BioMEL: a translational research biobank of melanocytic lesions and melanoma

INTRODUCTION

Diagnosing invasive cutaneous melanoma (CM) can be challenging due to subjectivity in distinguishing equivocal nevi, melanoma in situ and thin CMs. The underlying molecular mechanisms of progression from nevus to melanoma must be better understood. Identifying biomarkers for treatment response, diagnostics and prognostics is crucial. Using biomedical data from biobanks and population-based healthcare data, translational research can improve patient care by implementing evidence-based findings. The BioMEL biobank is a prospective, multicentre, large-scale biomedical database on equivocal nevi and all stages of primary melanoma to metastases. Its purpose is to serve as a translational resource, enabling researchers to uncover objective molecular, genotypic, phenotypic and structural differences in nevi and all stages of melanoma. The main objective is to leverage BioMEL to significantly improve diagnostics, prognostics and therapy outcomes of patients with melanoma.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The BioMEL biobank contains biological samples, epidemiological information and medical data from adult patients who receive routine care for melanoma. BioMEL is focused on primary and metastatic melanoma, but equivocal pigmented lesions such as clinically atypical nevi and melanoma in situ are also included. BioMEL data are gathered by questionnaires, blood sampling, tumour imaging, tissue sampling, medical records and histopathological reports.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The BioMEL biobank project is approved by the national Swedish Ethical Review Authority (Dnr. 2013/101, 2013/339, 2020/00469, 2021/01432 and 2022/02421-02). The datasets generated are not publicly available due to regulations related to the ethical review authority.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05446155.

Study protocol of the BASINEL Study: a pragmatic randomised controlled trial investigating treatment versus no treatment of low-risk basal cell carcinomas in older persons

INTRODUCTION

Basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) represent 70% of all skin cancers. These tumours do not metastasise but are locally invasive if left untreated. There is a high incidence of BCC in the elderly, and clinicians frequently face important treatment dilemmas. The approach to BCC in the elderly should be investigated thoroughly.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Data on health-related quality of life (HrQoL), survival and complication rate will be examined in a treatment and a non-treatment arm (1:1 allocation). In the non-treatment arm, in vivo biological behaviour of low-risk BCCs in elderly patients will be examined. The main objective is to combine tumour characteristics with demographic data, in order to determine whether treatment will positively affect the patients' HrQoL within a predetermined time frame. A monocentric randomised controlled trial (RCT) was designed at the Ghent University Hospital. The study population consists of patients with the minimum age of 75 years and a new diagnosis of (a) low-risk BCC(s). Patients in the treatment arm will receive standard care. Patients in the non-treatment arm will be closely monitored: the tumour will be intensively evaluated using multispectral dermoscopy, reflectance confocal microscopy and high-definition optical coherence tomography. All patients will be asked to fill in a questionnaire concerning their HrQoL at consecutive time points. Patient-reported side effects will be evaluated via an additional questionnaire.Primary outcomes will include the difference in HrQoL and the difference in complication risks (treatment vs non-treatment) at different time points of the study. Secondary endpoints are the evolution of the BCCs in the non-treatment arm and the long-term survival in both study arms. Tertiary endpoint is the treatment effectiveness in the treatment arm. The sample size calculation was performed and resulted in a target sample size of 272 patients in this study with a 1:1 allocation.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Subjects can withdraw from participating in this study at any time for any reason without any consequences. Approval for this study was received from the Ethics Committee of the Ghent University Hospital on 26 August 2021.The results of this RCT will be submitted for publication in one or more international, peer-reviewed medical journals, regardless of the nature of the study results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05110924).

