1
|
Stratigos AJ, Garbe C, Dessinioti C, Lebbe C, van Akkooi A, Bataille V, Bastholt L, Dreno B, Dummer R, Fargnoli MC, Forsea AM, Harwood CA, Hauschild A, Hoeller C, Kandolf-Sekulovic L, Kaufmann R, Kelleners-Smeets NW, Lallas A, Leiter U, Malvehy J, Del Marmol V, Moreno-Ramirez D, Pellacani G, Peris K, Saiag P, Tagliaferri L, Trakatelli M, Ioannides D, Vieira R, Zalaudek I, Arenberger P, Eggermont AMM, Röcken M, Grob JJ, Lorigan P. European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: Part 2. Treatment-Update 2023. Eur J Cancer 2023; 193:113252. [PMID: 37708630 DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2023.113252] [Citation(s) in RCA: 10] [Impact Index Per Article: 10.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/18/2023] [Accepted: 07/18/2023] [Indexed: 09/16/2023]
Abstract
In order to update recommendations on treatment, supportive care, education, and follow-up of patients with invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), a multidisciplinary panel of experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology (EADO), the European Dermatology Forum (EDF), the European Society for Radiotherapy and Oncology (ESTRO), the European Union of Medical Specialists (UEMS), the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology (EADV), and the European Organisation of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was formed. Recommendations were based on an evidence-based literature review, guidelines, and expert consensus. Treatment recommendations are presented for common primary cSCC (low risk, high risk), locally advanced cSCC, regional metastatic cSCC (operable or inoperable), and distant metastatic cSCC. For common primary cSCC, the first-line treatment is surgical excision with postoperative margin assessment or micrographically controlled surgery. Achieving clear surgical margins is the most important treatment consideration for patients with cSCCs amenable to surgery. Regarding adjuvant radiotherapy for patients with high-risk localised cSCC with clear surgical margins, current evidence has not shown significant benefit for those with at least one high-risk factor. Radiotherapy should be considered as the primary treatment for non-surgical candidates/tumours. For cSCC with cytologically or histologically confirmed regional nodal metastasis, lymph node dissection is recommended. For patients with metastatic or locally advanced cSCC who are not candidates for curative surgery or radiotherapy, anti-PD-1 agents are the first-line systemic treatment, with cemiplimab being the first approved systemic agent for advanced cSCC by the Food and Drugs Administration/European Medicines Agency. Second-line systemic treatments for advanced cSCC, include epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (cetuximab) combined with chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Multidisciplinary board decisions are mandatory for all patients with advanced cSCC, considering the risks of toxicity, the age and frailty of patients, and co-morbidities, including immunosuppression. Patients should be engaged in informed, shared decision-making on management and be provided with the best supportive care to improve symptom management and quality of life. The frequency of follow-up visits and investigations for subsequent new cSCC depends on underlying risk characteristics.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexander J Stratigos
- First Department of Dermatology-Venereology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Andreas Sygros Hospital, Athens, Greece.
| | - Claus Garbe
- Centre for Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Clio Dessinioti
- First Department of Dermatology-Venereology, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Andreas Sygros Hospital, Athens, Greece
| | - Celeste Lebbe
- Université Paris Cite, Dermato-Oncology AP-HP Hôpital Saint Louis, Cancer Institute APHP. Nord-Université Paris Cite, INSERM U976, Paris, France
| | - Alexander van Akkooi
- Department of Melanoma and Surgical Oncology, Royal Prince Alfred Hospital, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Faculty of Medicine and Health, University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia; Melanoma Institute Australia, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
| | | | - Lars Bastholt
- Department of Oncology, Odense University Hospital, Odense, Denmark
| | - Brigitte Dreno
- Nantes Université, INSERM, CNRS, Immunology and New Concepts in ImmunoTherapy, INCIT, UMR 1302/EMR6001, Nantes, France
| | - Reinhard Dummer
- Skin Cancer Centre at University Hospital, Zurich, Switzerland
| | - Maria Concetta Fargnoli
- Dermatology Department of Biotechnological and Applied Clinical Sciences, University of L'Aquila, L'Aquila, Italy
| | - Ana Maria Forsea
- Carol Davila University of Medicine and Pharmacy Bucharest, Department of Oncologic Dermatology, Elias University Hospital Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania
| | - Catherine A Harwood
- Centre for Cell Biology and Cutaneous Research, Blizard Institute, Barts and the London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Axel Hauschild
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital (UKSH), Kiel, Germany
| | - Christoph Hoeller
- Department of Dermatology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria
| | | | - Roland Kaufmann
- Department of Dermatology, Venereology and Allergology, Frankfurt University Hospital, Frankfurt, Germany
| | - Nicole Wj Kelleners-Smeets
