ArticleThe oncologist2026
Second-line treatments for patients with programmed cell death protein 1-refractory cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas: a brief report.
Article in The oncologist, 2026. 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.
- Review
- The Role of the TG2-GPR56 Complex in Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (CSCC) Aggression and Therapeutic Resistance.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundPatients with locally advanced or metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), who failed cemiplimab, have a poor prognosis, with most patients dying of disease. Second-line therapies consist of additional immunotherapy, epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors, chemotherapy, salvage surgery, or radiotherapy. Outcomes in this setting remain poorly characterized. We review the first 2 options for our population. The study objective was to describe non-clinical-trial/off-label immunotherapy treatments for advanced, recurrent, or refractory cSCC. PATIENTS: This single-institution retrospective case series took place at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, a high-volume academic medical oncology practice.
methodsWe reviewed the electronic medical records of patients who underwent systemic treatments for advanced cSCC. Patient demographics, clinicopathologic history, cancer data, treatments, and outcomes were abstracted. Overall response and progression-free survival by clinical judgment and overall survival rates were described.
resultsA total of 21 patients were included. Thirteen received cetuximab and 12 ipilimumab after failure of surgery and/or radiation, and of a programmed cell death protein 1 (PD-1) monoclonal inhibitor (primarily cemiplimab). Four patients are included in both cohorts. Durable complete responses were observed only in patients treated with ipilimumab. Otherwise, all other surviving patients had salvage surgery after some response to second line therapy.
conclusionsIn this salvage setting, ipilimumab demonstrated a 33% response rate, including complete responses with durable survival. Cetuximab induced response in patients pretreated with cemiplimab whether they had responded or not to this immunotherapy. Most cetuximab-treated patients died within 1-2 years, unless salvaged with surgery.
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.