An Over-the-Counter Healing Ointment: Benefits in Dry Skin and Wound Healing.

BACKGROUND: The use of ointments can be beneficial for dry, chapped, or cracked skin and also for supporting wound healing. We describe the results of 2 studies with an over-the-counter healing ointment (HO) to evaluate the effects on skin hydration and in the setting of wound healing after dermatologic procedures.  Methods: Study 1 was a single-center, in-use study using HO on qualified areas at least once daily for 4 weeks in subjects with dry, cracked body skin and self-perceived sensitive skin. Study 2 was a multi-center study of wound healing in subjects using HO on a daily basis after having dermatologic surgical procedures.  Results: In Study 1, there was a significant reduction in skin dryness after 1 and 4 weeks of HO use (P<0.05). Image analysis of the skin revealed a significant increase in skin smoothness after the first application of HO in 100% of subjects (P<0.05). Tolerability and safety were excellent, and HO was well-perceived by subjects throughout the study. In Study 2, HO improved clinical assessments at all time points compared with baseline with a decrease in erythema, edema, scabbing/crusting, and an improvement in overall wound appearance (P<0.05). There was no worsening or significant increase in measures for tolerability parameters at any study visits. Additionally, HO achieved a favorable perception by study subjects.  Conclusions: HO has a well-established safety profile and has been shown to improve both skin hydration and the overall wound healing process after dermatologic surgical procedures. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(5):360-365. doi:10.36849/JDD.8224.

Improving systemic therapy selection for inflammatory skin diseases: A clinical need survey.

Background: Empirical decisions to select therapies for psoriasis (PSO) and atopic dermatitis (AD) can lead to delays in disease control and increased health care costs. However, routine molecular testing for AD and PSO are lacking. Objective: To examine (1) how clinicians choose systemic therapies for patients with PSO and AD without molecular testing and (2) to determine how often the current approach leads to patients switching medications. Methods: A 20-question survey designed to assess clinician strategies for systemic treatment of AD and PSO was made available to attendees of a national dermatology conference in 2022. Results: Clinicians participating in the survey (265/414, 64% response rate) ranked "reported efficacy" as the most important factor governing treatment choice (P < .001). However, 62% (165/265) of clinicians estimated that 2 or more systemic medications were typically required to achieve efficacy. Over 90% (239/265) of respondents would or would likely find a molecular test to guide therapeutic selection useful. Limitations: To facilitate ease of recall, questions focused on systemic therapies as a whole and not individual therapies. Conclusion: Clinicians want a molecular test to help determine the most efficacious drug for individual patients.

A clinical impact study of dermatologists' use of diagnostic gene expression profile testing to guide patient management.

Aim: Cutaneous melanocytic neoplasms with diagnostic and/or clinical ambiguity pose patient management challenges. Methods: Six randomized case scenarios with diagnostic/clinical uncertainty were described with/without a benign or malignant diagnostic gene expression profile (GEP) result. Results: Clinical impact was assessed by reporting the mean increase/decrease of management changes normalized to baseline (n = 32 dermatologists). Benign GEP results prompted clinicians to decrease surgical margins (84.2%). Malignant GEP results escalated surgical excision recommendations (100%). A majority (72.2%) reduced and nearly all (98.9%) increased follow-up frequency for benign or malignant GEP results, respectively. There was an overall increase in management plan confidence with GEP results. Conclusion: Diagnostic GEP tests help guide clinical decision-making in a variety of diagnostically ambiguous or clinicopathologically discordant scenarios.

Dermatologists' use of diagnostic gene expression profiles for personalized patient care. When your doctor takes a piece of a mole, that mole is looked at under the microscope by a pathologist. The pathologist is responsible for figuring out if the mole is dangerous or not. Dangerous moles are removed with surgery to make sure all the dangerous tissue is gone. Moles without a health threat are left alone. Sometimes figuring out how dangerous a mole is is difficult. The pathologist may not provide the doctor with enough information for them to know how to treat your mole. There is a test that can provide information on whether your mole is unsafe. This test is called diagnostic gene expression profiling or GEP. In this study, GEP is used to help doctors figure out how to treat a mole and how often the patient should be seen in the office for skin checks. With GEP, important changes in patient treatment were identified. These include the need for an additional surgery, how much healthy tissue should be removed during surgery and how often the patient should be seen in the office. For suspicious moles where the pathology report is unclear, GEP can provide information that leads to more appropriate and personalized patient care.