- GROW-School for Oncology and Reproduction, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands; Department of Dermatology, Maastricht University Medical Centre+, Maastricht University, Maastricht, the Netherlands
| | - Aimilios Lallas
- First Department of Dermatology, Aristotle University, Thessaloniki, Greece
| | - Ulrike Leiter
- Centre for Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany
| | - Josep Malvehy
- Dermatology Department of Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBER de enfermedades raras, Instituto Carlos III, Barcelona, Spain
| | - Veronique Del Marmol
- Department of Dermatology, University Hospital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
| | - David Moreno-Ramirez
- Department of Medical and Surgical Dermatology Service, Hospital Universitario Virgen Macarena, Sevilla, Spain
| | | | - Ketty Peris
- UOC di Dermatologia, Dipartimento di Scienze Mediche e Chirurgiche Addominali ed Endocrino Metaboliche, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli-IRCCS, Rome, Italy; Dermatologia, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Rome, Italy
| | - Philippe Saiag
- Department of General and Oncologic Dermatology, Ambroise-Paré hospital, APHP, and EA 4340 'Biomarkers in Cancerology and Hemato-oncology', UVSQ, Université Paris-Saclay, Boulogne-Billancourt, France
| | - Luca Tagliaferri
- UOC Radioterapia Oncologica, Dipartimento di Diagnostica per Immagini, Radioterapia Oncologica ed Ematologia, Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A, Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy
| | - Myrto Trakatelli
- Department of Dermatology, Papageorgiou Hospital, Aristotle University Department of Medicine, Thessaloniki, Greece
| | | | - Ricardo Vieira
- Department of Dermatology, Coimbra Hospital and University Centre, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Iris Zalaudek
- Department of Dermatology, University of Trieste, Trieste, Italy
| | - Petr Arenberger
- Department of Dermatovenereology, Third Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
| | - Alexander M M Eggermont
- University Medical Center Utrecht and Princess Máxima Center, Utrecht, the Netherlands; Comprehensive Cancer Center Munich, Technical University Munich and Ludwig Maximilian University, Munich, Germany
| | - Martin Röcken
- Centre for Dermatooncology, Department of Dermatology, Eberhard Karls University, Tuebingen, Germany
| | | | - Paul Lorigan
- Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK; Department of Medical Oncology, Christie NHS Foundation Trust, Manchester, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Ji S, Liu H, Pachella L, Stephenson RD, Groisberg R, Weiss SA. Use of immune checkpoint inhibitors in solid organ transplant recipients with advanced cutaneous malignancies. FRONTIERS IN TRANSPLANTATION 2023; 2:1284740. [PMID: 38993910 PMCID: PMC11235332 DOI: 10.3389/frtra.2023.1284740] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/30/2023] [Accepted: 10/13/2023] [Indexed: 07/13/2024]
Abstract
Background Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) are standard of care therapy for patients with cutaneous malignancies, the most frequently diagnosed cancers in solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients. The activity and rate of allograft rejection in SOT recipients with advanced skin cancers treated with ICI is understudied. Methods We conducted a retrospective analysis of SOT recipients with advanced melanoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), and merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) who were treated with ICI. Unpublished cases from our institution and published cases from the literature were aggregated. Demographics, type of immunosuppressive therapy, type of ICI(s) administered, prior systemic therapies, tumor response to ICI, and evidence of organ rejection and/or failure were recorded. Objective response rates (ORR) and rates of graft rejection and failure are reported. Results Ninety patients were identified; four patients from our institution and 86 unique patients from a literature review. ORR to first-line ICI for the entire cohort was 41.1% (37/90). ORR by tumor type was 31% (18/58), 64.3% (18/28), and 25.0% (1/4) for melanoma, cSCC, and MCC, respectively. The rate of graft rejection was 37.8% (34/90) with 61.8% (21/34) of these cases progressing to graft failure. Number of immunosuppressive agents (0, 1, 2, or 3) was inversely associated with rate of graft failure. Conclusions In this retrospective analysis, ICIs demonstrate clinical activity in SOT recipients with cutaneous malignancies; however, the rate of graft rejection is high. Treatment plans should be individualized through thorough interdisciplinary discussion. Immunosuppressive modifications may be considered prior to starting treatment, but when feasible, enrollment on clinical trials is preferred.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stephanie Ji
- Department of Medicine, Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Hao Liu
- Department of Biostatistics and Epidemiology, Rutgers School of Public Health, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Laura Pachella
- Division of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Ryan D Stephenson
- Division of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Roman Groisberg
- Division of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| | - Sarah A Weiss
- Division of Medical Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, New Brunswick, NJ, United States
