BackgroundSkin cancers are known for their strong immunogenicity, which may contribute to a high treatment efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI). However, a considerable proportion of patients with skin cancer is immuno-compromised by concomitant diseases. Due to their previous exclusion from clinical trials, the ICI treatment efficacy is poorly investigated in these patients. The present study analyzed the ICI treatment outcome in advanced patients with skin cancer with a concomitant hematological malignancy.MethodsThis retrospective multicenter study included patients who were treated with ICI for locally advanced or metastatic melanoma (MM), cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), or Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC), and had a previous diagnosis of a hematological malignancy irrespective of disease activity or need of therapy at ICI treatment start. Comparator patient cohorts without concomitant hematological malignancy were extracted from the prospective multicenter skin cancer registry ADOREG. Treatment outcome was measured as best overall response, progression-free (PFS), and overall survival (OS).Results84 patients (MM, n=52; cSCC, n=15; MCC, n=17) with concomitant hematological malignancy were identified at 20 skin cancer centers. The most frequent concomitant hematological malignancies were non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (n=70), with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (n=32) being the largest entity. While 9 patients received ICI in an adjuvant setting, 75 patients were treated for advanced non-resectable disease (55 anti-PD-1; 8 anti-PD-L1; 5 anti-CTLA-4; 7 combinations). In the latter 75 patients, best objective response (complete response+partial response) was 28.0%, disease stabilization was 25.3%, and 38.6% showed progressive disease (PD). Subdivided by skin cancer entity, best objective response was 31.1% (MM), 26.7% (cSCC), and 18.8% (MCC). Median PFS was 8.4 months (MM), 4.0 months (cSCC), and 5.7 months (MCC). 1-year OS rates were 78.4% (MM), 65.8% (cSCC), and 47.4% (MCC). Comparison with respective ADOREG patient cohorts without hematological malignancy (n=392) revealed no relevant differences in ICI therapy outcome for MM and MCC, but a significantly reduced PFS for cSCC (p=0.002).ConclusionsICI therapy showed efficacy in advanced patients with skin cancer with a concomitant hematological malignancy. Compared with patients without hematological malignancy, the observed ICI therapy outcome was impaired in cSCC, but not in MM or MCC patients.

It is textbook knowledge that human infective forms of Trypanosoma brucei, the causative agent of sleeping sickness, enter the brain across the blood-brain barrier after an initial phase of weeks (rhodesiense) or months (gambiense) in blood. Based on our results using an animal model, both statements seem questionable. As we and others have shown, the first infection relevant crossing of the blood brain border occurs via the choroid plexus, i.e. via the blood-CSF barrier. In addition, counting trypanosomes in blood-free CSF obtained by an atlanto-occipital access revealed a cyclical infection in CSF that was directly correlated to the trypanosome density in blood infection. We also obtained conclusive evidence of organ infiltration, since parasites were detected in tissues outside the blood vessels in heart, spleen, liver, eye, testis, epididymis, and especially between the cell layers of the pia mater including the Virchow-Robin space. Interestingly, in all organs except pia mater, heart and testis, trypanosomes showed either a more or less degraded appearance of cell integrity by loss of the surface coat (VSG), loss of the microtubular cytoskeleton and loss of the intracellular content, or where taken up by phagocytes and degraded intracellularly within lysosomes. This is also true for trypanosomes placed intrathecally into the brain parenchyma using a stereotactic device. We propose a different model of brain infection that is in accordance with our observations and with well-established facts about the development of sleeping sickness.

Background Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is one of the most common types of cancer in the Caucasian population, with an increasing incidence. cSCC is mostly a local invasive disease that can be treated surgically in the majority of the cases. However, in the case of advanced cSCC (acSCC), a multimodality approach also involving systemic therapies needs to be considered.Methods One hundred and ninety-five patients diagnosed with acSCC (stages III and IV) treated in our centre between 2011 and 2018 were included. Patient and tumour characteristics along with treatment patterns were documented and analyzed. Descriptive analysis was performed and survival rates were estimated according to Kaplan-Meier and compared with the Log-rank test. Follow-up was defined as the time between diagnosis of advanced disease and last contact or death. All causes of death were considered as events. ResultsThe median follow-up was 21 months [IQR = (10.0; 21.0)]. The median age at time of advanced disease diagnosis was 78 years [IQR = (72; 84)], with 40.5% of the patients in stage III and 59.5% in stage IV. One hundred and forty-five patients had resectable tumours. In this group the median overall survival (mOS) was 59 months (95% CI:28.2-89.8), significantly higher than the mOS in patients with inoperable tumour [n = 50; mOS: 19 months (96% CI: 7-31, P <0.0001)]. Patients receiving immunotherapy (n = 20) showed a statistically significant better survival compared to those treated with other systemic therapies (n = 37; mOS not reached vs. mOS: 22 months (95% CI: 6.5-43.5), P = 0.034). For patients without systemic therapy, a combination of surgery and radiotherapy provided better outcomes compared to radiotherapy alone or best supportive care (P <0.001).Conclusion Surgical complete resection should be the first therapeutic option for patients with acSCC. For patients with inoperable tumour, first-line immunotherapy should be preferably considered.