Ancillary diagnostic gene expression profile testing for ambiguous cutaneous melanocytic lesions helps optimize dermatologist recommendations for excision margin and follow-up.

Inconsistent Associations Between Risk Factor Profiles and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy (ART) Treatment in Patients with Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Utility of the 40-Gene Expression Profile to Refine ART Guidance.

INTRODUCTION: National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) recommendations for adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) use are similar for High Risk and Very High Risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) with negative post-surgical margins. Although studies report reductions in disease progression following ART treatment, ART use is likely inconsistent when guided by available risk factors. This study evaluated the association of ART with clinical risk factors in ART-treated and untreated patients and showed the clinical utility of the 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) for guiding ART. METHODS: A multicenter study of 954 patients was conducted with institutional review board (IRB) approval. The 40-GEP test was performed using primary tumor tissue from patients with either a minimum of 3 years of follow-up or a documented regional or distant metastasis. Unsupervised hierarchical cluster analysis identified patterns of clinical risk factors for ART-treated patients, then identified untreated patients with matching risk factor profiles. Results were cross-referenced to 40-GEP test results to determine utility of the test to guide ART. RESULTS: Analysis demonstrated inconsistent implementation of ART for eligible patients. Cluster analysis identified four patient profiles based on clusters of risk factors and, notably, matching profiles in ART-treated and untreated patients. Further, the analysis identified patients who received but could have deferred ART on the basis of 40-GEP test result and biologically low risk of metastasis, and untreated patients who likely would have benefitted from ART on the basis of their 40-GEP test result. CONCLUSIONS: ART guidance is not determined by the presence of specific clinicopathologic factors, with treated and untreated patients sharing the same risk factor profiles. cSCC risk determination based on NCCN recommendations for clinical factor assessment results in inconsistent use of ART. Including tumor biology-based prognostic information from the 40-GEP refines risk and identifies patients who are most appropriate and likely to benefit from ART, and those that can consider deferring ART.

Integrating the 40-Gene Expression Profile (40-GEP) Test Improves Metastatic Risk-Stratification Within Clinically Relevant Subgroups of High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC) Patients.

INTRODUCTION: The validated 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test independently stratifies risk of regional or distant metastasis for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) tumors with high-risk clinicopathologic features. This study evaluated the stratification of risk by the 40-GEP test in a large cohort of tumors with one or more high-risk factors and in clinically relevant subgroups, including tumors within National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) high- and very-high-risk groups, lower-stage BWH T1 and T2a tumors, and patients > 65 years old. METHODS: This multicenter (n = 58) performance study of the 40-GEP included 897 patients. Kaplan-Meier analyses were performed to assess risk stratification profiles for 40-GEP Class 1 (low), Class 2A (higher) and Class 2B (highest) risk groups, while nested Cox regression models were used to compare risk prediction of clinicopathologic risk classification systems versus risk classification systems in combination with 40-GEP. RESULTS: Patients classified as 40-GEP Class 1, Class 2A, or Class 2B had significantly different metastatic risk profiles (p < 0.0001). Integrating 40-GEP results into models with individual clinicopathologic risk factors or risk classification systems (Brigham and Women's Hospital, American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 8th Edition) and NCCN demonstrated significant improvement in accuracy for prediction of metastatic events (ANOVA for model deviance, p < 0.0001 for all models). CONCLUSION: The 40-GEP test demonstrates accurate, independent, clinically actionable stratification of metastatic risk and improves predictive accuracy when integrated into risk classification systems. The improved accuracy of risk assessment when including tumor biology via the 40-GEP test ensures more risk-aligned, personalized patient management decisions.

Clinical and Disease Burden of Patients with Generalized Pustular Psoriasis: A Review of Real-World Evidence.

Generalized pustular psoriasis (GPP) is a chronic, rare, and potentially life-threatening disease. There is limited understanding of patient characteristics in GPP and their correlation with disease progression or healthcare resource utilization. Our review aims to examine real-world evidence on these characteristics and the associated disease burden as related to economic and quality of life factors. Results showed that most patients with GPP experienced flares once a year, lasting from 2 weeks to 3 months, with > 80% of patients having residual disease post-flare, with/without treatment, indicating the long-term nature of GPP. The impact of GPP on patients' daily activities was significant, even in the absence of a flare. GPP adversely affected mental health, and anxiety and depression were reported regularly. Patients with GPP had more comorbidities, were prescribed more medication, and had more inpatient and outpatient visits than in matched plaque psoriasis or general population cohorts. Improving the education of healthcare providers in diagnosing GPP, defining disease flares, and managing the disease, as well as making globally accepted clinical guidelines for GPP treatment available, could help to reduce the burden on patients with GPP. Effective therapies that control and prevent GPP flares and manage chronic disease are needed.

