Alam, Murad

ABSTRACT Background Journal clubs provide opportunities for discussion of new and evolving practices and technologies. Objective We sought to evaluate the utility and effectiveness of a monthly web‐based cosmetic dermatology journal club facilitated by faculty, residents, and medical students. Results From May 2025 to September 2025, 16 articles were discussed and 41 responses were recorded (response rate: 60%). Most respondents found the journal club was an appropriate length, engaging, and very useful. Relevance, frequency, and likelihood to participate in the future varied significantly by participant type. Medical students and residents collectively considered the journal club too infrequent ( p = 0.03) and reported it had less relevance to their practice ( p < 0.001). Conclusion A monthly web‐based cosmetic dermatology journal club was generally positively received by respondents.

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.

Importance Laser-assisted drug delivery (LADD) is used for various medical and cosmetic applications. However, there is insufficient evidence-based guidance to assist clinicians performing LADD. Objective To develop recommendations for the safe and effective use of LADD. Evidence Review A systematic literature review of Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, and MEDLINE was conducted in December 2019 to identify publications reporting research on LADD. A multidisciplinary panel was convened to draft recommendations informed by the systematic review; they were refined through 2 rounds of Delphi survey, 2 consensus meetings, and iterative review by all panelists until unanimous consensus was achieved. Findings Of the 48 published studies of ablative fractional LADD that met inclusion criteria, 4 were cosmetic studies; 21, oncologic; and 23, medical (not cosmetic/oncologic), and 6 publications of nonablative fractional LADD were included at the request of the expert panel, producing a total of 54 studies. Thirty-four studies (63.0%) were deemed to have low risk of bias, 17 studies (31.5%) had moderate risk, and 3 (5.5%) had serious risk. The key findings that informed the guidelines developed by the expert panel were as follows: LADD is safe in adults and adolescents (≥12 years) with all Fitzpatrick skin types and in patients with immunosuppression; it is an effective treatment for actinic keratosis, cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma in situ, actinic cheilitis, hypertrophic scars, and keloids; it is useful for epidermal and dermal analgesia; drug delivery may be increased through the application of heat, pressure, or occlusion, or by using an aqueous drug solution; laser settings should be selected to ensure that channel diameter is greater than the delivered molecule; antibiotic prophylaxis is not recommended, except with impaired wound healing; antiviral prophylaxis is recommended when treating the face and genitalia; and antifungal prophylaxis is not recommended. The guideline’s 15 recommendations address 5 areas of LADD use: (I) indications and contraindications; (II) parameters to report; (III) optimization of drug delivery; (IV) safety considerations; and (V) prophylaxis for bacterial, viral, and fungal infections. Conclusions and Relevance This systematic review and Delphi consensus approach culminated in an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for safe and effective use of LADD in a variety of applications. Future research will further improve our understanding of this novel treatment technique.

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 Success in skin cancer treatment is determined through outcome measurement. Patients and physicians may prioritize different outcomes of care, and identification of such may enhance patient-centered care. OBJECTIVE To identify gaps between patient and physician attitudes toward skin cancer outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS A single-day, 21-patient, modified, in-person Delphi process to solicit and rate the importance of skin cancer–related outcomes was conducted. Twelve masked dermatologic surgeons rated patient-generated outcomes in a 2-round modified Delphi process. Each item was rated on a 1 to 9 scale (1, least important; 9, most important) using the Qualtrics web platform (Qualtrics, Provo, UT). Results of the physician ratings were compared with the patient ratings. RESULTS A list of 53 skin cancer treatment–related themes and outcomes was generated. Eight items were ranked by physicians as “very high” (>80% importance), 5 as “high” (>70% importance), 19 as intermediate, and 21 as low. The physician and patient panels' ratings were concordant for 56% of items, whereas 7 outcome items showed a 2-category discordance. CONCLUSION Physicians and patients were concordant regarding skin cancer treatment on multiple spheres. Areas of discordance include patient fear of unknown future risk, recurrence, or empowering patients to make treatment choices, and may be areas of continued improvement for delivery of patient-centered care.

BACKGROUND Patient-reported outcomes are critical to research directed at maximizing patient benefit. The outcomes patients consider most relevant in the treatment of skin cancer have not been directly investigated. OBJECTIVE To develop a ranked list of outcomes deemed most important by patients with skin cancer through a proctored Delphi process. METHODS Twenty-one patients with a history of skin cancer volunteered to participate in the patient summit. The patient members participated in a guided discussion to generate a long list of potentially relevant outcomes. The list was then condensed and ranked through 2 rounds of a proctored Delphi process. RESULTS Patients were diverse in their skin cancer histories and complexities, ages, and states of residence. Twelve themes were rated as highly important by 70% or more of participants. Most of these themes related to patient education and the collaborative nature of the physician–patient relationship. Fear of recurrence and cosmetic outcome were also highly rated. Limitations include a preponderance of older patients and patients from the midwest and northeast. CONCLUSION Patients with skin cancer overwhelmingly prioritize a shared decision-making process, in which they are actively engaged and value detailed education regarding their disease. This should inform future research directed at skin cancer treatment and current physician–patient interactions.

e21079 Background: Increased emphasis is being placed on patient centered outcomes. There is little existing literature on the patient population's prioritization of outcomes in skin cancer care. A PCORI-supported Patient Outcomes Summit was organized to address this. Methods: Patients were recruited from patient support groups, solicitation of ASDS member practices, as well as personal recruitment of patients from the practices of the investigators. A one-day Patient Outcome Summit was convened in Arlington, VA in August 2016. Patients attendees were given orientation to existing outcomes for skin cancer as well as the Delphi process. They then participated in a two round Delphi process by run non-physician facilitators (AB and EA). Group discussion was used to solicit outcomes for inclusion in the rating rounds. Outcomes were then rated anonymously on a 1 (lowest relevance) to 9 (highest relevance) scale. Patients were then able to view the anonymous feedback of the group and rerate the items as they deemed fit based on the group feedback. Results: 21 patients participated in the Delphi process (5 men and 21 women). 10 were melanoma and 11 were non-melanoma patients. 56 treatment related outcomes and themes were identified. The ten most highly rated themes are shown in the table. Conclusions: The first ever skin cancer patient outcome summit was convened to address the lack of patient-centered data in the skin cancer literature and guide measure development. Some traditional outcomes (recurrence) were identifiend. However, the majority of the themes rated most important by the patient attendees center around inclusion of the patient in the decision making process and the physician-patient communication. Increased emphasis and education in these domains may drive increased patient satisfaction in skin cancer care. [Table: see text]