Search

Background: Programmed death-1 (PD-1) antibodies and BRAF + MEK inhibitors are widely used for adjuvant therapy of fully resected high-risk melanoma. Little is known about treatment efficacy outside of phase III trials. This real-world study reports on clinical outcomes of modern adjuvant melanoma treatment in specialized skin cancer centers in Germany, Austria and Switzerland., Methods: Multicenter, retrospective study investigating stage III-IV melanoma patients receiving adjuvant nivolumab (NIV), pembrolizumab (PEM) or dabrafenib + trametinib (D + T) between 1/2017 and 10/2021. The primary endpoint was 12-month recurrence-free survival (RFS). Further analyses included descriptive and correlative statistics, and a multivariate linear-regression machine learning model to assess the risk of early melanoma recurrence., Results: In total, 1198 patients from 39 skin cancer centers from Germany, Austria and Switzerland were analysed. The vast majority received anti PD-1 therapies (n = 1003). Twelve-month RFS for anti PD-1 and BRAF + MEK inhibitor-treated patients were 78.1% and 86.5%, respectively (hazard ratio [HR] 1.998 [95% CI 1.335-2.991]; p = 0.001). There was no statistically significant difference in overall survival (OS) in anti PD-1 (95.8%) and BRAF + MEK inhibitor (96.9%) treated patients (p > 0.05) during the median follow-up of 17 months. Data indicates that anti PD-1 treated patients who develop immune-related adverse events (irAEs) have lower recurrence rates compared to patients with no irAEs (HR 0.578 [95% CI 0.443-0.754], p = 0.001). BRAF mutation status did not affect overall efficacy of anti PD-1 treatment (p > 0.05). In both, anti PD-1 and BRAF + MEK inhibitor treated cohorts, data did not show any difference in 12-month RFS and 12-month OS comparing patients receiving total lymph node dissection (TLND) versus sentinel lymph node biopsy only (p > 0.05). The recurrence prediction model reached high specificity but only low sensitivity with an AUC = 0.65. No new safety signals were detected. Overall, recorded numbers and severity of adverse events were lower than reported in pivotal phase III trials., Conclusions: Despite recent advances in adjuvant melanoma treatment, early recurrence remains a significant clinical challenge. This study shows that TLND does not reduce the risk of early melanoma recurrence and should only be considered in selected patients. Data further highlight that variables collected during clinical routine are unlikely to allow for a clinically relevant prediction of individual recurrence risk., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology.)

Background and Objectives: Treatment options for moderate-to-severe hidradenitis suppurativa (HS) comprise antibiotics, biologics, and different surgical methods. These approaches differ substantially regarding the treatment process, success rates, and adverse events. However, information on patient preferences for HS therapies is hitherto scarce. Our aim was to assess patient preferences for medicamentous and surgical treatment of HS with conjoint analysis., Patients and Methods: In this cross-section study, computerized discrete choice experiments were used to quantify patient preferences for HS therapies decomposed into treatment modality (tablets, subcutaneous injections, surgery with secondary-intention healing or primary closure), probability of sustained therapeutic success, probability of mild or severe adverse events, and duration of treatment or wound healing., Results: Averaged over the cohort (n  =  216 patients with HS), sustained therapeutic success was considered as most important (Relative Importance Score [RIS]: 36.2), followed by the treatment modality (RIS: 24.0), and duration of treatment/wound healing (RIS: 19.9), whereas mild or severe adverse events (RIS: 10.7 or 9.3) were regarded as less relevant. Patients preferred tablets, followed by subcutaneous injections, and disliked surgery with primary closure. Preferences differed significantly dependent on age and affected body regions., Conclusions: Awareness of patient preferences is essential for patient-centered care in HS., (© 2022 The Authors. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft.)