Use of the 40-gene Expression Profile (40-GEP) Test in Medicare-eligible Patients Diagnosed with Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC) to Guide Adjuvant Radiation Therapy (ART) Decisions Leads to a Significant Reduction in Healthcare Costs.

Objective: Adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) is often recommended for high-risk cSCC patients but carries significant costs and risks. This study aims to determine if utilizing the 40-GEP test to guide ART can reduce healthcare costs in cSCC management. Methods: Medical claims data with new diagnoses of cSCC for the 12 months ending June 2022 in the Medicare (≥65 years) population (source: IQVIA claims database) were obtained and normalized to the general population for missingness. CPT codes associated with radiation therapy within one-year post diagnosis were used to establish adjuvant RT use (defined as 'ART'). Average weighted direct costs for four major ART modalities were calculated from published studies and (IQVIA). Sensitivity analysis was used to assess the financial impact of ART treatment using varying distributions of 40-GEP Class results. Results: Normalized medical claims data identified 22,917 Medicare-eligible cSCC patients who received ART within the United States. The weighted average direct cost for ART, which includes the four most used CPT code-defined modalities (IGRT, IMRT, IMPT, and XRT), was $60,693 per patient, amounting to an annual projected ART cost of $1.4 billion. Using the distribution of 40-GEP results from published studies, utilization of a 40-GEP test result to avoid ART in these patients could save up to $972 million in Medicare-eligible population. Sensitivity analysis shows, depending upon the distribution of the 40-GEP results, that for every 10% of Class 2A test results omitting ART, an extra $38-66 million in annual savings is expected. Limitations: Potential limitations include a need for more comprehensive patient information and the cost of ART-related complications. Conclusion: Utilizing the 40-GEP test results to guide ART decision-making would result in material savings to Medicare.

Nonulcerated Necrobiosis Lipoidica Successfully Treated with Tapinarof: A Case Report.

Necrobiosis lipoidica (NL) is a chronic granulomatous disorder of the skin which usually presents with red papules and plaques on the lower extremities. Diabetes mellitus has been found to be associated with NL, but the pathophysiology of the disease is unknown. Based on a Doppler flowmetry study showing increased blood flow at NL lesions and the macrophage upregulation of granulomatous disorders, it is reasonable to conclude that there is an inflammatory component to it. NL is extremely challenging to manage. The initial treatment of choice is usually topical or intralesional corticosteroids, and if this fails to work, many dermatologists depend on the small number of case reports for more treatment options. We present a pre-diabetic patient with nonulcerative NL who was successfully treated with the first-in-class therapeutic aryl hydrocarbon receptor (AHR)-modulating agent tapinarof cream (VTAMA, Dermavant). Following the case presentation is a discussion of this topical novel agent and its unique anti-inflammatory mechanism of action. Tapinarof specifically binds to and activates AHR leading to downregulation of TNF-α/IL-23/IL-17 and inhibition of IL-4/IL-13 mediated STAT6 activation. Anti-TNF-α agents and JAK-inhibitors have also been found to be beneficial in treating NL; tapinarof seems to target both these pathways without the risk of their serious adverse reactions.

Unmet Needs in the Management of Acne Vulgaris: A Consensus Statement.

Acne vulgaris is the most common skin condition in the US, affecting up to 50 million Americans. The American Academy of Dermatology (AAD) guidelines on acne treatment were developed to provide recommendations for the diagnosis, grading, and treatment of acne in adolescents and adults to support clinicians in their therapeutic decision-making process. The most recent acne guidelines were published in 2016, and the approach to care and the therapeutic landscape of acne have evolved since that time. The Acne Management Consensus Roundtable was convened in 2022 to discuss unmet needs in the management of acne. The main focus of the meeting was the role of androgens in acne pathology; the evaluation of clascoterone, the first topical anti-androgen that specifically addresses sebum production in acne; and the identification of the place of clascoterone in therapy. Clascoterone was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of acne in patients 12 years and older in 2020. This report aims to highlight important limitations of the 2016 AAD treatment guidelines and to familiarize practitioners with clascoterone and its indication, efficacy and safety profile, and potential use across diverse patient populations. With its new mechanism of action, clascoterone may be able to fulfill important unmet needs in acne treatment. Baldwin H, Farberg AS, Frey C, et al. Unmet needs in the management of acne vulgaris: a consensus statement. J Drugs Dermatol. 2023;22(6):582-587. doi:10.36849/JDD.7587.