The Copenhagen Actinic Keratosis Study (COAKS). A decentralised clinical trial to evaluate tolerability, safety and efficacy of daily field-directed topical treatment with cytosolic phospholipase A2 inhibitor, AVX001, in participants with actinic keratosis: protocol for a randomised controlled phase I/IIa trial

INTRODUCTION

Actinic keratosis (AK) is the most common precancerous skin condition caused by long-term UV exposure. Given the high recurrence rate of 15%-53%, identifying safe and effective treatment options is warranted. AVX001, a cytosolic phospholipase A₂α (cPLA₂α) enzyme inhibitor, is a novel anti-inflammatory drug for field-directed, self-administered, topical therapy of AK.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This study is a single-centre, randomised, vehicle-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group hybrid clinical trial in adults with multiple AK lesions Olsen grade 1 or 2. The hybrid design combines decentralised participant tasks and assessments with conventional in-clinic visits. Recruitment using targeted advertising on social media and eligibility prescreening are conducted via the Studies&Me online recruitment platform. Participants (n=60) are randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment arms: AVX001 gel 1%, AVX001 gel 3% or vehicle gel. The trial consists of a 4-week treatment period with daily field-directed topical application of the gel and an 8-week follow-up period. Participants attend in-clinic visits at baseline, week 4 and week 12. The remote participant trial tasks include questionnaires and upload of smartphone-obtained photos of the treated skin area using a study-specific web-based app. Both remote and in-clinic assessments of safety and efficacy will be performed. The primary objective is to evaluate the local tolerability of daily application of AVX001 gel (1% or 3%) compared with vehicle gel. Secondary objectives include safety, efficacy, dose-response efficacy relationship, treatment satisfaction and cosmetic outcome. Exploratory objectives include evaluations of tolerability and efficacy assessed by dermatologists using smartphone photos uploaded by participants, comparisons of in-clinic and remote assessments and assessment of AK-related skin changes by non-invasive optical imaging.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Approved by the Ethics Committee of the Capital Region of Denmark (H-21018064) and the Danish Medicines Agency (2021032485). Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

2021-000934-32; NCT05164393.

Developing an Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR): a protocol paper

INTRODUCTION

Australia has the highest incidence of melanoma in the world with variable care provided by a diverse range of clinicians. Clinical quality registries aim to identify these variations in care and provide anonymised, benchmarked feedback to clinicians and institutions to improve patient outcomes. The Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry (MelCOR) aims to collect population-wide, clinical-level data for the early management of cutaneous melanoma and provide anonymised feedback to healthcare providers.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

A modified Delphi process will be undertaken to identify key clinical quality indicators for inclusion in the MelCOR pilot. MelCOR will prospectively collect data relevant to these quality indicators, initially for all people over the age of 18 years living in Victoria and Queensland with a melanoma diagnosis confirmed by histopathology, via a two-stage recruitment and consent process. In stage 1, existing State-based cancer registries contact the treating clinician and provide an opportunity for them to opt themselves or their patients out of direct contact with MelCOR. After stage 1, re-identifiable clinical data are provided to the MelCOR under a waiver of consent. In stage 2, the State-based cancer registry will approach the patient directly and invite them to opt in to MelCOR and share identifiable data. If a patient elects to opt in, MelCOR will be able to contact patients directly to collect patient-reported outcome measures. Aggregated data will be used to provide benchmarked, comparative feedback to participating institutions/clinicians.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Following the successful collection of pilot data, the feasibility of an Australia-wide roll out will be evaluated. Key quality indicator data will be the core of the MelCOR dataset, with additional data points added later. Annual reports will be issued, first to the relevant stakeholders followed by the public. MelCOR is approved by the Alfred Ethics Committee (58280/127/20).

Describing, predicting and explaining adherence to total skin self-examination (TSSE) in people with melanoma: a 12-month longitudinal study

OBJECTIVES

To describe trajectories in melanoma survivors' adherence to monthly total skin self-examination (TSSE) over 12 months, and to investigate whether adherence trajectories can be predicted from demographic, cognitive or emotional factors at baseline.

DESIGN

A longitudinal observational study nested within the intervention arm of the ASICA (Achieving Self-Directed Integrated Cancer Aftercare) randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Follow-up secondary care in Aberdeen and Cambridge UK.

PARTICIPANTS

n=104 adults (48 men/56 women; mean age 58.83 years, SD 13.47, range 28-85 years; mean Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation score 8.03, SD 1.73, range 2-10) who had been treated for stage 0-IIC primary cutaneous melanoma in the preceding 60 months and were actively participating in the intervention arm of the ASICA trial.

