Hedgehog Inhibitors Beyond Clinical Complete Response in Basal Cell Carcinoma: Should I Stop or Should I Go?

INTRODUCTION: In advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC), the issue of whether Hedgehog inhibitors (HHIs) should be stopped or not after clinical complete response (cCR) achievement remains an unmet clinical need. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, multicenter study across 7 Italian dermato-oncology units including patients with BCC who continued vismodegib after cCR between 2012 and 2019. We assessed the relationship between the duration of vismodegib intake (days to cCR [DTCR], days to stop after cCR [DTS], total treatment days [TTD]), and disease-free survival (DFS). Reasons to stop vismodegib were (R1) toxicity and (R2) disease recurrence. The relationship between DTCR, DTS, TTD, and DFS in the whole population and in R1 subgroup was assessed by Pearson's correlation coefficient (P < .05) and Bayesian statistics (BF10). RESULTS: Sixty-eight BCC patients with a median (m) age of 75.5 years (39-100) were included. Most patients were male (N = 43, 63%), without Gorlin syndrome (N = 56, 82%) and with head and neck area as primary site (N = 51, 75%). After cCR, out of 68 patients, 90% (N = 61/68) discontinued vismodegib: 82% (N = 50/61) due to toxicity (R1), and 18% (N = 11/61) due to recurrence (R2). Conversely, 10% (N = 7/68) continued vismodegib until last follow-up. In the whole population (N = 68), cCR was achieved with a mDTCR of 180.50 days. DFS showed a significant correlation with DTS (P < .01, BF10 = 39.2) and TTD (P < .01, BF10 = 35566), while it was not correlated to DTCR (BF10 < 0.1). The analysis of R1 subgroup (N = 50) confirmed these results. DFS correlated with DTS in all recurrent patients (N = 38, r = 0.44, P < .01) and in the recurrent patients who stopped vismodegib for toxicity (N = 26, r = 0.665, P < .01). DFS was longer when vismodegib was maintained for >2 months after cCR (mDFS > 2 months, N = 54 vs. ≤ 2 months, N = 14: 470 vs. 175 d, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Our retrospective results suggest that HHIs should be continued after cCR to improve DFS in BCC.

Quality of Life Impact in Patients with Cutaneous Toxicities Caused by Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors and Immunotherapy.

BACKGROUND: Novel oncologic therapies, including epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFR-Is) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs), are associated with a new spectrum of adverse reactions, with prominent cutaneous toxicities. The impact of cutaneous adverse events (cAEs) on patients' quality of life (QoL) represents an unmet clinical need. OBJECTIVES: The aims of this study were (1) to assess whether cutaneous toxicities directed therapies are effective in reducing the QoL burden via the submission of 2 patient reported outcome measures (PROMs); (2) to investigate whether class of oncologic therapy, type of cAE and toxicity severity differently impact on patients' QoL. METHODS: A prospective observational study was conducted at the Dermatology department of the Fondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy, from October 2018 to October 2019. Patients aged ≥18 years, under therapy with EGFR-Is or ICIs and experiencing a treatment-related cAE were eligible for the study. Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) and European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire - Core 30 version 3.0 (EORTC QLQ-C30) were administered to patients at first clinical visit (T0), at 1-month (T1), and at 3-month (T2) dermatological follow-up. RESULTS: Sixty cAEs of 51 patients have been recorded. A significant difference in the mean score for both DLQI and EORTC QLQ-C30 was found along the 3-months dermatological follow-up (p < 0.0001). A similar QoL improvement was reported for PROMs stratified by class of therapy and toxicity severity (p < 0.0001). No difference was reported for patients with pyogenic granuloma-like lesions and psoriasiform eruption as per DLQI. Class of therapy and toxicity severity did not differently impact on patients' QoL at selected timepoints; we reported a higher EORTC QLQ-C30 score at T2 for patients developing psoriasiform eruption compared to other types of cAEs. CONCLUSIONS: Early patients' referral to dermatologists and tailored management could result in better QoL.

Facial Papulopustular Eruption during the COVID-19 Pandemic in Patients Treated with EGFR Inhibitors.

Papulopustular rash (PPR) is the most frequent cutaneous adverse event during treatment with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRis). Although often mild in severity, it can impair patients' quality of life and may also be a reason for discontinuing or changing the dose of the antineoplastic treatment. During COVID-19 pandemics, the use of surgical masks drastically increased and it had an impact on the face skin microenvironment, favoring the worsening of dermatological pathologies. We reported the relapse of PPR in patients treated with EGFR inhibitors who consistently wore face masks (>6 hours/day). All the patients developed the PPR within 6 months of starting mask use. Compared to the PPR occurred previously, after mask use, the skin eruption was more severe and affected mainly those regions of the face which came into contact with the mask. Patients received topical or systemic treatment, obtaining complete response in 65.7% of the cases. The establishment of an early treatment for the PPR allows continuing the oncologic treatment, without any suspension which could result in a decreased oncologic outcome. In conclusion, when using these devices, it is recommended to use special precautions, particularly in oncologic patients, by using a daily prophylactic skincare and replacing masks regularly with regular and frequent breaks.