Incorporation of the 40-Gene Expression Profile (40-GEP) Test to Improve Treatment Decisions in High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC) Patients: Case Series and Algorithm.

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) has become a significant public health issue due to its rapidly rising incidence and an estimated 1.8 million newly diagnosed cases annually. As with other cancers, treatment decisions for patients with cSCC are based primarily on a patient's risk for poor outcomes. There has been improvement in clinicopathologic factor-based risk assessment approaches, either through informal methods or ever evolving staging approaches. However, these approaches misidentify patients who will eventually have disease progression as low-risk and conversely, over classify patients as high-risk who do not experience relapse. To improve the accuracy of risk assessment for patients with cSCC, the 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test has been validated to show statistically significant stratification of a high-risk cSCC patient's risk of nodal or distant metastasis, independent of currently available risk-assessment methods. The 40-GEP test allows for a more accurate classification of metastatic risk for high-risk cSCC patients, with the aim to influence appropriate allocation of clinician time and therapeutic resources to those patients who will most benefit. The objective of this article is to present a treatment algorithm in which clinicians can easily integrate the results of the 40-GEP test into their current treatment approaches to tailor patient care based on individual tumor biology. The following modalities were considered: surveillance imaging, sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), adjuvant radiation therapy (ART), and clinical follow-up. The authors have contributed their own cases for discussion as to how they have seen the beneficial impact of 40-GEP test results in their own practice. Overall, clinicians can identify risk-aligned treatment pathway improvements with the use of the 40-GEP test for challenging to manage, high-risk cSCC patients.

A Physician's Guide to the Use of Gene Expression Profile Ancillary Diagnostic Testing for Cutaneous Melanocytic Neoplasms.

Objectives: Some melanocytic neoplasms suspicious for melanoma require additional workup to arrive at a final diagnosis. Within the last eight years, gene expression profiling (GEP) has become an important ancillary tool to aid in the diagnosis of melanocytic neoplasms with uncertain malignant potential. As the usage of two commercially available tests (23-GEP and 35-GEP) evolves, it is important to answer key questions about optimal utilization and their impact on patient care. Methods: Recent and relevant articles answering the following questions were included in the review. First, how do dermatopathologists synthesize the available literature, the latest guidelines, and their clinical experience to determine which cases would be most likely to benefit from GEP testing? Second, how best can a dermatologist convey to their dermatopathologist that the use of GEP in the diagnostic process could provide a more clearly defined result and thereby help empower the dermatologist to provide higher-quality patient care when making specific patient management decisions for otherwise pathologically ambiguous lesions? Results: When interpreted in the context of the clinical, pathologic, and laboratory information, GEP results can facilitate the rendering of timely, accurate, and definitive diagnoses for melanocytic lesions with otherwise uncertain malignant potential to inform personalized treatment and management plans. Limitations: This was a narrative review focused on clinical use of GEP compared to other ancillary diagnostic tests performed postbiopsy. Conclusion: Open communication between dermatopathologists and dermatologists, especially regarding GEP testing, can be a vital component to achieve appropriate clinicopathologic correlation for otherwise ambiguous melanocytic lesions.

Advances in Photodynamic Therapy for the Treatment of Actinic Keratosis and Nonmelanoma Skin Cancer: A Narrative Review.

Photodynamic therapy (PDT) with photosensitization using 5-aminolevulinic acid (ALA) [including a nanoemulsion (BF-200 ALA)] is approved in the USA for the treatment of actinic keratoses (AKs); another derivative, methyl aminolevulinate, is not approved in the USA but is used in Europe. For AK treatment, the photosensitizer may be applied to individual AK lesions or, depending on treatment regimen, to broader areas of sun-damaged skin to manage field cancerization, although not all products are approved for field treatment. ALA-PDT and photosensitizers have also been used off-label for the treatment of nonmelanoma skin cancers, primarily basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) and cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (cSCC). Advantages of PDT include potentially improved cosmesis and patient satisfaction; disadvantages include pain and duration of treatment. Alternative illumination approaches, including intense pulsed light as well as pulsed-dye lasers, have also been used successfully. Pretreating the affected tissue or warming during incubation can help to increase photosensitizer absorption and improve therapeutic efficacy. Combinations of multiple treatments are also under exploration. Reducing incubation time between photosensitizer application and illumination may significantly reduce pain scores without affecting treatment efficacy. Substituting daylight PDT for a conventional illumination source can also reduce pain without compromising efficacy. The objective of this narrative review is to describe current and ongoing research in the use of topical photosensitizers and modified light delivery regimens to achieve improved therapeutic outcomes with less toxicity in patients with AK, cSCC, BCC, and field cancerization.