INTERVENTIONS

All participants were using the ASICA intervention-a tablet-based intervention designed to support monthly TSSE.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was adherence to guideline recommended (monthly) TSSE over 12 months. This was determined from time-stamped TSSE data recorded by the ASICA intervention app.

RESULTS

Latent growth mixture models identified three TSSE adherence trajectories (adherent -41%; drop-off -35%; non-adherent -24%). People who were non-adherent were less likely to intend to perform TSSE as recommended, intending to do it more frequently (OR=0.21, 95% CI 0.06 to 0.81, p=0.023) and were more depressed (OR=1.31, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.61, p=0.011) than people who were adherent. People whose adherence dropped off over time had less well-developed action plans (OR=0.78, 95% CI 0.63 to 0.96, p=0.016) and lower self-efficacy about TSSE (OR=0.92, 95% CI 0.86 to 0.99, p=0.028) than people who were adherent.

CONCLUSIONS

Adherence to monthly TSSE in people treated for melanoma can be differentiated into adherent, drop-off and non-adherent trajectories. Collecting information about intentions to engage in TSSE, depression, self-efficacy and/or action planning at outset may help to identify those who would benefit from additional intervention.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov Registry (NCT03328247).

DNA Methylation Analysis to predict Regression of high-grade anal Intraepithelial Neoplasia in HIV+ men (MARINE): a cohort study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Anal cancer precursors, or high-grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia (HGAIN), are highly prevalent in HIV-seropositive (HIV+) men who have sex with men (MSM). Around 30% of lesions regress within 1 year, but current histopathological assessment is unable to distinguish between HGAIN likely to regress and HGAIN likely to persist or progress to cancer. We aim to assess if host cell DNA methylation markers can predict regression of HGAIN, thus determining the need for immediate treatment or active surveillance. This could reduce overtreatment and the associated anal and psycho-sexual morbidity.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This is an active surveillance cohort study in three centres located in Amsterdam, the Netherlands, in 200 HIV+ MSM diagnosed with HGAIN. Participants will not be treated, but closely monitored during 24 months of follow-up with 6 monthly visits including cytology, and high-resolution anoscopy with biopsies. The primary study endpoint is histopathological regression of each baseline HGAIN lesion at the end of the study. Regression is defined as ≤low grade anal intraepithelial neoplasia in the exit biopsy at 24 months. Regression proportions in lesions with low versus high methylation levels (ASCL1, ZNF582), other biomarkers (HPV genotype, HPV-E4, p16^INK4A, Ki-67) and immunological markers at baseline will be compared. Main secondary endpoints are the histological and clinical outcome (ie, the number of octants affected by HGAIN) of each baseline HGAIN lesion and overall HGAIN disease (i.e., all lesions combined) after each visit. The health-related quality of life of the study group will be compared with that of a control group of 50 HIV+ MSM receiving regular HGAIN treatment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of the Academic Medical Center (Amsterdam, The Netherlands; reference no. 2021_099). Participants are required to provide written informed consent. Findings will be disseminated through publication in peer-reviewed scientific journals and presentations at international scientific conferences; dissemination to policy makers and the target patient group will be achieved through our (inter-)national network, professional associations and collaboration with a patient representative organisation.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NL9664.

BESPOKE IO protocol: a multicentre, prospective observational study evaluating the utility of ctDNA in guiding immunotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours

INTRODUCTION

Immunotherapy (IO) has transformed the treatment paradigm for a wide variety of solid tumours. However, assessment of response can be challenging with conventional radiological imaging (eg, iRECIST), which do not precisely capture the unique response patterns of tumours treated with IO. Emerging data suggest that circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) can aid in response assessment in patients with solid tumours receiving IO. The short half-life of ctDNA puts it in a unique position for early treatment response monitoring. The BESPOKE IO study is designed to investigate the clinical utility of serial ctDNA testing to assess treatment response using a tumour-informed, bespoke ctDNA assay (Signatera) and to determine its impact on clinical decision-making with respect to continuation/discontinuation, or escalation/de-escalation of immunotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumours.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

