Incorporating a Prognostic Gene Expression Profile Test into the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: An Expert Consensus Panel Report.

BACKGROUND:  Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is a growing health concern with a rapidly increasing incidence. Disease-specific mortality is typically preceded by a metastasis, but current staging systems have significant limitations in predicting this event. The 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test is a validated method of further stratifying patients based on the risk of regional or distant metastasis, but limited guidelines exist for incorporating this test into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE:  To review the available literature on the use of gene expression profile (GEP) testing to assess prognosis in cSCC and create consensus statements to guide dermatology clinicians on its use. METHODS:  A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus was completed for English-language original research articles on the use of GEP testing to assess cSCC prognosis. A panel of 8 dermatologists with significant expertise in diagnosing and managing cSCC gathered to review the articles and create consensus statements. A modified Delphi process was used to approve each statement and a strength of recommendation was assigned using the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) criteria. RESULTS:  The literature search produced 157 articles that met the search criteria. A thorough screening of the studies for relevance to the research question resulted in 21 articles that were distributed to the panelists for review prior to the roundtable discussion. The panel unanimously voted to adopt 7 consensus statements and recommendations, 6 of which were given a strength of "A" and 1 of which was given a strength of "C". CONCLUSION:  The 40-GEP test provides accurate and independent prognostic information beyond standard staging systems that only incorporate pathologic data. Incorporation of GEP testing into national guidelines can help further stratify patients based on risk of metastasis and thus may improve morbidity and mortality. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22(12):54-60.   doi:10.36849/JDD.7691.

Incorporating a Prognostic Gene Expression Profile Test into the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: An Expert Consensus Panel Report.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is a growing health concern with a rapidly increasing incidence. Disease-specific mortality is typically preceded by a metastasis, but current staging systems have significant limitations in predicting this event. The 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test is a validated method of further stratifying patients based on the risk of regional or distant metastasis, but limited guidelines exist for incorporating this test into clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: To review the available literature on the use of gene expression profile (GEP) testing to assess prognosis in cSCC and create consensus statements to guide dermatology clinicians on its use. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus was completed for English-language original research articles on the use of GEP testing to assess cSCC prognosis. A panel of 8 dermatologists with significant expertise in diagnosing and managing cSCC gathered to review the articles and create consensus statements. A modified Delphi process was used to approve each statement and a strength of recommendation was assigned using the Strength of Recommendation Taxonomy (SORT) criteria. RESULTS: The literature search produced 157 articles that met the search criteria. A thorough screening of the studies for relevance to the research question resulted in 21 articles that were distributed to the panelists for review prior to the roundtable discussion. The panel unanimously voted to adopt 7 consensus statements and recommendations, 6 of which were given a strength of "A" and 1 of which was given a strength of "C". CONCLUSION: The 40-GEP test provides accurate and independent prognostic information beyond standard staging systems that only incorporate pathologic data. Incorporation of GEP testing into national guidelines can help further stratify patients based on risk of metastasis and thus may improve morbidity and mortality. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22(12): doi:10.36849/JDD.7691e.

AAD/ACMS/ASDSA/ASMS 2012 appropriate use criteria for Mohs micrographic surgery: a report of the American Academy of Dermatology, American College of Mohs Surgery, American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association, and the American Society for Mohs Surgery.

The appropriate use criteria process synthesizes evidence-based medicine, clinical practice experience, and expert judgment. The American Academy of Dermatology in collaboration with the American College of Mohs Surgery, the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association, and the American Society for Mohs Surgery has developed appropriate use criteria for 270 scenarios for which Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is frequently considered based on tumor and patient characteristics. This document reflects the rating of appropriateness of MMS for each of these clinical scenarios by a ratings panel in a process based on the appropriateness method developed by the RAND Corp (Santa Monica, CA)/University of California-Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA). At the conclusion of the rating process, consensus was reached for all 270 (100%) scenarios by the Ratings Panel, with 200 (74.07%) deemed as appropriate, 24 (8.89%) as uncertain, and 46 (17.04%) as inappropriate. For the 69 basal cell carcinoma scenarios, 53 were deemed appropriate, 6 uncertain, and 10 inappropriate. For the 143 squamous cell carcinoma scenarios, 102 were deemed appropriate, 7 uncertain, and 34 inappropriate. For the 12 lentigo maligna and melanoma in situ scenarios, 10 were deemed appropriate, 2 uncertain, and 0 inappropriate. For the 46 rare cutaneous malignancies scenarios, 35 were deemed appropriate, 9 uncertain, and 2 inappropriate. These appropriate use criteria have the potential to impact health care delivery, reimbursement policy, and physician decision making on patient selection for MMS, and aim to optimize the use of MMS for scenarios in which the expected clinical benefit is anticipated to be the greatest. In addition, recognition of those scenarios rated as uncertain facilitates an understanding of areas that would benefit from further research. Each clinical scenario identified in this document is crafted for the average patient and not the exception. Thus, the ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of MMS should be determined by the expertise and clinical experience of the physician.

AAD/ACMS/ASDSA/ASMS 2012 appropriate use criteria for Mohs micrographic surgery: a report of the American Academy of Dermatology, American College of Mohs Surgery, American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association, and the American Society for Mohs Surgery.

The appropriate use criteria process synthesizes evidence-based medicine, clinical practice experience, and expert judgment. The American Academy of Dermatology in collaboration with the American College of Mohs Surgery, the American Society for Dermatologic Surgery Association, and the American Society for Mohs Surgery has developed appropriate use criteria for 270 scenarios for which Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) is frequently considered based on tumor and patient characteristics. This document reflects the rating of appropriateness of MMS for each of these clinical scenarios by a ratings panel in a process based on the appropriateness method developed by the RAND Corp (Santa Monica, CA)/University of California-Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA). At the conclusion of the rating process, consensus was reached for all 270 (100%) scenarios by the Ratings Panel, with 200 (74.07%) deemed as appropriate, 24 (8.89%) as uncertain, and 46 (17.04%) as inappropriate. For the 69 basal cell carcinoma scenarios, 53 were deemed appropriate, 6 uncertain, and 10 inappropriate. For the 143 squamous cell carcinoma scenarios, 102 were deemed appropriate, 7 uncertain, and 34 inappropriate. For the 12 lentigo maligna and melanoma in situ scenarios, 10 were deemed appropriate, 2 uncertain, and 0 inappropriate. For the 46 rare cutaneous malignancies scenarios, 35 were deemed appropriate, 9 uncertain, and 2 inappropriate. These appropriate use criteria have the potential to impact health care delivery, reimbursement policy, and physician decision making on patient selection for MMS, and aim to optimize the use of MMS for scenarios in which the expected clinical benefit is anticipated to be the greatest. In addition, recognition of those scenarios rated as uncertain facilitates an understanding of areas that would benefit from further research. Each clinical scenario identified in this document is crafted for the average patient and not the exception. Thus, the ultimate decision regarding the appropriateness of MMS should be determined by the expertise and clinical experience of the physician.