SUPPLEMENT INDIVIDUAL ARTICLE: Bridging the Gap: Optimizing Skin Care in Acne Treatment.

To optimize the treatment of dermatologic diseases, one must recognize the interplay between maintaining the function of the skin barrier and utilizing topical medications which often disrupt the former.

Real-World Evidence Shows Clinicians Appropriately Use the Prognostic 40-Gene Expression Profile (40-GEP) Test for High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC) Patients.

Treatment decisions for patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) are traditionally based upon clinicopathologic risk factors and staging systems. Due to the accuracy limitations of these resources in predicting poor outcomes, there is a clinically significant need for more accurate methods of risk assessment. The 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test was developed to augment metastatic risk prediction of high-risk cSCC patients and has been validated in two independent, multi-center studies involving over 1,000 patients. This study substantiates that the 40-GEP is appropriately utilized by clinicians and that the personalized risk-stratification results are impactful in guiding risk-aligned patient management.

Variance from published guidelines and changes in temporal trends in the management of cutaneous malignant melanoma: a 5-year update.

This study aimed to assess the current management of melanoma from relative to present guidelines and determine changes 5 years ago. An eight-question survey was sent to practicing US dermatologists using the same methodology and questions from our JAAD study. Overall, saucerization/scoop biopsy (48%) was the most commonly used method. The most commonly chosen margin for melanoma in-situ (MMIS) removal was 6-10 mm (51% of respondents). For CMM with a depth greater than 1 mm, the most commonly chosen margins were in the 1.1-1.9 cm range (55% of respondents). More respondents referred cases of MMIS and CMM out for treatment as compared to 2016. Academic dermatologists in 2021 were 8% less likely to treat MMIS as compared to all other practice types in 2021, whereas 7% more likely to treat CMM greater than 1 mm. Academic dermatologists in 2016, as compared to 2021, were 4% more likely to treat MMIS and 19% more likely to treat CMM greater than 1 mm. A total of 91% of respondents reported having some change in their management of CMM. Our study findings suggest that a knowledge gap still exists representing a continued educational opportunity to more effectively distribute and implement CMM management guidelines.

Expert Consensus on the Use of Prognostic Gene Expression Profiling Tests for the Management of Cutaneous Melanoma: Consensus from the Skin Cancer Prevention Working Group.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic assessment of cutaneous melanoma relies on historical, clinicopathological, and phenotypic risk factors according to American Joint Committee on Cancer(AJCC) and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) guidelines but may not account for a patient's individual additional genetic risk factors. OBJECTIVE: To review the available literature regarding commercially available gene expression profile (GEP) tests and their use in the management of cutaneous melanoma. METHODS: A literature search was conducted for original, English-language studies or meta-analyses published between 2010 and 2021 on commercially available GEP tests in cutaneous melanoma prognosis, clinical decision-making regarding sentinel lymph node biopsy, and real-world efficacy. After the literature review, the Skin Cancer Prevention Working Group, an expert panel of dermatologists with specialized training in melanoma and non-melanoma skin cancer diagnosis and management, utilized a modified Delphi technique to develop consensus statements regarding prognostic gene expression profile tests. Statements were only adopted with a supermajority vote of > 80%. RESULTS: The initial search identified 1064 studies/meta-analyses that met the search criteria. Of these, we included 21 original articles and meta-analyses that studied the 31-GEP test (DecisionDx-Melanoma; Castle Biosciences, Inc.), five original articles that studied the 11-GEP test (Melagenix; NeraCare GmbH), and four original articles that studied the 8-GEP test with clinicopathological factors (Merlin; 8-GEP + CP; SkylineDx B.V.) in this review. Six statements received supermajority approval and were adopted by the panel. CONCLUSION: GEP tests provide additional, reproducible information for dermatologists to consider within the larger framework of the eighth edition of the AJCC and NCCN cutaneous melanoma guidelines when counseling regarding prognosis and when considering a sentinel lymph node biopsy.