The BESPOKE IO is a multicentre, prospective, observational study with a goal to enroll over 1500 patients with solid tumours receiving IO in up to 100 US sites. Patients will be followed for up to 2 years with serial ctDNA analysis, timed with every other treatment cycle. The primary endpoint is to determine the percentage of patients who will have their treatment regimen changed as guided by post-treatment bespoke ctDNA results along with standard response assessment tools. The major secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall survival and overall response rate based on the ctDNA dynamics.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The BESPOKE IO study was approved by the WCG Institutional Review Board (Natera-20-043-NCP BESPOKE Study of ctDNA Guided Immunotherapy (BESPOKE IO)) on 22 February 2021. Data protection and privacy regulations will be strictly observed in the capturing, forwarding, processing and storing patients' data. Natera will approve the publication of any study results in accordance with the site-specific contract.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04761783.

Protocol for the implementation of a stepped-care model to address fear of cancer recurrence in patients previously diagnosed with early-stage (0-II) melanoma

INTRODUCTION

Fear of cancer recurrence (FCR) is commonly reported by patients diagnosed with early-stage (0-II) melanoma and can have a significant impact on daily functioning. This study will pilot the implementation of the Melanoma Care Program, an evidence-based, psychological intervention to reduce FCR, into routine practice, using a stepped-care model.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Intervention effectiveness and level of implementation will be investigated using a hybrid type I design. Between 4 weeks before and 1 week after their next dermatological appointment, patients with melanoma will be invited to complete the Fear of Cancer Recurrence Inventory Short-Form, measuring self-reported FCR severity. Using a stepped-care model, clinical cut-off points will guide the level of support offered to patients. This includes: (1) usual care, (2) Melanoma: Questions and Answers psychoeducational booklet, and (3) three or five psychotherapeutic telehealth sessions. This longitudinal, mixed-methods pilot implementation study aims to recruit 108 patients previously diagnosed with stage 0-II melanoma. The primary effectiveness outcome is change in FCR severity over time. Secondary effectiveness outcomes include change in anxiety, depression, stress, health-related quality of life and melanoma-related knowledge over time. All outcomes are measured at baseline, within 1 week of the final telehealth session, and 6 and 12 months post-intervention. Implementation stakeholders at each study site and interested patients will provide feedback on intervention acceptability and appropriateness. Implementation stakeholders will also provide feedback on intervention cost, feasibility, fidelity and sustainability. These outcomes will be measured throughout implementation, using questionnaires and semistructured interviews/expert group discussions. Descriptive statistics, linear mixed-effects regression and thematic analysis will be used to analyse study data.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was granted by the Sydney Local Health District-Royal Prince Alfred Zone (2020/ETH02518), protocol number: X20-0495. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, conference presentations, social media and result summaries distributed to interested participants. TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: (ACTRN12621000145808).

Process evaluation of a multicentre randomised clinical trial of substituting surgical excisions of low-risk basal cell carcinomas from secondary to primary care

OBJECTIVES

In 2016, the SKINCATCH Trial, a clustered multi-centre randomised trial, was initiated to assess whether low-risk basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) can be treated by general practitioners (GPs) without loss of quality of care. The trial intervention consisted of a tailored 2-day educational course on skin cancer management. The aim of this process evaluation was to investigate GPs' exposure to the intervention, implementation of the intervention and experiences with the intervention and trial.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Data on exposure to the intervention, implementation and experiences were obtained at several points during the trial. Complementary quantitative components (ie, surveys, database analysis, medical record analysis) and qualitative components (ie, interviews and focus groups) were used. Quantitative data were analysed using descriptive statistics; qualitative data were summarised (barrier interviews) or audiorecorded, transcribed verbatim and thematically analysed using Atlas.Ti (focus groups).