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic imposes major challenges for care of cancer patients., Objectives: Our aim was to assess the effects of the pandemic on treatment and appointments of patients with malignant melanoma based on a large skin cancer centre in Berlin, Germany, and identify reasons for, and impact factors associated with these changes., Materials & Methods: Patients with melanoma treated from January 1st 2019 received a postal survey with questions on impairment due to the pandemic, fear of COVID-19, fear of melanoma, changes in therapy and/or appointments, including reasons for the changes. Impact factors on postponed/missed appointments were examined using descriptive analyses and multivariate logistic regression., Results: The response rate was 41.3% (n = 324; 57.4% males; mean age: 67.9 years). Among 104 participants currently receiving therapy, four (3.8%) reported treatment changes due to the pandemic. Postponements or cancellations of appointments occurred in 48 participants (14.8%), most frequently, at their own request (81.3%) due to fear of SARS-CoV-2 infection (68.8%). Current treatment was associated with a reduced chance of post-poning/missing appointments (OR = 0.208, p = 0.003), whereas a high or very high level of concern for COVID-19 (OR = 6.806, p = 0.034; OR= 10.097, p = 0.038), SARS-CoV-2 infection among close acquaintances (OR = 4.251, p = 0.026), anxiety disorder (OR = 5.465, p = 0.016) and AJCC stage IV (OR = 3.108, p = 0.048) were associated with a higher likelihood of postponing/missing appointments., Conclusion: Among our participants, treatment changes were rare and the proportion of missed/delayed appointments was rather small. The main reasons for delays/cancellations of appointments were anxiety and concern for COVID-19.

Background and Objectives: The COVID-19 pandemic poses a great challenge for cancer patients. Our aim was to assess its influence on treatment and appointments of melanoma patients after one year of pandemic., Methods: Melanoma patients treated in the Vivantes Skin Cancer Centre in Berlin, Germany completed a postal survey on pandemic-related alterations in melanoma care. Impact factors on changes of appointments were examined with descriptive analyses and multivariate logistic regression. Data after one year of pandemic were compared to those after its first wave., Results: Among 366 participants (57.7 % males; mean age 69.2 years, response rate: 36.1 %), 38 (10.1 %) reported postponed or missed appointments, mostly on their own demand (71.1 %) due to fear of COVID-19 (52.6 %). Current treatment was associated with a lower risk of changing appointments (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0.194, p = 0.002), higher age (OR: 1.037, p = 0.039), longer disease duration (OR: 1.007, p = 0.028), and higher school degree (OR: 2.263, p = 0.043) with higher probability. Among 177 patients currently receiving therapy, only 1.7 % experienced pandemic-related treatment alterations. Concern about COVID-19 was significantly higher after one year of pandemic than after its first wave, but the number of missed appointments was lower., Conclusions: Pandemic-related changes were rare in our cohort and decreased over time despite increasing concern., (© 2022 Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Hintergrund Und Ziele: Die COVID-19-Pandemie stellt für Krebspatienten eine große Herausforderung dar. Unser Ziel war es, ihren Einfluss auf die Behandlung und auf Arzttermine von Melanompatienten nach einem Jahr Pandemie zu untersuchen., Patienten Und Methodik: Melanompatienten, die im Vivantes Hauttumorzentrum in Berlin behandelt wurden, beantworteten eine postalische Umfrage zu Pandemie-bedingten Änderungen ihrer Melanomversorgung. Einflussfaktoren auf Terminänderungen wurden mit deskriptiven Analysen und multivariater logistischer Regression untersucht. Daten nach einem Jahr Pandemie wurden mit Daten nach der ersten Welle verglichen., Ergebnisse: Von den 366 Teilnehmern (57,7 % Männer; Durchschnittsalter 69,2 Jahre, Rücklaufquote: 36,1 %) berichteten 38 (10,1 %) über verschobene oder verpasste Arzttermine, meist auf eigenen Wunsch (71,1 %) aus Angst vor COVID-19 (52,6 %). Eine aktuelle Therapie war mit einem geringeren Risiko, Termine zu verpassen, assoziiert (Odds Ratio [OR]: 0,194, p = 0,002), höheres Alter (OR: 1,037, p = 0,039), längere Krankheitsdauer (OR: 1,007, p = 0,028) und ein höherer Schulabschluss (OR: 2,263, p = 0,043) mit höherer Wahrscheinlichkeit. Von den 177 Patienten, die aktuell eine Therapie erhielten, erfuhren nur 1,7 % Pandemie-bedingte Behandlungsänderungen. Die Besorgnis über COVID-19 war nach einem Jahr Pandemie signifikant größer als nach der ersten Welle, die Zahl der verpassten Arzttermine jedoch niedriger., Schlussfolgerungen: Pandemie-bedingte Änderungen waren in unserer Kohorte selten und nahmen trotz zunehmender Besorgnis mit der Zeit ab., (© 2022 Deutsche Dermatologische Gesellschaft (DDG). Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)