concept
                Dermatol Pract Concept
                DP
                Dermatology Practical & Conceptual
                Mattioli 1885
                2160-9381
                November 2021
                01 November 2021
                : 11
                : Suppl 2
                : e2021170S
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Medical Oncology Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy.
                Author notes
                Corresponding author: Paolo Bossi, MD. Medical Oncology Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy. Email: paolo.bossi@ 123456unibs.it

                Authorship: Both authors have contributed significantly to this publication.

                Article
                dp11s2a170s
                10.5826/dpc.11S2a170S
                8609951
                34877078
                f3720d49-f062-44f7-bf08-1c07f52ad3cc
                ©2021 Bossi and Lorini.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License BY-NC-4.0, which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and source are credited.

                History
                : 25 September 2021
                Categories
                Review

                cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma,special population,auto-immune disease,immunosuppression,immunodepression

                Comments

                Comment on this article