RESULTS

Following a 100% intervention exposure, results concerning the implementation of the trial showed that aside from the low inclusion rate of patients with low-risk BCCs (n=54), even less excisions of low-risk BCCs were performed (n=40). Although the intervention was experienced as highly positive, several barriers were mentioned regarding the trial including administrative challenges, lack of time and high workload of GPs, low volume of BCC patients and patients declining to participate or requesting a referral to a dermatologist.

CONCLUSIONS

Although GPs' participation in the highly valued training was optimal, several barriers may have contributed to the low inclusion and excision rate of low-risk BCCs. While some of the issues were trial-related, other barriers such as low patient-volume and patients requesting referrals are applicable outside the trial setting as well. This may question the feasibility of substitution of surgical excisions of low-risks BCCs from secondary to primary care in the current Dutch setting.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Trial NL5631 (NTR5746).

Improving Skin cancer Management with ARTificial Intelligence (SMARTI): protocol for a preintervention/postintervention trial of an artificial intelligence system used as a diagnostic aid for skin cancer management in a specialist dermatology setting

INTRODUCTION

Convolutional neural networks (CNNs) can diagnose skin cancers with impressive accuracy in experimental settings, however, their performance in the real-world clinical setting, including comparison to teledermatology services, has not been validated in prospective clinical studies.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Participants will be recruited from dermatology clinics at the Alfred Hospital and Skin Health Institute, Melbourne. Skin lesions will be imaged using a proprietary dermoscopic camera. The artificial intelligence (AI) algorithm, a CNN developed by MoleMap Ltd and Monash eResearch, classifies lesions as benign, malignant or uncertain. This is a preintervention/postintervention study. In the preintervention period, treating doctors are blinded to AI lesion assessment. In the postintervention period, treating doctors review the AI lesion assessment in real time, and have the opportunity to then change their diagnosis and management. Any skin lesions of concern and at least two benign lesions will be selected for imaging. Each participant's lesions will be examined by a registrar, the treating consultant dermatologist and later by a teledermatologist. At the conclusion of the preintervention period, the safety of the AI algorithm will be evaluated in a primary analysis by measuring its sensitivity, specificity and agreement with histopathology where available, or the treating consultant dermatologists' classification. At trial completion, AI classifications will be compared with those of the teledermatologist, registrar, treating dermatologist and histopathology. The impact of the AI algorithm on diagnostic and management decisions will be evaluated by: (1) comparing the initial management decision of the registrar with their AI-assisted decision and (2) comparing the benign to malignant ratio (for lesions biopsied) between the preintervention and postintervention periods.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) approval received from the Alfred Hospital Ethics Committee on 14 February 2019 (HREC/48865/Alfred-2018). Findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications, non-peer reviewed media and conferences.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04040114.

Training general practitioners in melanoma diagnosis: a scoping review of the literature

BACKGROUND

General practitioners (GPs) play a key role in early melanoma detection. To help GPs deal with suspicious skin lesions, melanoma diagnostic training programmes have been developed. However, it is unclear whether these programmes guarantee the acquisition of skills that will be applied by GPs in their daily clinical practice and maintained over time.

OBJECTIVES

This scoping review aimed to examine and compare educational programmes designed to train GPs in melanoma diagnosis using clinical (naked eye) examination alone or dermoscopy±clinical examination, and sought to inform on the long-term sustainability of the GPs' acquired skills.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies eligible for inclusion evaluated educational programmes for teaching diagnosis of melanoma to GPs. MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases were searched for relevant articles from 1995 to May 2020.

RESULTS

Forty-five relevant articles were found assessing 31 educational programmes. Most programmes that improved the diagnostic accuracy and long-term performances of the GPs, that is, increase in confidence, decrease in dermatologist referral for benign skin lesions and improvement in the benign/malignant ratio of excised skin lesions, trained the GPs in clinical diagnosis, followed by dermoscopy. To maintain long-term performances, these programmes provided refresher training material.

CONCLUSION

This review shows that studies generally report positive outcomes from the training of GPs in melanoma diagnosis. However, refresher training material seemed necessary to maintain the acquired skills. The optimal form and ideal frequency for these updates have yet to be defined.

