Skin cancers are the most frequent cancers in fair-skinned populations, but we can prevent them.

Cancers of the skin are the most commonly occurring cancers in humans. In fair-skinned populations, up to 95% of keratinocyte skin cancers and 70-95% of cutaneous melanomas are caused by ultraviolet radiation and are thus theoretically preventable. Currently, however, there is no comprehensive global advice on practical steps to be taken to reduce the toll of skin cancer. To address this gap, an expert working group comprising clinicians and researchers from Africa, America, Asia, Australia, and Europe, together with learned societies (European Association of Dermato-Oncology, Euromelanoma, Euroskin, European Union of Medical Specialists, and the Melanoma World Society) reviewed the extant evidence and issued the following evidence-based recommendations for photoprotection as a strategy to prevent skin cancer. Fair skinned people, especially children, should minimise their exposure to ultraviolet radiation, and are advised to use protective measures when the UV index is forecast to reach 3 or higher. Protective measures include a combination of seeking shade, physical protection (e.g. clothing, hat, sunglasses), and applying broad-spectrum, SPF 30 + sunscreens to uncovered skin. Intentional exposure to solar ultraviolet radiation for the purpose of sunbathing and tanning is considered an unhealthy behaviour and should be avoided. Similarly, use of solaria and other artificial sources of ultraviolet radiation to encourage tanning should be strongly discouraged, through regulation if necessary. Primary prevention of skin cancer has a positive return on investment. We encourage policymakers to communicate these messages to the general public and promote their wider implementation.

Early diagnosis of melanoma: a randomized trial assessing the impact of the transmission of photographs taken with a smartphone from the general practitioner to the dermatologist on the time to dermatological consultation.

BACKGROUND: Difficulty obtaining a dermatological consultation is an obstacle to the early diagnosis of melanoma. On the one hand, patients survival depends on the lesion thickness at the time of diagnosis. On the other hand, dermatologists treat many patients with benign lesions. Optimizing patient care pathways is a major concern. The aim of the present study was to assess whether the e-mail transmission of photographs of suspected melanoma lesions between general practitioners (GPs) and dermatologists reduces the time to dermatological consultation for patients whose suspicious skin lesions ultimately require resection. METHODS: We conducted a cluster-randomized controlled study in primary care involving 51 French GPs between April 2017 and August 2019. A total of 250 patients referred to a dermatologist for a suspected melanoma lesion were included GPs were randomized to either the smartphone arm or the usual care arm. In the smartphone arm, the GPs referred patients to the dermatologist by sending 2 photographs of the suspicious lesion using their smartphone. The dermatologist then had to set up an appointment at an appropriate time. In the usual care arm, GPs referred patients to a dermatologist according to their usual practice. The primary outcome was the time to dermatological consultation for patients whose lesion ultimately required resection. RESULTS: 57 GPs volunteered were randomized (27 to the smartphone arm, and 30 to the usual care arm). A total of 125 patients were included in each arm (mean age: 49.8 years; 53% women) and followed 8 months. Twenty-three dermatologists participated in the study. The time to dermatological consultation for patients whose suspicious skin lesion required resection was 56.5 days in the smartphone arm and 63.7 days in the usual care arm (mean adjusted time reduction: -18.5 days, 95% CI [-74.1;23.5], p = .53). CONCLUSIONS: The e-mail transmission of photographs from GPs to dermatologists did not improve the dermatological management of patients whose suspicious skin lesions ultimately required resection. Further research is needed to validate quality criteria that might be useful for tele-expertise in dermatology. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registered on ClinicalTrials.gov under reference number NCT03137511 (May 2, 2017).

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of actinic keratoses, epithelial UV-induced dysplasia and field cancerization on behalf of European Association of Dermato-Oncology, European Dermatology Forum, European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology and Union of Medical Specialists (Union Européenne des Médecins Spécialistes).