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Grace de Lima S, Hyrcza MD, Monzon JG. Treatment of Unresectable Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma with Cemiplimab in a Patient on Dialysis. Case Rep Oncol 2023; 16:137-142. [PMID: 36880029 PMCID: PMC9984937 DOI: 10.1159/000528414] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/21/2022] [Accepted: 11/03/2022] [Indexed: 03/06/2023] Open
Abstract
Program death-1 inhibitors, a class of immune-checkpoint inhibitors, are now the standard of care in a variety of cancer settings, including cutaneous malignancies, such as melanomas, Merkel cell, and cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (cSCCs). The clinical trials that led to the approval of the programmed death-1 inhibitor cemiplimab-rwlc (Libtayo®) for use in advanced cSCC excluded patients with autoimmune disease and those that required systemic immunosuppressive treatments, or had undergone solid-organ transplantation. Also, to be eligible, patients had to have adequate organ function. Here, we present the first report of a patient that has been successfully treated with cemiplimab for locally advanced cSCC while simultaneously on dialysis for treatment of renal failure following renal transplant.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Martin D. Hyrcza
- Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine and Arnie Charbonneau Cancer Center, University of Calgary, Calgary, AB, Canada
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Ascierto PA, Schadendorf D. Update in the treatment of non-melanoma skin cancers: the use of PD-1 inhibitors in basal cell carcinoma and cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma. J Immunother Cancer 2022; 10:jitc-2022-005082. [PMID: 36455990 PMCID: PMC9716987 DOI: 10.1136/jitc-2022-005082] [Citation(s) in RCA: 14] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 11/05/2022] [Indexed: 12/05/2022] Open
Abstract
Non-melanoma skin cancer (NMSC) includes a wide range of cutaneous tumors, the most frequent of which are basal cell carcinoma (BCC) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC). Although NMSC is usually cured by surgical resection, in rare cases it can progress to locally advanced and metastatic disease. Risk factors for advanced disease include comorbidities, neglect, and immunosuppression. Advanced NMSC may require systemic treatment if surgery and radiation are not feasible. Chemotherapy, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors in CSCC, and hedgehog inhibitors in BCC have been used but are generally of limited benefit, with responses often short-lived and toxicity issues. Given the high mutational burden of NMSC, the use of immunotherapy has been investigated and two anti-PD-1 antibodies, cemiplimab and pembrolizumab, are approved for the treatment of advanced CSCC not curable by surgery or radiation. Both have shown durable responses with good tolerability in patients in phase II trials and anti-PD-1 therapy is now the standard of care for locally advanced and metastatic CSCC. PD-1 blockade is also approved as second-line therapy in advanced BCC, with frequent and durable responses after failure on hedgehog inhibitor therapy. PD-1 checkpoint inhibition is being assessed for NMSC in combination with other modalities, including oncolytic viruses and EGFR inhibitors. Adjuvant and neoadjuvant use of cemiplimab and pembrolizumab is also being investigated with several ongoing trials. Further clinical trials of immunotherapy must be prioritized in NMSC for further improvement in outcomes.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paolo A Ascierto
- Department of Melanoma, Cancer Immunotherapy and Innovative Therapy, National Cancer Institute IRCCS Pascale Foundation, Napoli, Italy
| | - Dirk Schadendorf
- Department for Dermatology, Venerology and Allergology, University Hospital Essen & German Cancer Consortium, Partner Site Essen, Essen, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Immune checkpoint blockade for organ-transplant recipients with cancer: A review. Eur J Cancer 2022; 175:326-335. [DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2022.08.010] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/06/2022] [Revised: 08/02/2022] [Accepted: 08/05/2022] [Indexed: 11/24/2022]
|
6
|
Hanania HL, Lewis DJ. Systematic Review of Programmed Cell Death-1 Inhibitor Therapy for Advanced-Stage Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma in Solid-organ Transplant Recipients. J DERMATOL TREAT 2022; 33:3119-3126. [PMID: 36018250 DOI: 10.1080/09546634.2022.2118516] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/15/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) inhibitors represent an effective treatment option for advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). However, solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients with cSCC have traditionally been excluded from clinical trials. OBJECTIVE To assess the safety and efficacy of PD-1 inhibitors for stage III-IV cSCC in SOT recipients. MATERIALS & METHODS A systematic review was performed using the PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases. RESULTS We identified 21 articles describing 33 SOT recipients (26 kidney, four liver, two lung, and one heart) with stage III-IV cSCC treated with PD-1 inhibitors. Eleven patients (33.3%) experienced allograft rejection. Of the 25 cases with iRECIST scores, twelve patients (48.0%) had a complete response (CR), eight (32.0%) showed a partial response (PR), three (12.0%) progressive disease, and two (8.0%) stable disease (SD). Including patients without available iRECIST scores, 21 patients (63.6%) showed tumor response. Eleven patients died, with six (50.0%) due to tumor progression and one (11.1%) due to allograft rejection after foregoing dialysis. CONCLUSION PD-1 inhibitors demonstrate efficacy for advanced cSCC and confer a risk of allograft rejection in SOT recipients, requiring careful assessment of risks and benefits. If anti-PD-1 therapy is pursued, use of mTOR inhibitors, prophylactic steroids, and donor-derived cell-free DNA monitoring may mitigate the risk of rejection.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Hannah L Hanania