No abstract

No abstract

The development of non-invasive diagnostic tools for skin cancer is an important topic for researchers. The objective of this study was to evaluate the diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of use of an electrical imped ance spectroscopy technique in non-melanoma skin cancer. Electrical impedance spectroscopy was able to distinguish between benign and malignant skin lesions. The results of this study suggest that electrical impedance spectroscopy measurements can improve diagnostic performance with a high sensitivity in detection of non-melanoma skin cancer.Electrical impedance spectroscopy is a non-invasive technique that can help clinicians in diagnosing malignant skin tumours. Depending on the cellular irregularity of the lesion, electrical impedance spectroscopy can reveal changes in the structure and form of the cells, using a harmless electrical current applied to the skin. A score between 0 and 10 is generated by the electrical impedance spectrometer, where 0 is consider ed benign and 10 is malignant. This prospective study was conducted in 101 patients with a total of 200 skin lesions; 62 benign and 138 malignant. There was a significant difference between the electrical impedance of malignant and benign lesions (p < 0.001). The sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value of electrical impedance spectroscopy for non-melanoma skin cancer were 94.2%, 41.9%, 78.3% and 76.5%, respectively, when the cut-off for the electrical impedance spectroscopy score was set between 5 and 6. The area under the curve in receiver operating characteristics analyses was 0.758.

Patient-centered motives and expectations of the treatment of actinic keratoses (AK) have received little attention until now. Hence, we aimed to profile and cluster treatment motivations and expectations among patients with AK in a nationwide multicenter, cross-sectional study including patients from 14 German skin cancer centers. Patients were asked to complete a self-administered questionnaire. Treatment motives and expectations towards AK management were measured on a visual analogue scale from 1–10. Specific patient profiles were investigated with subgroup and correlation analysis. Overall, 403 patients were included. The highest motivation values were obtained for the items “avoid transition to invasive squamous cell carcinoma” (mean ± standard deviation; 8.98 ± 1.46), “AK are considered precancerous lesions” (8.72 ± 1.34) and “treating physician recommends treatment” (8.10 ± 2.37; p < 0.0001). The highest expectation values were observed for the items “effective lesion clearance” (8.36 ± 1.99), “safety” (8.20 ± 2.03) and “treatment-related costs are covered by health insurance” (8.00 ± 2.41; p < 0.0001). Patients aged ≥77 years and those with ≥7 lesions were identified at high risk of not undergoing any treatment due to intrinsic and extrinsic motivation deficits. Heat mapping of correlation analysis revealed four clusters with distinct motivation and expectation profiles. This study provides a patient-based heuristic tool for a personalized treatment decision in patients with AK.

Background: Primary resistance to immunotherapy can be observed in approximately 40–65% of the stage IV melanoma patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors. A minority of the patients receive a second-line therapy, and the clinical benefit is small. Patients and methods: Stage IV melanoma patients treated with first-line PD-1-based immunotherapy between January 2015 and December 2018 were investigated. Primary resistance was defined as progressive disease (PD) at the time of the first tumor assessment after starting immunotherapy. Patients with complete response, partial response, and stable disease were classified as having disease control (DC). Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were evaluated by Kaplan–Meier estimator. Univariate and multivariate logistic regression analyses were performed to determine prognostic factors associated with OS. Results: Three hundred and nineteen patients were included, and 40% had primary resistance to immunotherapy. The median follow-up time was 22 months. Patients with primary resistance had 1-, 2-, and 3-year OS rates of 41%, 15%, and 10%, respectively, compared to 91%, 81%, and 65% for the patients who achieved DC. The following independently significant prognostic factors for OS were identified: protein S100B level and primary tumor localization. There was a statistically significant difference for OS (p < 0.0001) but not for PFS (p = 0.230) when analyzing risk groups formed with a combination of these two variables (low-, intermediate-, and high-risk subgroups). Conclusions: Melanoma patients with primary resistance to immunotherapy have a dismal prognosis. Response at the first tumor assessment after starting immunotherapy is a stronger prognostic factor for the further course of the disease than pretreatment risk factors.