A collaboration of multidisciplinary experts from the European Association of Dermato-Oncology, the European Dermatology Forum, the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology, and the European Union of Medical Specialists was formed to develop European recommendations on AK diagnosis and treatment, based on current literature and expert consensus. This guideline addresses the epidemiology, diagnostics, risk stratification and treatments in immunocompetent as well as immunosuppressed patients. Actinic keratoses (AK) are potential precursors of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and display typical histopathologic and immunohistochemical features of this malignancy in an early stage. They can develop into cSSC in situ and become invasive in a low percentage of cases. AK is the most frequent neoplasia in white populations, frequently occurring within a cancerous field induced by ultraviolet radiation. Since it cannot be predicted, which lesion will progress to cSCC and when treatment is usually recommended. The diagnosis of AK and field cancerization is made by clinical examination. Dermatoscopy, confocal microscopy, optical coherence tomography or line-field confocal-OCT can help in the differential diagnosis of AK and other skin neoplasms. A biopsy is indicated in clinically and/or dermatoscopically suspicious and/or treatment-refractory lesions. The choice of treatment depends on patients' and lesion characteristics. For single non-hyperkeratotic lesions, the treatment can be started upon patient's request with destructive treatments or topical treatments. For multiple lesions, field cancerization treatment is advised with topical treatments and photodynamic therapy. Preventive measures such as sun protection, self-examination and repeated field cancerization treatments of previously affected skin areas in high-risk patients are advised.

High response rate with extended dosing of cemiplimab in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cemiplimab (Libtayo®), a human monoclonal immunoglobulin G4 antibody to the programmed cell death-1 receptor, is approved for the treatment of patients with advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC), who are not candidates for curative surgery or curative radiation, using an every-3-weeks (Q3W) dosing interval. Pharmacokinetic modeling indicated that Ctrough of extended intravenous dosing of 600 mg every 4 weeks (Q4W) would be comparable to the approved intravenous dosage of 350 mg Q3W. We examined the efficacy, pharmacokinetics, and safety of cemiplimab dosed Q4W. METHODS: In this open-label, phase II trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02760498), the cohort of patients ≥18 years old with advanced CSCC received cemiplimab 600 mg intravenously Q4W for up to 48 weeks. Tumor measurements were recorded every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response rate by independent central review. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients with advanced CSCC were treated with cemiplimab. The median duration of follow-up was 22.4 months (range: 1.0-39.8). An objective response was observed in 39 patients (62%; 95% CI: 48.8% to 73.9%), with 22% of patients (n=14) achieving complete response and 40% (n=25) achieving partial response. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were diarrhea, pruritus, and fatigue. CONCLUSIONS: Extended dosing of cemiplimab 600 mg intravenously Q4W exhibited substantial antitumor activity, rapid and durable responses, and an acceptable safety profile in patients with advanced CSCC. These results confirm that cemiplimab is a highly active therapy for advanced CSCC. Additional data would help ascertain the benefit-risk profile for the 600 mg intravenous dosing regimen compared with the approved regimen.

Isotretinoin-associated acne fulminans: A multicentre, retrospective study of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology Task Force on Acne, Rosacea and Hidradenitis Suppurativa.

BACKGROUND: Acne fulminans (AF) is a rare severe acne entity. Although occasionally reported, it is unclear whether AF development is associated with oral isotretinoin treatment. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the occurrence of isotretinoin-associated AF, clinical characteristics and prognosis at follow-up. METHODS: An international, multicentre, retrospective study was performed in eight hospitals following the call of the EADV Task Force on Acne, Rosacea and Hidradenitis Suppurativa (ARHS). Characteristics of patients treated with isotretinoin before the development of AF (isotretinoin-associated acne fulminans, IAF) were compared with non-IAF (NAF). RESULTS: Forty-nine patients diagnosed with AF from 2008 to 2022 were included (mean age 16.4 years, SD 2.9, 77.6% male). Αrthralgias/arthritis occurred in 11 patients (22.9%). AF occurred without any previous acne treatment in 26.5% of the patients. Overall, 28 patients (57.1%) developed AF after oral isotretinoin intake (IAF group), while the remaining 21 patients (42.9%) developed AF without previous oral isotretinoin administration (NAF group). IAF occurred after a median duration of isotretinoin treatment of 45 days (IQR: 30, 90). Patients with IAF were more frequently male compared to patients with NAF (89.3% vs. 61.9%, respectively, p = 0.023). There were no differences in patients with IAF versus NAF in patient age, the duration of pre-existing acne, a family history of AF, the distribution of AF lesions or the presence of systemic symptoms or arthralgias. Regarding the management of AF, patients with IAF were treated more frequently with prednisolone (96.2%) compared to those with NAF (70%; p = 0.033) and less frequently with isotretinoin (32.1%) compared to NAF (85.7%; p < 0.001). At a median follow-up of 2.2 years, 76.4% of patients were free of AF and scarring was present in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: No specific clinical or demographic characteristics of IAF compared with NAF could be detected, a fact that does not support IAF as a district clinical entity.