- Baylor College of Medicine, School of Medicine, Houston, TX, USA
| | - Daniel J Lewis
- Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Department of Dermatology, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Serkies K, Dębska-Ślisień A, Kowalczyk A, Lizakowski S, Małyszko J. Malignancies in adult kidney transplant candidates and recipients: current status. Nephrol Dial Transplant 2022:6674222. [PMID: 35998321 DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfac239] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/12/2022] Open
Abstract
Posttransplant malignancies, particularly recurrent and de novo, in solid organs including kidney transplant recipients (KTRs) are a significant complication associated with substantial mortality, largely attributed to long-term immunosuppression necessary to maintain allograft tolerance. Older age at transplantation and oncogenic virus infection along with pretransplant malignancies are among the main factors contributing to the risk of cancer in this population. As the mean age of transplant candidates rises, the rate of transplant recipients with pretransplant malignancies also increases. The eligibility criteria for transplantation in patients with prior cancer have recently changed. The overall risk of posttransplant malignancies is at least double after transplantation including KTRs relative to the general population, most pronounced for skin cancers associated with UV radiation and virally-mediated tumors. The risk of renal cell carcinoma is specifically increased in the kidney transplant population. The therapy of cancer in transplant patients is associated with risk of higher toxicity, and graft rejection and/or impairment, which poses a unique challenge in the management. Reduction of immunosuppression and the use of mTOR inhibitors are common after cancer diagnosis, although optimal immunosuppression for transplant recipients with cancer remains undefined. Suboptimal cancer treatment contributing to a worse prognosis has been reported for malignancies in this population. In this article, we focus on the prevalence and outcomes of posttransplant malignancies, cancer therapy including a short overview of immunotherapy, cancer screening and prevention strategies, and immunosuppression as a cancer risk factor. The 2020/2021 recommendations of the Kidney Diseases Improving Global Outcome (KDIGO) and American Society of Transplantation (AST) for transplant candidates with a history of cancer are presented.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Krystyna Serkies
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland
| | - Alicja Dębska-Ślisień
- Department of Nephrology, Transplantology and Internal Medicine, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland
| | - Anna Kowalczyk
- Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland
| | - Sławomir Lizakowski
- Department of Nephrology, Transplantology and Internal Medicine, Medical University of Gdańsk, Poland
| | - Jolanta Małyszko
- Department of Nephrology, Dialysis and Internal Medicine, Warsaw Medical University, Poland
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Su T, Racz E, Wiegman MJ, Crop MJ, Broekman KE. Sustained complete response of metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma by immune checkpoint inhibition in a renal transplant patient: a case report. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2022; 36:e735-e737. [PMID: 35607905 DOI: 10.1111/jdv.18262] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 02/02/2022] [Accepted: 05/13/2022] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
Affiliation(s)
- T Su
- Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - E Racz
- Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - M J Wiegman
- Department of Dermatology, University Medical Center, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - M J Crop
- Department of Internal Medicine - Nephrology, University Medical Center, Groningen, The Netherlands
| | - K E Broekman
- Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center, Groningen, The Netherlands
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Bossi P, Lorini L. Treatment of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma with Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Special Populations. Dermatol Pract Concept 2021; 11:e2021170S. [PMID: 34877078 DOI: 10.5826/dpc.11s2a170s] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 09/25/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022] Open
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Paolo Bossi
- Medical Oncology Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| | - Luigi Lorini
- Medical Oncology Unit, Department of Medical and Surgical Specialties, Radiological Sciences and Public Health, ASST Spedali Civili of Brescia, University of Brescia, Brescia, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
10
|
