Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31952975›Full record

Trial reportThe Lancet. Oncology2020

Cemiplimab in locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: results from an open-label, phase 2, single-arm trial.

Michael R Migden, Nikhil I Khushalani, Anne Lynn S Chang, Karl D Lewis, Chrysalyne D Schmults, Leonel Hernandez-Aya, Friedegund Meier, Dirk Schadendorf, Alexander Guminski, Axel Hauschild and 12 more

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase IIMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in The Lancet. Oncology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02760498 (A Phase 2 Study of REGN2810, a Fully Human Monoclonal Antibody to Programmed Death-1), which is not on this map. Cited by 247 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
247citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
42.5field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

NCT02760498 phase2completednot on this map

A Phase 2 Study of REGN2810, a Fully Human Monoclonal Antibody to Programmed Death-1 (PD-1), in Patients With Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma

TypeinterventionalSponsorRegeneron PharmaceuticalsRan2016 to 2023Enrolled432ConditionsAdvanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell CarcinomaArmscemiplimab
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

247 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 462 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Immune checkpoint inhibitors in advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: A systemic review and meta-analysis.Skin research and technology : official journal of International Society for Bioengineering and the Skin (ISBS) [and] International Society for Digital Imaging of Skin (ISDIS) [and] International Society for Skin Imaging (ISSI) · 2023
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Cemiplimab in Locally Advanced or Metastatic Secondary Angiosarcomas (CEMangio): A Phase II Clinical Trial and Biomarker Analyses.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2025
    Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Pilot Phase II Trial of Neoadjuvant Immunotherapy in Locoregionally Advanced, Resectable Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2021
    Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Short-course immunotherapy in surgically resectable, high risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology : JEADV · 2026
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Article

187 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

22 authors at 13 institutions in 3 countries.

Michael R MigdenDepartments of Dermatology and Head and Neck Surgery, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX, USA. Electronic address: mrmigden@mdanderson.org.
Nikhil I KhushalaniDepartment of Cutaneous Oncology, Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, USA.
Anne Lynn S ChangDepartment of Dermatology, Stanford University School of Medicine, Redwood City, CA, USA.
Karl D LewisUniversity of Colorado Denver, School of Medicine, Aurora, CO, USA.
Chrysalyne D SchmultsDepartment of Dermatology, Brigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA.
Leonel Hernandez-AyaDivision of Medical Oncology, Department of Medicine, Washington University School of Medicine, St Louis, MO, USA.
Friedegund MeierDepartment of Dermatology, University Hospital Dresden, Dresden, Germany.
Dirk SchadendorfUniversity Hospital Essen, Essen and German Cancer Consortium, Essen, Germany.
Alexander GuminskiDepartment of Medical Oncology, Royal North Shore Hospital, St Leonards, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
Axel HauschildSchleswig-Holstein University Hospital, Kiel, Germany.
Deborah J WongUCLA Department of Medicine, Los Angeles, CA, USA.
Gregory A DanielsDivision of Hematology and Oncology, University of California San Diego, Moores Cancer Center, La Jolla, CA, USA.
Carola BerkingDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy, Munich University Hospital (LMU), Munich, Germany.
Vladimir JankovicRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY, USA.
Elizabeth StankevichRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Basking Ridge, NJ, USA.
Jocelyn BoothRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Basking Ridge, NJ, USA.
Siyu LiRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Basking Ridge, NJ, USA.
David M WeinreichRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY, USA.
George D YancopoulosRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY, USA.
Israel LowyRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY, USA.
Matthew G FuryRegeneron Pharmaceuticals, Tarrytown, NY, USA.
Danny RischinDepartment of Medical Oncology, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre and University of Melbourne, Melbourne, VIC, Australia.
Regeneron (United States) · USEssen University Hospital · DEHarvard University · USLudwig-Maximilians-Universität München · DEMoffitt Cancer Center · USPeter MacCallum Cancer Centre · AURoyal North Shore Hospital · AUStanford University · USThe University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center · USUniversity of California San Diego · USUniversity of Colorado Denver · USUniversity of Lübeck · DEWashington University in St. Louis · US

Funding

Tumor Evolution and Metastasis ProgramP30CA016672 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF TX MD ANDERSON CAN CTR · PI Scott Kopetz · 1985 to 2026
$290.8M
TRANSLATIONAL RESEARCHP30CA076292 · NCI · UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA · PI KENNETH Lynn WRIGHT · 1998 to 2026
$93.5M
NCI NIH HHS P30 CA016672NCI NIH HHS P30 CA076292
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCemiplimab has shown substantial antitumour activity in patients with metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Patients with locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma have poor prognosis with conventional systemic therapy. We present a primary analysis of the safety and antitumour activity of cemiplimab in patients with locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma.

methodsThis pivotal open-label, phase 2, single-arm trial was done across 25 outpatient clinics, primarily at academic medical centres, in Australia, Germany, and the USA. Eligible patients (aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1) received cemiplimab 3 mg/kg intravenously over 30 min every 2 weeks for up to 96 weeks. Tumour measurements were done every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was objective response, defined as the proportion of patients with complete or partial response, according to independent central review as per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 for radiological scans and WHO criteria for medical photography. Data cutoff was Oct 10, 2018, when the fully enrolled cohort reached the prespecified timepoint for the primary analysis. Analyses were done as per the intention-to-treat principle. The safety analysis comprised all patients who received at least one dose of cemiplimab. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02760498.

findingsBetween June 14, 2016, and April 25, 2018, 78 patients were enrolled and treated with cemiplimab. The median duration of study follow-up was 9·3 months (IQR 5·1-15·7) at the time of data cutoff. An objective response was observed in 34 (44%; 95% CI 32-55) of 78 patients. The best overall response was ten (13%) patients with a complete response and 24 (31%) with a partial response. Grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 34 (44%) of 78 patients; the most common were hypertension in six (8%) patients and pneumonia in four (5%). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 23 (29%) of 78 patients. One treatment-related death was reported that occurred after onset of aspiration pneumonia.

interpretationCemiplimab showed antitumour activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with locally advanced cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma for whom there was no widely accepted standard of care.

fundingRegeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agents, ImmunologicalAustraliaCarcinoma, Squamous CellFemaleGermanyHumansMaleSkin NeoplasmsTime FactorsTreatment OutcomeUnited StatesAntibodies, Monoclonal, HumanizedAntineoplastic Agents, Immunologicalcemiplimab

Identifiers

PMID31952975
PMCPMC7771329
OpenAlexW2998989384

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.