The role of dermocosmetics in the management of cancer-related skin toxicities: international expert consensus.

Skin toxicities are very common in patients undergoing cancer treatment and have been found to occur with all types of cancer therapeutic interventions (cytotoxic chemotherapy, targeted therapies, immunotherapy, and radiotherapy). Further, skin toxicities can lead to interruption or even discontinuation of anticancer treatment in some patients, translating to suboptimal outcomes. Dermocosmetics (or cosmeceuticals)-defined as skincare solutions incorporating dermatologically active ingredients (beyond vehicle effects) that directly improve symptoms of various skin conditions-are increasingly being used in cancer care to prevent and manage skin toxicities. The active ingredients in these products have a measurable biological action in skin; they typically improve skin integrity (barrier function/hydration and other factors) while relieving skin symptoms. The Association Francophone des Soins Oncologiques de Support (AFSOS) and Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) partnered to select a multidisciplinary group of healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients with cancer and skin toxicities. The group reviewed existing literature and created a summary of recommendations for managing these toxicities through online meetings and communication. In this publication, the group (1) reviews new skin toxicities seen with oncology drugs and (2) evaluates the role of dermocosmetics in improving patient outcomes and minimizing cancer treatment interruptions. We provide general recommendations for initiation and selection of skin care in all oncology patients as well as recommendations for what factors should be considered when using dermocosmetics in specific types of skin toxicities.

Differential gradients of immunotherapy vs targeted therapy efficacy according to the sun-exposure pattern of the site of occurrence of primary melanoma: a multicenter prospective cohort study (MelBase).

Background: The tumor mutational burden (TMB) is high in melanomas owing to UV-induced oncogenesis. While a high TMB is a predictive biomarker of response to PD-1 inhibitors, it may be associated with the rise of resistant clones to targeted therapy over time. We hypothesized that survivals may depend on both the sun-exposure profile of the site of primary melanoma and the type of systemic treatment. Patients and methods: Patients were screened from MelBase, a multicenter biobank dedicated to the prospective follow-up of stage III/IV melanoma. All patients with a known cutaneous primary melanoma who received a 1st-line systemic treatment by immunotherapy or targeted therapy were included (2013-2019). Outcomes were progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results: 973 patients received either anti PD-1(n=466), anti CTLA-4(n=143), a combination of both (n=118), or targeted therapies (n=246). Patients' characteristics at treatment initiation were: male (62%), median age of 62, AJCC stage IV (84%). Median follow-up was 15.5 months. The primary melanoma was located on chronically sun-exposed skin in 202 patients (G1: head neck), on intermittently sun-exposed skin in 699 patients (G2: trunk, arms, legs), and on sun-protected areas in 72 patients (G3: palms, soles). Median PFS was significantly higher in G1 under anti PD-1 treatment (8.7 months vs 3.3 and 3.4 months for G2 and G3, respectively) (p=0.011). PFS did not significantly differ in other groups. Similarly, median OS was significantly higher in G1 receiving 1st line anti PD-1 treatment (45.6 months vs 31.6 and 21.4 months for G2 and G3) (p=0.04), as opposed to 1st line targeted therapy (19.5 months vs 16.3 and 21.1 months for G1, G2 and G3 respectively). Conclusion: Our study confirms that immunotherapy with anti PD-1 is particularly recommended for melanomas originating from chronically sun-exposed areas, but this finding needs to be confirmed by further research.

