Srivastava, Divya

ABSTRACT Background Current staging systems for head and neck cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (HNCSCC), such as AJCC8 and BWH, often fail to adequately stratify high‐risk patients, particularly due to the exclusion of important biological and host factors. This study aimed to identify independent prognostic factors for HNCSCC outcomes in the largest multi‐institutional retrospective series to date. Methods De‐identified data from 8,610 primary HNCSCC tumors, treated with curative intent surgery across multiple international centers, were analyzed. Outcomes included local recurrence (LR), locoregional metastasis (LM), distant metastasis (DM), and disease‐specific death (DSD). Multivariable Fine–Gray subdistribution hazard regression models with robust standard errors clustered at the patient level were fitted to generate exploratory hypotheses regarding independent hazard determinants. Results During a median follow‐up of 31.4 months (IQR 14.2–52.8), the cumulative incidence was 3.3% for LR, 2.7% for LM, 0.5% for DM, and 1.2% for DSD. Multivariable analysis confirmed that tumor diameter, poor differentiation, deep invasion, and large‐caliber perineural invasion (LCPNI) were the strongest predictors, being significantly associated with at least three of the four outcomes. Notably, factors currently excluded from or weighted differently in staging systems also proved critical: Immunosuppression was significantly associated with LR (SHR 2.03) and DSD (SHR 1.70); and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) was independently associated with LM (SHR 3.00). Poor differentiation demonstrated high prognostic impact, being a significant predictor for all four endpoints. Conclusion Tumor diameter, poor differentiation, deep invasion, LCPNI, immunosuppression status, and LVI are the most critical independent factors for HNCSCC prognosis. Our multi‐institutional data provide a robust framework for hypothesis generation, highlighting that incorporating host biological features and non‐anatomic variables could significantly refine future staging system discussions.

Importance There is no consensus on staging and surveillance imaging for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC). Although imaging has been shown to affect management, broad recommendations from the National Comprehensive Cancer Network have led to variability in clinical practice. Objective To develop multidisciplinary consensus recommendations on the use of staging and surveillance imaging of localized CSCC. Evidence Review A multidisciplinary expert panel across academic and clinical practice settings convened a Delphi consensus, with 3 iterative survey rounds from January to June 2025. Data were analyzed from February 2025 to January 2026. Eligibility defined by at least 1 to 2 CSCC publications during the previous 5 years, involvement in a relevant clinical trial, experience treating at least 3 patients monthly with CSCC, and/or 5 years or longer of clinical practice. Fifty-four experts were invited and 45 (83%) completed all 3 rounds and were included in the final analysis. Structured Delphi surveys evaluated clinical scenarios, imaging modalities, and surveillance strategies for CSCC. Consensus and near-consensus recommendations were generated, defined as 80% or greater and 70% to 79% agreement, respectively. Findings The 45 participants (21 female individuals [47%] and 24 male individuals [53%]; 14 Asian individuals [31%], 1 multiracial individual [2%], and 30 White individuals [67%]) consisted of dermatology (15 [33%]), medical oncology (7 [16%]), radiation oncology (9 [20%]), radiology (9 [20%]), surgery (3 [7%]), and otolaryngology specialists (2 [4%]). The Delphi panel recommended staging and surveillance for CSCCs with at least a 15% risk of metastasis. Consensus or near consensus was reached to recommend staging and surveillance imaging for tumors with a concern for metastasis, bone invasion, invasion beyond subcutaneous fat, large-caliber nerve invasion, or a diameter of 4 cm or larger or the combination of tumors with poorly differentiated histology and any of the following: diameter of 2 cm or larger, lymphovascular invasion and subcutaneous fat invasion, or lymphovascular invasion and small-caliber perineural invasion. Computed tomography imaging was the preferred modality for nodal staging (38 [84%]) and surveillance (35 [78%]). For surveillance duration, consensus was reached to provide imaging for at least 2 years, and near consensus was reached for at least 3 years. Conclusions and Relevance This study provides an expert consensus–based framework to standardize imaging in localized CSCC that may inform future guidelines.

Dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans (DFSP) is a rare cutaneous soft tissue sarcoma and affects an estimated 1,500 people annually in the United States. DFSP frequently exhibits extensive local infiltration. Initial treatment is through surgical excision, and care should be taken to ensure that negative margins are achieved to minimize recurrence. Although DFSP has a reported high rate of recurrence, metastasis is more uncommon. Fibrosarcomatous DFSP is an aggressive variant with an increased risk for local recurrence and metastasis. If achieving negative margins or resection is not feasible, radiation therapy or systemic treatment are options that may be considered by a multidisciplinary team. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) outline recommended treatment options available for DFSP.

The NCCN Guidelines for Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical stage, and treatment options for patients. The panel meets annually to discuss updates to the guidelines based on comments from expert review from panel members, institutional review, as well as submissions from within NCCN and external organizations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the introduction of a new page for locally advanced disease in the setting of clinical node negative status, entitled “Clinical N0 Disease, Locally Advanced MCC.” This new algorithm page addresses locally advanced disease, and the panel clarifies the meaning behind the term “nonsurgical” by further defining locally advanced disease. In addition, the guideline includes the management of in-transit disease and updates to the systemic therapy options.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common form of skin cancer in the United States. Due to the high frequency, BCC occurrences are not typically recorded, and annual rates of incidence can only be estimated. Current estimated rates are 2 million Americans affected annually, and this continues to rise. Exposure to radiation, from either sunlight or previous medical therapy, is a key player in BCC development. BCC is not as aggressive as other skin cancers because it is less likely to metastasize. However, surgery and radiation are prevalent treatment options, therefore disfigurement and limitation of function are significant considerations. The NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) outline an updated risk stratification and treatment options available for BCC.

The NCCN Guidelines for Squamous Cell Skin Cancer provide recommendations for diagnostic workup, clinical stage, and treatment options for patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. The NCCN panel meets annually to discuss updates to the guidelines based on comments from panel members and the Institutional Review, as well as submissions from within NCCN and external organizations. These NCCN Guidelines Insights focus on the introduction of a new surgical recommendation terminology (peripheral and deep en face margin assessment), as well as recent updates on topical prophylaxis, immunotherapy for regional and metastatic disease, and radiation therapy.

BACKGROUND Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS) for cutaneous melanoma is becoming more prevalent, but surgical technique varies. OBJECTIVE To define variations in published techniques for MMS for melanoma. METHODS AND MATERIALS A systematic review was performed of PubMed, EMBASE, and Scopus databases to identify all articles describing surgical techniques for MMS for melanoma. Technical details were recorded for the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative phases of MMS. RESULTS Twenty-four articles were included. Mohs surgeons vary in how they assess clinical margins, how wide a margin they excise on the first MMS layer, and how they process tissue to determine tumor stage and margin clearance during MMS for melanoma. CONCLUSION Mohs micrographic surgery for melanoma is performed with varied surgical techniques. To establish best practices, additional research is necessary to determine how different techniques affect outcomes.