ArticleThe oncologist2025
Treatment with programmed-death-1 inhibitors for non-melanoma skin cancer among immunocompromised patients with subgroup analysis of solid organ transplant patients.
Article in The oncologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Novel Immunotherapeutic Approaches for Patients with Head and Neck Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma.Oncology research · 2026Review
- Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Kidney Transplant Recipients: A French Multicenter Retrospective Cohort Study.Transplantation direct · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProgrammed-cell death protein 1 (PD-1) inhibitors have emerged as a standard of care treatment among advanced-stage or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC). Immune-compromised patients and particularly solid organ transplant recipients (SOTRs) are considered at high risk for cSCC. When treated with PD-1 inhibitors, the possibility of organ rejection, autoimmune flare, or insufficient response to treatment is feared. As these patients were excluded from past prospective clinical trials, we aim to describe our institute's experience regarding these patients.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on cSCC patients treated with PD-1 inhibitors. Comparisons were made between immune-compromised and immune-competent groups, with a subgroup analysis of SOTR.
resultsThe study cohort comprised of 133 patients, including 97.8% receiving Cemiplimab with a mean age of 77.2 ± 11.7 years. Immune-compromised patients constituted 26.9% (n = 35) of the cohort, including 10 SOTR (all kidney transplant recipients). Objective response rates (ORRs) and disease control rates (DCR) were comparable between immunocompetent and immunosuppressed patients receiving Cemiplimab (ORR: 76.8% vs 62.9%, P = .12; DCR: 81.1% vs 68.6%, P = .13). SOTR demonstrated an 80% ORR and DCR. Progression-free survival was comparable across all groups. Toxicity rates were similar between immunosuppressed and immunocompetent subgroups (68.6% vs 62.1%, P = .5). Two OTRs (20%) experienced acute graft rejection.
conclusionsPD-1 inhibitors demonstrate efficacy and safety in immunosuppressed cSCC patients. While effective in SOTR, treatment requires multidisciplinary management due to the potential risk of organ rejection. These findings provide valuable insights into this understudied population and support the use of PD-1 inhibitors in immunosuppressed patients with advanced cSCC.
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.