Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2024 Mar;17(3 Suppl 2):S3-S8.

Integrating 40-GEP Testing to Improve Clinical Recommendations for Adjuvant Radiation for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Multidisciplinary Consensus Guidelines

Affiliations
Review

Integrating 40-GEP Testing to Improve Clinical Recommendations for Adjuvant Radiation for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: Multidisciplinary Consensus Guidelines

Ramesh Gopal et al. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2024 Mar.

Abstract

Early identification and intervention in patients with cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) who are at high risk for metastasis is important for optimal outcomes. Prognostic tools (e.g., American Joint Committee on Cancer, 8th edition [AJCC-8]) and management guidelines (National Comprehensive Cancer Network® [NCCN]) are useful in helping to identify high-risk patients with cSCC who might benefit from adjuvant therapies, such as radiation and/or immunotherapies; however, traditional staging and management guidelines rely on clinicopathologic risk factors to predict risk, which limits their prognostic accuracy. Gene expression profiling (GEP) is a clinically available, objective metric that can be used in conjunction with traditional clinicopathological staging to help clinicians stratify risk in patients with cSCC. The validated 40-GEP test can accurately classify patients with at least one high-risk feature as being at low (Class 1), higher (Class 2A), or highest (Class 2B) biological risk of nodal or distant metastasis within three years of diagnosis. A multidisciplinary panel comprising radiation oncologists and dermatologists/Mohs micrographic surgeons with expertise in cSCC management convened in June 2023 to discuss the utility of 40-GEP testing in cSCC clinical decision-making in regard to adjuvant radiation therapy (ART). The panel identified gaps in clinical practice in which 40-GEP testing has particular utility: in escalation of care for lower-stage patients with high-risk tumors; in de-escalation of care for patients for whom the risks of ART may outweigh the benefits; and in decision-making regarding elective radiation to the nodal basin. The expert panel developed a risk-based clinical workflow for ART in patients with cSCC, utilizing 40-GEP testing within NCCN management guidelines and AJCC-8 staging.

Keywords: 40-GEP; adjuvant radiation therapy; consensus; cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma; gene expression profiling; prognosis; risk of recurrence; risk stratification.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

DISCLOSURES: All authors received an honorarium from for their participation in this roundtable supplement. Dr. Tolkachjov is a speaker and investigator for Castle Biosciences, Inc., and Bioventus/LifeNet. Dr. Marquardt has served as a speaker for Castle Biosciences, Inc.

Figures

FIGURE 1.
FIGURE 1.
Metastatic risk prediction of AJCC-8 and BWH staging systems is significantly improved when 40-GEP is included. When the performance of staging-alone models was compared to multivariate models that included the 40-GEP, a significant improvement in predictive accuracy of metastatic events was observed. Inclusion of interaction terms revealed no significant interactions (p>0.05), verifying the 40-GEP as contributing independent prognostic value to the prediction of metastatic risk relative to staging alone.GEP: gene expression profile; AJCC-8: American Joint Commission on Cancer Staging Manual, eighth edition; BWH: Brigham and Women’s Hospital cancer staging system SOURCE: Wysong A, Newman JG, Covington KR, et al. Validation of a 40-gene expression profile test to predict metastatic risk in localized high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84(2):361–369.
FIGURE 2.
FIGURE 2.
A risk-based clinical workflow for ART in patients with cSCC, integrating AJCC-8 staging and 40-GEP testing into current NCCN guidelines

References

    1. Amin MB, Edge SB, Greene FL, editors. American Joint Commission on Cancer Staging Manual (8th ed). 2017. Switzerland: Springer.
    1. Venables ZC, Tokez S, Hollestein LM et al. Validation of four cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma staging systems using nationwide data. Br J Dermatol. 2022;186:835–842. - PMC - PubMed
    1. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/squamous.pdf NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®). Squamous cell skin cancer, V1.2024. 9 Nov 2023. Accessed 18 Dec 2023.
    1. Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, Kanetsky PA, Karia PS et al. Evaluation of AJCC tumor staging for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma and a proposed alternative tumor staging system. JAMA Dermatol. 2013;149(4):402–410. - PubMed
    1. Karia PS, Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, Harrington DP et al. Evaluation of American Joint Committee on Cancer, International Union Against Cancer, and Brigham and Women’s Hospital tumor staging for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. J Clin Oncol. 2014;32(4):327–334. - PMC - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources