Get your free personalized podcast brief

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

Though typically contraindicated, checkpoint inhibitors can be used for transplant recipients with advanced skin cancer. This requires shared decision-making, collaboration with the transplant team, and a specific protocol involving high-dose pulse steroids to mitigate the high risk of allograft rejection.

Related Insights

Instead of automatically ruling out immunotherapy for cancer patients with co-existing autoimmune diseases like rheumatoid arthritis, oncologists collaborate with experienced rheumatologists. This specialist team can assess the patient's specific condition, manage risks, and confidently advise whether it is safe to proceed with anti-PD-1 therapy, enabling more patients to access effective treatments.

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.

ITP caused by immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) is rare (0.25% incidence) but generally has a good prognosis. Most patients respond to standard first-line ITP therapies, and approximately 70% of those re-challenged with the ICI can continue treatment without a recurrence of ITP.

T-cells have natural inhibitory signals, or "brakes" (like PD-1), to prevent over-activation. Some cancers exploit this. Checkpoint inhibitor drugs block these brakes, unleashing a patient's existing T-cells to attack cancer cells more aggressively. This approach has been miraculous for cancers like melanoma.

The primary goal after managing immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI)-induced ITP is resuming cancer therapy. Data shows most patients do not experience a relapse of ITP upon re-challenge with the ICI, allowing them to continue their effective cancer treatment.

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.

Patients receiving systemic immunotherapy for advanced skin cancer are still at high risk for developing new, low-risk primary skin cancers. Medical oncologists should not act as default dermatologists; ongoing co-management is crucial to identify and treat these new lesions while the patient is on systemic therapy.

Data shows that patients who permanently stopped ipilimumab due to immune-related side effects still had exceptionally good outcomes. This gives clinicians confidence to manage toxicity by discontinuing the CTLA-4 inhibitor portion of the regimen while continuing nivolumab, without fearing a loss of efficacy.

The high efficacy of checkpoint inhibitors in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma is enabling a "de-escalation" strategy. Upfront systemic therapy can be so effective that it eliminates the need for subsequent morbid local treatments like extensive surgery or radiation, a major benefit for elderly patients.

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.