Faculty Bibliography

Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC) is an aggressive and rare cutaneous cancer of the mechanoreceptor unit of the skin with a neuroendocrine origin. MCC incidence has been on the rise over the past two decades. Risk factors include old age, chronic UV exposure, and immunosuppression. Although MCC is a cutaneous malignancy that is often misdiagnosed as a benign nodule at the time of diagnosis, it has an aggressive disease course due to its high recurrence and metastatic potential. The PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint blockade has recently shown promising results in the management of advanced MCC. Avelumab and pembrolizumab are considered the new standard of care for metastatic MCC. Despite advances in the field, studies are needed to elucidate the role of immunotherapy for patients who are resistant to treatment. Most ongoing clinical trials aim to assess the efficacy of checkpoint inhibitor combination therapies. This article reviews the most current literature on the surgical and medical management of MCC.

There have been several significant advances in cancer treatment in the last decade that are applicable to the treatment of melanoma and advanced nonmelanoma skin cancers. Among these are the development of immune checkpoint inhibitors targeting the programmed death protein-1 (PD-1)/programmed death legand-1 (PDL-1) axis, as well as targeted inhibitors of the BRAF/MEK signaling cascade in melanoma, and the hedgehog signaling pathway in basal cell carcinoma (BCC). These immune-based and targeted therapies have dramatically changed the treatment options for locally advanced and metastatic melanoma, Merkel's cell carcinoma, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), and BCC. In this article, we will briefly review the currently approved targeted and immunotherapy-based treatments for locally advanced and metastatic melanoma, Merkel's cell carcinoma, and cSCC and discuss various combinations of approved therapies, as well as emerging therapeutic candidates that are currently in clinical trials, including novel checkpoint inhibitors in development, intratumoral oncolytic agents (viral and nonviral), and various immune-based therapies such as toll-like receptor (TLR) agonists, adoptive T-cell therapy, T-cell costimulation, and innate immune cell therapy. For advanced BCC, we will discuss trials investigating the currently approved smoothened (SMO) inhibitors for neoadjuvant use, emerging SMO inhibitors in development, topical SMO inhibitors, alternative targets in the hedgehog signaling pathway, and the use of anti-PD-1 agents for advanced BCC both alone and in combination with SMO inhibitors.

The International Immunosuppression and Transplant Skin Cancer Collaborative (ITSCC) is an organization of more than 500 physicians and scientists focused on the treatment of cutaneous malignancies following solid organ transplantation and in other forms of immunosuppression. It is well known that solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) have an approximate 100-fold increase in the risk of developing skin cancer with consensus guidelines recommending these patients be managed as high risk for local recurrence and metastasis associated with poor outcomes. In September 2018, ITSCC and its European counterpart, the Skin Care in Organ Transplant Patients-Europe (SCOPE), held their biennial scientific retreat in Essex, MA to discuss novel findings in the pathogenesis of cutaneous malignancy including new treatment and prevention strategies in this at risk population for significant morbidity and mortality from their cutaneous disease. This meeting report is a summary of the novel findings discussed.

BACKGROUND:Staging systems for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC) include Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) and American Joint Committee on Cancer staging system, eighth edition (AJCC-8). OBJECTIVE:To evaluate and compare AJCC-8 and BWH staging systems for CSCC in immunosuppressed patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS/METHODS:A retrospective cohort study of immunosuppressed patients diagnosed with primary CSCC from 2012 to 2016. The main end point was any poor outcome (PO), which included local recurrence, nodal metastasis, and disease-specific death. RESULTS:Fifty-eight immunosuppressed patients had 263 CSCCs. Fifty percent of tumors were AJCC-8 T1, 44.7% T2, and 4.8% T3. Fifty percent of tumors were BWH T1, 48.5% T2a, 1.3% T2b, and 0.4% T3. Risk of PO for AJCC-8 was 1.7%, 8.8%, and 36.4% for T1, T2, and T3, respectively (p < .01). Risk of PO for BWH was 1.8%, 9.9%, 33.3%, and 100.0% for T1, T2a, T2b, and T3, respectively (p < .01). Thirty-six percent of AJCC-8 T3/T4 tumors had POs compared with 5.1% in low T1/T2 stages (p = .002). Fifty percent of BWH T2b/T3 tumors had POs compared with 5.3% in low T1/T2a stages (p = .01). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:AJCC-8 and BWH staging systems stratify CSCC with similar distinctiveness, homogeneity, and monotonicity for immunosuppressed patients.

BACKGROUND:The management of skin cancers has evolved with the development of Mohs micrographic surgery and a greater emphasis on surgical training within dermatology. It is unclear whether these changes have translated into innovations and contributions to the reconstructive literature. OBJECTIVE:To assess contributions from each medical specialty to the cutaneous head and neck oncologic reconstructive literature. METHODS:The authors conducted a systematic review of the head and neck reconstructive literature from 2000 through 2015 based on a priori search terms relating to suture technique, linear closure, advancement, rotation, transposition and interpolation flaps, and identified the specialty of the senior authors. RESULTS:The authors identified 74,871 articles, of which 1,319 were relevant. Under suture technique articles, the senior authors were primarily dermatologists (58.2%) and plastic surgeons (20.3%). Under linear closure, the authors were dermatologists (48.1%), plastic surgeons (22.2%), and otolaryngologists (20.4%). Under advancement and rotation flaps, the senior authors were plastic surgeons (40.5%, 38.9%), dermatologists (38.1%, 34.2%), and otolaryngologists (14.4%, 21.6%). Under transposition and interpolation flaps, the senior authors were plastic surgeons (47.3%, 39.4%), dermatologists (32.3%, 27.0%), and otolaryngologists (15.3%, 23.4%). CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:The primary specialties contributing to the cutaneous head and neck reconstructive literature are plastic surgery, dermatology, and otolaryngology.

Though screening for skin cancer is an essential practice in dermatology, limited data are published on dermatologists' total body skin examination (TBSE) behaviors. We surveyed 6500 dermatologists on their TBSE practices, including questions about less commonly examined body sites. We found varied TBSE practices among all dermatologists and discrepancies in examinations between dermatologists of opposite genders. J Drugs Dermatol. 2018;17(5):516-520.