Long-term benefits of a therapeutic make-up consultation for patients with various facial dermatoses.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic make-up has previously been proven to be efficacious in improving the quality of life of patients with facial dermatoses, but its efficacy has only been assessed in the short term (less than one month). OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether the effect of therapeutic make-up on patients' quality of life persists in the longer term, i.e., after one year. MATERIALS & METHODS: This study included 53 patients who benefited from a therapeutic make-up consultation in the context of various facial dermatoses (pigmentation disorders, scars, acne, rosacea, eczema, adverse events of chemotherapy, etc.). Patients were asked to complete a quality-of-life questionnaire to obtain the Skindex score at baseline, and one month (M1) and one year (M12) after the first consultation. The difference in scores between baseline and M12 was calculated and Student's t-test was used to assess the significance of the values. RESULTS: Our results showed a significant difference (p<0.001) with an improvement in quality-of-life score by more than 10% between baseline and M12, for all the dimensions of the score (Emotion, Symptoms and Functioning). Based on the subgroup analysis, this score particularly improved for patients suffering with acne or rosacea (p=0.009) and scars (p=0.43), as well as for younger patients (<30 years old) (p=0.009). CONCLUSION: This is the first study to demonstrate a persistent long-term effect of therapeutic make-up on the quality of life of patients with facial dermatoses.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Part 1: Diagnostics and prevention-Update 2023.

Invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common cancers in white populations, accounting for 20% of all cutaneous malignancies. Overall, cSCC mostly has very good prognosis after treatment, with 5-year cure rates greater than 90%. Despite the overall favourable prognosis and the proportionally rare deaths, cSCC is associated with a high total number of deaths due to its high incidence. A collaboration of multidisciplinary 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 Organization of Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC), was formed to update recommendations on cSCC, based on current literature and expert consensus. Part 1 of the guidelines addresses the updates on classification, epidemiology, diagnosis, risk stratification, staging and prevention in immunocompetent as well as immunosuppressed patients.

European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline for invasive cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: Part 2. Treatment-Update 2023.

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.

Sun exposure behaviours as a compromise to paradoxical injunctions: Insight from a worldwide survey.

BACKGROUND: Behavioural interventions can improve attitudes towards sun protection but the impact remains inconsistent worldwide. OBJECTIVE: To assess awareness of and attitudes towards the multiple facets of sun exposure and suggest ways to improve prevention from overexposure to the sun in all geographical zones and multiple skin types. METHODS: Online survey was conducted from 28 September to 18 October 2021. Study population was selected from the Ipsos online Panel (3,540,000 panellists), aged ≥18 years, from 17 countries around the five continents. Demographics, sun-exposure habits and practices, understanding of risks and information on phototypes were documented and analysed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Eighty-eight per cent of participants knew that sunlight can cause skin health problems (90% phototypes I-II, 82% phototypes V-VI, >90% in American and European countries, 72% in Asia and 85% in Africa). Eighty-five per cent used some form of protection against sunlight, predominantly: Seeking shade (77%), avoiding the midday sun (66%), facial application of sunscreen (60%) and wearing protective clothing (44%). The perception of sunlight itself is positive ('it gives energy' for 82%; 'tanned skin looks attractive' for 72%), although less in Asian countries and among individuals with dark skin phototypes. Eighty-three per cent reported having experienced sunburn, mainly in Australia, Canada, USA, Germany, France and Russia, and among individuals with dark skin phototypes. Only 12% systematically/often used all types of protection during exposure to the sun and 23% believed it is safe to go out in the sun with no protection when their skin is already tanned. From 13% (skin phototype I) to 26% (phototype VI) reported not using any form of protection against the sun. Knowledge and habits were significantly superior among people who are accustomed to seeing a dermatologist for a complete skin exam. CONCLUSIONS: Dermatologists could play a crucial role in relaying novel prevention messages, more finely tailored to specific risks, populations and areas of the world.

Smart e-Skin Cancer Care in Europe During and after the Covid-19 Pandemic: a Multidisciplinary Expert Consensus.

