ArticleCancer management and research2024
Real-World Treatment Patterns and Outcomes of Cemiplimab in Patients with Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma Treated in US Oncology Practices.
Article in Cancer management and research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
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.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- The Role of Cemiplimab in Treating Locally Advanced Cutaneous SCC: A UK Single-Centre Experience and the Implications for Surgical Management.Annals of surgical oncology · 2026Article
- Review
- Real-World Response of Cemiplimab Immunotherapy for Treating Locally Advanced or Metastatic Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma in a Tertiary UK Oncology Centre.Journal of skin cancer · 2026Article
- Advanced Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Biology, Immunotherapy, and Evolving Prognostic Factors.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Article
- Mechanisms of immunotherapy in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in the tumor microenvironment.Frontiers in immunology · 2025Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Prior to the Food and Drug Administration approval of cemiplimab in 2018, the median overall survival (OS) for adult patients with advanced CSCC receiving systemic therapy was approximately 8 to 15 months. Limited real-world data are available on cemiplimab for this indication in the US. Patients and Methods: This retrospective cohort study included US patients with advanced CSCC initiating cemiplimab monotherapy in a real-world database (2018-2021). A clinical trial-like sub-cohort was identified using select criteria. Time to treatment discontinuation (TTD), time to next treatment (TTNT), and OS were estimated using Kaplan-Meier methods. Cox proportional hazard models were used to examine prognostic factors associated with OS in the main cohort. Results: The main cohort included 622 patients (n = 240 in the trial-like cohort). In the main cohort, the median age was 78 years, 77.8% were male, 21.4% were immunocompromised/immunosuppressed, and 63.8% had metastatic CSCC. Median (95% CI) TTD and TTNT were 8.0 (6.6-9.0) months and 16.4 (13.3-21.0) months, respectively, in the main cohort. Median (95% CI) OS was 24.8 (21.8-29.1) months in the main cohort (not reached in the trial-like cohort). In multivariable analyses, age <60 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.37), Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status <3-4 (HR range, 0.13-0.57), and primary CSCC location in the head and neck only versus extremities only (HR, 0.59) were associated with better OS. Similar OS was observed between patients who had immunosuppressing/immunocompromising conditions and those without. Conclusion: These findings confirm the effectiveness of cemiplimab among a heterogenous, real-world advanced CSCC patient population and substantiate the efficacy of cemiplimab observed in clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
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.