Implementation of patient-reported outcome measures and patient-reported experience measures in melanoma clinical quality registries: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To identify patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) and patient-reported experience measures (PREMs) in clinical quality registries, for people with cutaneous melanoma, to inform a new Australian Melanoma Clinical Outcomes Registry; and describe opportunities and challenges of routine PROM/PREM collection, especially in primary care.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Which PROMs and PREMs are used in clinical quality registries for people with cutaneous melanoma, how they are collected, frequency of collection, participant recruitment methods and funding models for each registry.

RESULTS

1134 studies were identified from MEDLINE, PreMEDLINE, Embase, PsychInfo, Cochrane Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects databases and TUFTS Cost-Effectiveness Analysis Registry, alongside grey literature, from database inception to 5th February 2020. Following screening, 14 studies were included, identifying four relevant registries: Dutch Melanoma Registry, Adelphi Real-World Disease-Specific Programme (Melanoma), Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship Registry, and Cancer Experience Registry. These used seven PROMs: EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Functional Assessment of Cancer-General (FACT-G) and FACT-Melanoma (FACT-M), European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire-Cancer 30 (EORTC QLQ-C30), Fatigue Assessment Scale Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Patient-Reported Outcome Measures Information System-29 and one PREM; EORTC QLQ-Information Module 26. PROMs/PREMs in registries were reported to improve transparency of care; facilitate clinical auditing for quality assessment; enable cost-effectiveness analyses and create large-scale research platforms. Challenges included resource burden for data entry and potential collection bias toward younger, more affluent respondents. Feedback from patients with melanoma highlighted the relevance of PROMs/PREMs in assessing patient outcomes and patient experiences.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical registries indicate PROMs/PREMs for melanoma care can be incorporated and address important gaps, however cost and collection bias may limit generalisability.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42018086737.

Migraines and keloids: a 15-year Taiwan claim database analysis

Background

Fibroproliferative lesions with intractable pruritus, pain and hyperesthesia that cause uncontrolled scar growth are known as keloids. Migraines are common upsetting headache disorders characterised by frequent recurrence and attacks aggravated by physical activity. Both keloids and migraines can cause physical exhaustion and discomfort in patients; they have similar pathophysiological pathways, that is, the transforming growth factor-β1 gene and neurogenic inflammation.

Objective

To investigate subsequent development of migraines in patients with keloids.

Methods

Data were retrieved from the Taiwan National Health Insurance Research Database. The keloids group included patients aged 20 years and older with a recent diagnosis of keloids(n=9864). The non-keloids group included patients without keloids matched for gender and age at 1–4 ratio (n=39 456). Migraine risk between groups was measured by Cox proportional hazards regression models. Incidence rates and hazard ratios were calculated.

Results

During the study period, 103 keloids patients and 323 non-keloids patients developed migraines. The keloids patients had a 2.29-fold greater risk of developing migraines compared with the non-keloids group after adjustment for covariates (1.81 vs 0.55 per 1000 person-years, respectively). In the keloids group, female or patients younger than 50 years were prone to developing migraines.

Conclusion

The higher tendency to develop migraines in the keloids group in comparison with the non-keloids group suggests that keloids could be a predisposing risk factor for migraine development in adults. Keloids patients who complain of headaches should be examined for migraines.

Phase I/II study protocol to assess safety and efficacy of adoptive cell therapy with anti-PD-1 plus low-dose pegylated-interferon-alpha in patients with metastatic melanoma refractory to standard of care treatments: the ACTME trial

INTRODUCTION

Treatment with anti-PD-1 immunotherapy does not lead to long-lasting clinical responses in approximately 60% of patients with metastatic melanoma. These refractory patients, however, can still respond to treatment with tumour infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) and interferon-alpha (IFNa). A combination of TIL, pegylated-interferon-alpha (PEG-IFNa) and anti-PD-1 is expected to provide a safe, feasible and effective therapy for patients with metastatic melanoma, who are refractory to standard of care treatment options.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Patients are treated in two phases. In phase I, the safety of the combination TIL and anti-PD-1 is assessed (cohort 1) according to CTCAE 4.03 criteria. Subsequently, the safety of cotreatment with PEG-IFNa is tested in cohort 2. The efficacy will be evaluated in the second phase of the trial. Efficacy is evaluated according to RECIST 1.1 and immune-related response criteria. Clinical and immunological parameters will be evaluated for their relation with clinical responsiveness.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval of the trial was obtained from the Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects in the Netherlands. The trial results will be shared with the scientific community at (inter)national conferences and by publication in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03638375; Pre-results.

