Refine
Has Fulltext
- yes (2)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (2) (remove)
Year of publication
- 2022 (2) (remove)
Document Type
- Journal article (2)
Language
- English (2)
Keywords
- immunosuppression (2) (remove)
Background
Systemic sclerosis (SSc) patients often need immunosuppressive medication (IS) for disease control. If SSc is progressive despite IS, autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (aHSCT) is a treatment option for selected SSc patients. aHSCT is effective with good available evidence, but not all patients achieve a treatment-free remission after aHSCT. Thus far, data about the need of IS after aHSCT in SSc is not published. The aim of this study was to investigate the use of IS after aHSCT, its efficacy, and the occurrence of severe adverse events (SAEs).
Methods
Twenty-seven patients with SSc who had undergone aHSCT were included in this single-center retrospective cohort study. Clinical data, including IS, SAEs, and lung function data, were collected.
Results
Sixteen of 27 (59.3%) patients received IS after aHSCT. Methotrexate, rituximab, mycophenolate, cyclophosphamide, and hydroxychloroquine were most commonly used. The main reason for starting IS was SSc progress. Nine patients received rituximab after aHSCT and showed an improvement in modified Rodnan skin score and a stabilization of lung function 2 years after rituximab. SAEs in patients with IS after aHSCT (50.0%) were not more common than in patients without IS (54.6%). SAEs were mostly due to SSc progress, secondary autoimmune diseases, or infections. Two deaths after aHSCT were transplantation related and three during long-term follow-up due to pulmonary arterial hypertension.
Conclusion
Disease progression and secondary autoimmune diseases may necessitate IS after aHSCT in SSc. Rituximab seems to be an efficacious treatment option in this setting. Long-term data on the safety of aHSCT is reassuring.
Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is a common malignancy of the skin and has an overall favorable outcome, except for patients with an advanced stage of the disease. The efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) for advanced cSCC has been demonstrated in recent clinical studies, but data from real-world cohorts and trial-ineligible cSCC patients are limited. We retrospectively investigated patients with advanced cSCC who have been treated with CPI in a first-line setting at eight German skin cancer centers registered within the multicenter registry ADOReg. Clinical outcome parameters including response, progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS), time-to-next-treatment (TTNT), and toxicity were analyzed and have been stratified by the individual immune status. Among 39 evaluable patients, the tumor response rate (rwTRR) was 48.6%, the median PFS was 29.0 months, and the median OS was not reached. In addition, 9 patients showed an impaired immune status due to immunosuppressive medication or hematological diseases. Our data demonstrated that CPI also evoked tumor responses among immunocompromised patients (rwTRR: 48.1 vs. 50.0%), although these responses less often resulted in durable remissions. In line with this, the median PFS (11 vs. 40 months, p = 0.059), TTNT (12 months vs. NR, p = 0.016), and OS (29 months vs. NR, p < 0.001) were significantly shorter for this patient cohort. CPI therapy was well tolerated in both subcohorts with 15% discontinuing therapy due to toxicity. Our real-world data show that first-line CPI therapy produced strong and durable responses among patients with advanced cSCC. Immunocompromised patients were less likely to achieve long-term benefit from anti-PD1 treatment, despite similar tumor response rates.