Head & neck · 2023
Immunotherapy response in patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma of head and neck with cranial nerve involvement.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Lopetegui-Lia Nerea, Dima Danai, Buchberger David Scott, Yalamanchali Anirudh, Osantowski Bennett, Ondeck Mariah, Lorenz Robert Roman, Prendes Brandon, Ku Jamie, Lamarre Eric, Scharpf Joseph, Silver Natalie Lea, Schwartzman Larisa, Geiger Jessica Lyn, Woody Neil McIver, Campbell Shauna Rosalie, Koyfman Shlomo A, Yilmaz Emrullah
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Metastatic or locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) can be treated with immunotherapy (IO). Cranial nerve involvement (CNI) is uncommon in cSCC and is a poor prognostic factor. Our aim is to describe how patients with CNI respond to IO monotherapy and/or as an adjunct to RT.
METHODS: Under an IRB approved protocol, patients with histologically proven cSCC of the head and neck with CNI treated with IO were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: Twelve patients were included and received cemiplimab or pembrolizumab. Eight patients had CNI at diagnosis, and 4 at time of recurrence after non-IO therapy. Best responses were complete response (1), partial response (7), stable disease (1), progressive disease (2), and pending response (1). Nine patients are alive, 6 of which remain on IO.
CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, IO showed clinical response in 83% of patients, indicating IO can be an effective monotherapy, reserving RT for instances of local failure after IO.
METHODS: Under an IRB approved protocol, patients with histologically proven cSCC of the head and neck with CNI treated with IO were retrospectively reviewed.
RESULTS: Twelve patients were included and received cemiplimab or pembrolizumab. Eight patients had CNI at diagnosis, and 4 at time of recurrence after non-IO therapy. Best responses were complete response (1), partial response (7), stable disease (1), progressive disease (2), and pending response (1). Nine patients are alive, 6 of which remain on IO.
CONCLUSIONS: In this cohort, IO showed clinical response in 83% of patients, indicating IO can be an effective monotherapy, reserving RT for instances of local failure after IO.