Identifying challenges to implementation of clinical practice guidelines for sentinel lymph node biopsy in patients with melanoma in Australia: protocol paper for a mixed methods study

INTRODUCTION

Sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB) is a diagnostic procedure developed in the 1990s. It is currently used to stage patients with primary cutaneous melanoma, provide prognostic information and guide management. The Australian Clinical Practice Guidelines state that SLNB should be considered for patients with cutaneous melanoma >1 mm in thickness (or >0.8 mm with high-risk pathology features). Until recently, sentinel lymph node (SLN) status was used to identify patients who might benefit from a completion lymph node dissection, a procedure that is no longer routinely recommended. SLN status is now also being used to identify patients who might benefit from systemic adjuvant therapies such as anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD1) checkpoint inhibitor immunotherapy or BRAF-directed molecular targeted therapy, treatments that have significantly improved relapse-free survival for patients with resected stage III melanoma and improved overall survival of patients with unresectable stage III and stage IV melanoma. Australian and international data indicate that approximately half of eligible patients receive an SLNB.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This mixed-methods study seeks to understand the structural, contextual and cultural factors affecting implementation of the SLNB guidelines. Data collection will include: (1) cross-sectional questionnaires and semistructured interviews with general practitioners and dermatologists; (2) semistructured interviews with other healthcare professionals involved in the diagnosis and early definitive care of melanoma patients and key stakeholders including researchers, representatives of professional colleges, training organisations and consumer melanoma groups; and (3) documentary analysis of documents from government, health services and non-government organisations. Descriptive analyses and multivariable regression models will be used to examine factors related to SLNB practices and attitudes. Qualitative data will be analysed using thematic analysis.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been granted by the University of Sydney. Results will be disseminated through publications and presentations to clinicians, patients, policymakers and researchers and will inform the development of strategies for implementing SLNB guidelines in Australia.

High-risk basal cell carcinoma excision in primary care: a retrospective observational study of compliance with NICE guidance

OBJECTIVES

To assess compliance with 2010 National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guidance on cancer services relating to the management of basal cell carcinomas (BCC) in the community, where except in specific circumstances it is recommended that only low-risk BCCs should be excised routinely.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A retrospective observational study of the histopathology reports of BCC excisions received from primary care in two district general hospitals in the South of England. One hundred consecutive BCC excisions were analysed from each hospital.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The numbers of high-risk BCCs excised in primary care according to histological subtype, anatomical site and age and if these excisions were compliant with NICE 2010 guidance. Completeness of excision and mention of BCC on histology request were secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Histologically high-risk subtypes were present in 32% (64/200) of BCCs excised in the community. Only 17/64 were excised by general practitioners (GPs) who were accredited to do so. Non-compliance regarding anatomical site occurred in 16% of samples; only one was non-compliant regarding patient age. There was a high overall rate of complete excision (94.5%) with variation in presence of the term BCC on histology request forms.

CONCLUSIONS

NICE 2010 guidance relating to BCC excision in primary care was not followed in a considerable number of cases. Compliance with NICE 2010 guidance depends on the ability to recognise high-risk BCCs clinically and manage appropriately. It also shows that despite close supervision by secondary care, there are still failures of compliance.GP training in identification of subtypes of BCC might be improved, as well as an increase in numbers of GPs accredited to carry out high-risk BCC excisions. Difficulty in diagnosing high-risk histological subtypes of BCC preoperatively should be considered in any future revision of NICE guidance.