Get your free personalized podcast brief

We scan new podcasts and send you the top 5 insights daily.

While neoadjuvant pembrolizumab (KEYNOTE-689) is now standard of care for resectable head and neck cancer, it carries a critical risk. During the pre-surgical treatment window, some patients may experience disease progression or toxicity that makes them ineligible for their planned curative surgery.

Related Insights

While neoadjuvant-only immunotherapy has a strong rationale, a patient-level cross-trial comparison of CheckMate 816 (neoadjuvant) and 770T (perioperative) suggests the addition of adjuvant therapy improves event-free survival, favoring a full perioperative approach.

With 72% response rates to neoadjuvant immunotherapy, surgeons are shifting from immediate, aggressive surgery to a "wait-and-see" approach. Shrinking the tumor first can turn a morbid, disfiguring operation into a much simpler procedure, fundamentally changing the initial surgical evaluation for cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (CSCC).

Instead of basing adjuvant radiation decisions on a patient's initial, pre-treatment tumor stage, clinicians should use the post-neoadjuvant pathological stage (ypTNM). Patients with a major pathologic response (e.g., downstaging from T3 to T1) may be able to safely avoid additional adjuvant radiation therapy.

The practice-changing KEYNOTE-689 trial was open-label, meaning patients knew their treatment. This could introduce bias; patients on the standard care arm may have dropped out ("bailed"), while those on the pembrolizumab arm might have progressed, artificially making the rates of patients reaching surgery appear similar.

Standard cancer surgery often removes lymph nodes—the factories producing immune cells. Administering immunotherapy *before* this destructive process is critical. It arms the immune system while it is still intact and capable of mounting a powerful, targeted response against the tumor.

While KEYNOTE-905 showed dramatic survival benefits with neoadjuvant plus adjuvant EV-pembrolizumab, its design makes it impossible to isolate the benefit of each phase. The high (57%) pathologic complete response after neoadjuvant therapy alone suggests many patients may be overtreated with adjuvant cycles, risking unnecessary long-term toxicity like neuropathy.

A potential complication of successful neoadjuvant immunotherapy in rectal cancer is the development of stenosing scar tissue. This can block the lumen, making endoscopic surveillance impossible and necessitating surgery for a patient who may have otherwise achieved a complete clinical response.

While oncologists focus on the low 4% rate of Interstitial Lung Disease (ILD) from neoadjuvant TDXD, surgeons worry this complication could prevent patients from reaching potentially curative surgery, drawing parallels to issues seen with neoadjuvant immunotherapy.

Dr. Radvanyi advocates for a paradigm shift: treating almost all cancers with neoadjuvant immunotherapy immediately after diagnosis. This "kickstarts" an immune response before standard treatments like surgery and chemotherapy, which are known to be immunosuppressive, can weaken the patient's natural defenses against the tumor.

While an approved option, systemic checkpoint inhibitors like pembrolizumab come with a significant downside. Clinicians counsel patients on a 15% chance of life-altering toxicities like permanent endocrine disease, a critical risk when the treatment often only delays, not prevents, cystectomy.