INTRODUCTION: Melanoma is the deadliest of all the skin cancers and its incidence is increasing every year in Europe. Patients with melanoma often present late to the specialist and treatment is delayed for many reasons (delay in patient consultation, misdiagnosis by general practitioners, and/or limited access to dermatologists). Beyond this, there are significant inequalities in skin cancer between population groups within the same country and between countries across Europe. The emergence of the COVID-19 pandemic only aggravated these health deficiencies. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to create an expert opinion about the challenges in skin cancer management in Europe during the post COVID-19 acute pandemic and to identify and discuss the implementation of new technologies (including e-health and artificial intelligence defined as "Smart Skin Cancer Care") to overcome them. METHODS: For this purpose, an ad-hoc questionnaire with items addressing topics of skin cancer care was developed, answered independently and discussed by a multidisciplinary European panel of experts comprising dermatologists, dermato-oncologists, patient advocacy representatives, digital health technology experts, and health technology assessment experts. RESULTS: After all panel of experts discussions, a multidisciplinary expert opinion was created. CONCLUSIONS: As a conclusion, the access to dermatologists is difficult and will be aggravated in the near future. This fact, together with important differences in Skin Cancer Care in Europe, suggest the need of a new approach to skin health, prevention and disease management paradigm (focused on integration of new technologies) to minimize the impact of skin cancer and to ensure optimal quality and equity.

Machine learning algorithm to predict response to immunotherapy in real-life settings for patients with advanced melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Melanoma is one of the most fatal forms of skin cancer. Defining relevant biomarkers to predict treatment outcome based on immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is needed in order to increase overall survival of metastatic melanoma patients (MM). OBJECTIVES: This study compared different machine learning models in terms of performance to identify biomarkers from clinical diagnosis and follow-up of MM patients, to predict treatment response to ICIs under real-life conditions. MATERIALS & METHODS: Clinical data from melanoma patients with an AJCC status of III C/D or IV, having received ICIs, were extracted from the RIC-MEL database for this pilot study. Light Gradient Boosting Machine, linear regression, Random Forest (RF), Support Vector Machine and Extreme Gradient Boosting were compared in terms of performance. The SHAP (SHapley Additive exPlanations) method was used to assess the link between the different clinical features investigated and the prediction of response to ICIs. RESULTS: RF showed the highest scores for accuracy (0.63) and sensitivity (0.64) and high scores for precision (0.61) and specificity (0.63). AJCC stage (0.076) showed the highest SHAP mean value, thus being the most suitable feature to predict response to treatment. The number of metastatic sites per year (0.049), number of months since first treatment initiation and the Breslow index (both 0.032) were less predictive, but still showed relatively high predictive power. CONCLUSION: This machine learning approach confirms that a certain number of biomarkers may enable prediction of treatment success with ICIs.

Analysis of cost-effectiveness of chemotherapeutic agents and new therapies for the management of unresectable and metastatic melanoma.

BACKGROUND: The advent of targeted therapies and immunotherapies has revolutionized metastatic melanoma (MM) management but their use is associated with high daily costs compared to chemotherapies: €2 for dacarbazine versus €175 for immunotherapies and €413 for targeted therapies. While overall survival (OS) has increased, healthcare expenditures are expected to double by 2030. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to estimate the median OS and costs for MM patients in order to evaluate the effectiveness of new biological or targeted therapies (NT) used since 2013 compared to chemotherapies. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was a retrospective monocentric cost-effectiveness analysis performed in CHU Nantes (Nantes University Hospital). All MM patients treated with conventional chemotherapy as first-line treatment between 2008 and 2012 were included (CHEMO group). The same number of patients treated with NT as first-line between 2013 and 2017 were included (NT group). RESULTS: In total, 161 patients were included in each group. The mean age at diagnosis was 64.7±2.4 years in the CHEMO group and 65.3±2.4 years in the NT group (not significant). The men/women ratio was 1.48 and 1.27, respectively, (not significant). The median OS was 158 days in the CHEMO group and 395 days in the NT group (p<0.001). Treatment cost was €10,280/patient versus €94,676/patient, respectively. The mean incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was €90,184/LY (95% CI: €59,637; €166,395). CONCLUSION: Our study assessed clinical and economic features associated with MM management before and after the advent of NT. Costs and life expectancy have increased. NT appears to be cost-effective.

Panniculitis does not predict clinical response in patients with advanced melanoma under targeted therapy.