Villani A, Ocampo-Garza SS, Potestio L, Fabbrocini G, Ocampo-Candiani J, Ocampo-Garza J, Scalvenzi M. Cemiplimab for the treatment of advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2021; 21:21-29. [PMID: 34644510 DOI: 10.1080/14740338.2022.1993819] [Citation(s) in RCA: 21] [Impact Index Per Article: 7.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/20/2022]
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) is the second most frequent malignant skin cancer, with an increasing worldwide incidence. Cemiplimab is a human monoclonal antibody directed against programmed cell death-1 receptor that acts by blocking T-cell inactivation. It is the first drug approved for the treatment of adult patients with metastatic or locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation. AREAS COVERED The aim of this review is to analyze the mechanism of action, including pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties, clinical efficacy, safety, and tolerability of cemiplimab for squamous cell carcinoma. EXPERT OPINION The introduction of immune checkpoint inhibitors has revolutionized the therapeutic scenario of advanced skin cancers. Many challenges regarding the use of cemiplimab for locally advanced and metastatic CSCC still exist. The use of combination treatments, including the association of different immune checkpoint inhibitors, could be a strategy to increase treatment response, reducing the possibility of therapeutic failure. Also, different schemes of treatment or dose adjustments should be considered in order to reduce toxicity, avoiding treatment discontinuation and increasing patient´s quality of life.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alessia Villani
- Dermatology Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico Ii, Naples, Italy
| | - Sonia Sofia Ocampo-Garza
- Dermatology Department, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, University Hospital ¨Dr. José Eleuterio González¨, Monterrey, Mexico
| | - Luca Potestio
- Dermatology Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico Ii, Naples, Italy
| | - Gabriella Fabbrocini
- Dermatology Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico Ii, Naples, Italy
| | - Jorge Ocampo-Candiani
- Dermatology Department, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, University Hospital ¨Dr. José Eleuterio González¨, Monterrey, Mexico
| | - Jorge Ocampo-Garza
- Dermatology Department, Universidad Autónoma de Nuevo León, University Hospital ¨Dr. José Eleuterio González¨, Monterrey, Mexico
| | - Massimiliano Scalvenzi
- Dermatology Unit, Department of Clinical Medicine and Surgery, University of Naples Federico Ii, Naples, Italy
| |
Collapse
|
11
|
Maggiore U, Palmisano A, Buti S, Claire Giudice G, Cattaneo D, Giuliani N, Fiaccadori E, Gandolfini I, Cravedi P. Chemotherapy, targeted therapy and immunotherapy: Which drugs can be safely used in the solid organ transplant recipients? Transpl Int 2021; 34:2442-2458. [PMID: 34555228 PMCID: PMC9298293 DOI: 10.1111/tri.14115] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/10/2021] [Revised: 08/04/2021] [Accepted: 09/03/2021] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
In solid organ transplant recipients, cancer is associated with worse prognosis than in the general population. Among the causes of increased cancer‐associated mortality, are the limitations in selecting the optimal anticancer regimen in solid organ transplant recipients, because of the associated risks of graft toxicity and rejection, drug‐to‐drug interactions, reduced kidney or liver function, and patient frailty and comorbid conditions. The advent of immunotherapy has generated further challenges, mainly because checkpoint inhibitors increase the risk of rejection, which may have life‐threatening consequences in recipients of life‐saving organs. In general, there are no safe or unsafe anticancer drugs. Rather, the optimal choice of the anticancer regimen results from a careful risk/benefit assessment, from the awareness of potential pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug‐to‐drug interactions, and of the risk of drug overexposure in patients with kidney or liver dysfunction. In this review, we summarize general principles that may help the oncologists and transplant physicians in the multidisciplinary management of recipients of solid organ transplantation with cancer who are candidates for chemotherapy, targeted therapy, or immunotherapy.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Umberto Maggiore
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.,Nephrology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | | | - Sebastiano Buti
- Medical Oncology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | | | - Dario Cattaneo
- Unit of Clinical Pharmacology, ASST Fatebenefratelli Sacco University Hospital, Milan, Italy
| | - Nicola Giuliani
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.,Hematology Unit, Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Enrico Fiaccadori
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.,Nephrology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Ilaria Gandolfini
- Department of Medicine and Surgery, University of Parma, Parma, Italy.,Nephrology Unit, University Hospital of Parma, Parma, Italy
| | - Paolo Cravedi
- Renal Division, Department of Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, NY, USA
| |
Collapse
|
12
|
Commentary on Keratinocyte Cancer Mortality in Kidney Transplant Recipients. Transplantation 2021; 106:918-919. [PMID: 34033606 DOI: 10.1097/tp.0000000000003828] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/26/2022]
|