Analytical validity of DecisionDx-SCC, a gene expression profile test to identify risk of metastasis in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) patients.

BACKGROUND: To improve identification of patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) at high risk for metastatic disease, the DecisionDx-SCC assay, a prognostic 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test, was developed and validated. The 40-GEP assay utilizes RT-PCR gene expression analysis on primary tumor biopsy tissue to evaluate the expression of 34 signature gene targets and 6 normalization genes. The test provides classifications of low risk (Class 1), moderate risk (Class 2A), and high risk (Class 2B) of metastasis within 3 years of diagnosis. The primary objective of this study was to validate the analytical performance of the 40-gene expression signature. METHODS: The repeatability and reproducibility of the 40-GEP test was evaluated by performance of inter-assay, intra-assay, and inter-operator precision experiments along with monitoring the reliability of sample and reagent stability for class call concordance. The technical performance of clinical orders from September 2020 through July 2021 for the 40-GEP test was assessed. RESULTS: Patient hematoxylin and eosin (H&E) stained slides were reviewed by a board-certified pathologist to assess minimum acceptable tumor content. Class specific controls (Class 1 and Class 2B) were evaluated with Levey-Jennings analysis and demonstrated consistent and reproducible results. Inter-assay, inter-operator and intra-assay concordance were all ≥90%, with short-term and long-term RNA stability also meeting minimum concordance requirements. Of the 2586 orders received, 93.5% remained eligible for testing, with 97.1% of all tested samples demonstrating actionable class call results. CONCLUSION: DecisionDx-SCC demonstrates a high degree of analytical precision, yielding high concordance rates across multiple performance experiments, along with exhibiting robust technical reliability on clinical samples.

Current Methods and Caveats to Risk Factor Assessment in Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC): A Narrative Review.

Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is the second most common form of skin cancer, and the number of deaths due to cSCC is estimated to be greater than the number attributed to melanoma. While the majority of cSCC tumors are resectable with clear margins by standard excision practices, some lesions exhibit high-risk factors for which there is evidence of their association with recurrence, metastasis, and disease-specific death. The most commonly used staging systems and guidelines in the USA for cSCC are based on these clinical and pathologic high-risk factors; however, these are limited in their ability to predict adverse events, thus posing a challenge for implementing risk-directed patient management. Since the development of local recurrence and/or metastasis has a profound impact on the survival of patients with cSCC, accurate identification of patients at high risk for poor outcomes is critical, potentially allowing for early and appropriate adjuvant therapy. This review summarizes the current cSCC literature with a focus on how differing clinical assessments within each of the five selected risk factors (perineural invasion, differentiation, depth of invasion, size, and location) can influence the evaluation of patient outcomes, along with summarizing the utility of staging and guidelines, and highlighting the potential for molecular tools to improve upon cSCC risk assessment.

Enhanced metastatic risk assessment in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma with the 40-gene expression profile test.

Aim: To clinically validate the 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma patients and evaluate coupling the test with individual clinicopathologic risk factor-based assessment methods. Patients & methods: In a 33-site study, primary tumors with known patient outcomes were assessed under clinical testing conditions (n = 420). The 40-GEP results were integrated with clinicopathologic risk factors. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were performed for metastasis. Results: The 40-GEP test demonstrated significant prognostic value. Risk classification was improved via integration of 40-GEP results with clinicopathologic risk factor-based assessment, with metastasis rates near the general cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma population for class 1 and ≥50% for class 2B. Conclusion: Combining molecular profiling with clinicopathologic risk factor assessment enhances stratification of cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma patients and may inform decision-making for risk-appropriate management strategies.

Plain language summary Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is a common skin cancer, with approximately 2 million cases diagnosed each year in the USA. Because substantial numbers of patients experience metastasis, which can result in death, accurate metastatic risk assessment is important. Clinicians use clinicopathologic factors to determine risk for disease progression. However, traditional methods miss pinpointing many patients who experience metastasis and sometimes categorize patients as at risk who do not develop metastasis, indicating that additional tools are needed. A molecular test, the 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP), was developed to predict metastatic risk based on the biology of the tumor. This study demonstrates that the 40-GEP, either as an independent tool or together with traditional methods, accurately identifies patients' risk of metastasis. Using the 40-GEP could improve patient management to improve patient outcomes.