BACKGROUND: BRAF and MEK inhibitors have changed the landscape of treatment for advanced melanoma. Among their side effects, panniculitis has been hypothesized to be associated with better survival. OBJECTIVES: In this study, we aimed to explore the association between the occurrence of panniculitis during targeted therapy and outcome of metastatic melanoma. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was a retrospective single-centre comparative study from 2014 to 2019. An English literature review was also conducted to further our understanding of the mechanism(s) involved and identify characteristics of this association, in order to support better management. RESULTS: Ten patients who developed panniculitis during treatment were matched to 26 controls based on potential confounders at treatment introduction. The prevalence of panniculitis was 5.3%. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 8.5 months (range: 3.0-94.0). The median PFS for the group with panniculitis was 10.5 months (7.0-undefined) and 7.0 months (6.0-32.0) for controls (p=0.39). According to the scientific literature, panniculitis occurring during targeted therapy affects mainly young people, predominantly women, with variable delay to onset (with half reported cases occurring in the first month). In addition, panniculitis usually only affects the lower limbs or is associated with other clinical signs (fever, arthralgia), without histological specificity. Discontinuation of targeted therapy is not required as spontaneous remission is usually experienced. Symptomatic treatment may be administered but systemic corticosteroids have not been proven to be effective. CONCLUSION: In contrast to the belief that there is a link between panniculitis and clinical response to targeted therapy according to the literature, our results show that there is no significant association between the two.

Long-term strategies for management of advanced basal cell carcinoma with hedgehog inhibitors.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC), the most common type of skin cancer, is characterized by aberrant activation of the hedgehog molecular pathway. Systemic therapy is indicated when local approaches, such as surgery and radiation, are inappropriate. In this article, a group of clinical experts recommends the long-term management strategy for advanced BCC patients treated with systemic therapy. The hedgehog inhibitors sonidegib and vismodegib are first-line treatments for advanced BCC with a long-lasting response, but long-term treatment with hedgehog inhibitors is often challenged by tolerability issues. However, several strategies for adverse effect management are available, such as dose interruptions, on-label alternate-day dosing and supportive medications. In conclusion, although BCC shows a high tumor mutational burden that favors a response to immunotherapy, experts recommend keeping patients on hedgehog inhibitors limiting immunotherapy to those who developed resistance during hedgehog inhibitor therapy or in case of persisting toxicity despite long-term management of adverse events.

First-Line, Fixed-Duration Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Followed by Nivolumab in Clinically Diverse Patient Populations With Unresectable Stage III or IV Melanoma: CheckMate 401.

PURPOSE: To address the paucity of data in patients with historically poor outcomes, we conducted the single-arm phase IIIb CheckMate 401 study to evaluate the safety and efficacy of nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy in clinically diverse patient populations with advanced melanoma. METHODS: Treatment-naive patients with unresectable stage III-IV melanoma received nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg once every 3 weeks (four doses) followed by nivolumab 3 mg/kg (240 mg following a protocol amendment) once every 2 weeks for ≤24 months. The primary end point was the incidence of grade 3-5 select treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Overall survival (OS) was a secondary end point. Outcomes were evaluated in subgroups defined by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS), brain metastasis status, and melanoma subtype. RESULTS: In total, 533 patients received at least one dose of study drug. Grade 3-5 select TRAEs affecting the GI (16%), hepatic (15%), endocrine (11%), skin (7%), renal (2%), and pulmonary (1%) systems occurred in the all-treated population; similar incidence rates were observed across all subgroups. At 21.6 months' median follow-up, 24-month OS rates were 63% in the all-treated population, 44% in the ECOG PS 2 subgroup (including patients with cutaneous melanoma only), 71% in the brain metastasis subgroup, 36% in the ocular/uveal melanoma subgroup, and 38% in the mucosal melanoma subgroup. CONCLUSION: Nivolumab plus ipilimumab followed by nivolumab monotherapy was tolerable in patients with advanced melanoma and poor prognostic characteristics. Efficacy was similar between the all-treated population and patients with brain metastases. Reduced efficacy was observed in patients with ECOG PS 2, ocular/uveal melanoma, and/or mucosal melanoma, highlighting the continued need for novel treatment options for these difficult-to-treat patients.