Margaret McCusker1, Nicole Basset-Seguin2, Reinhard Dummer3, Karl Lewis4, Dirk Schadendorf5, Aleksandar Sekulic6, Jeannie Hou7, Lisa Wang7, Huibin Yue7, Axel Hauschild8. 1. Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA. Electronic address: Mccusker.Margaret@gene.com. 2. Hôpital Saint-Louis, Université Paris 7, Paris, France. 3. University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland. 4. University of Colorado Cancer Center, Denver, CO, USA. 5. University HospitalEssen, Essen, Germany. 6. Mayo Clinic, Scottsdale, AZ, USA. 7. Genentech, Inc., South San Francisco, CA, USA. 8. University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Kiel, Germany.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This review provides a description of the epidemiology and survival outcomes for cases with metastatic basal cell carcinoma (mBCC) based on published reports (1981-2011). METHODS: A literature search (MEDLINE via PubMed) was conducted for mBCC case reports published in English: 1981-2011. There were 172 cases that met the following criteria: primary BCC located on skin, metastasis confirmed by pathology and metastasis not resulting from direct tumour spread. From these, 100 mBCC cases with explicit information on follow-up time were selected for analysis. Survival analysis was conducted using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Among 100 mBCC cases selected for analysis, including one case with Gorlin syndrome, 50% had regional metastases (RM) and 50% had distant metastases (DM). Cases with DM were younger at mBCC diagnosis (mean age, 58.0 versus 66.3 years for RM; P=0.0013). Among 93 (of 100) cases with treatment information for metastatic disease, more DM cases received chemotherapy (36.2% versus 6.5% for RM), but more RM cases underwent surgery (87.0% versus 40.4% for DM). Among all 100 cases, median survival after mBCC diagnosis was 54 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 24-72), with shorter survival in DM (24 months; 95% CI, 12-35) versus RM cases (87 months; 95% CI, 63-not evaluable). CONCLUSION: Cases with RM and DM mBCC may have different clinical courses and outcomes. Based on published reports, DM cases were younger at mBCC diagnosis, with shorter median survival than RM cases. This study provides a historical context for emerging mBCC treatments.
PURPOSE: This review provides a description of the epidemiology and survival outcomes for cases with metastatic basal cell carcinoma (mBCC) based on published reports (1981-2011). METHODS: A literature search (MEDLINE via PubMed) was conducted for mBCC case reports published in English: 1981-2011. There were 172 cases that met the following criteria: primary BCC located on skin, metastasis confirmed by pathology and metastasis not resulting from direct tumour spread. From these, 100 mBCC cases with explicit information on follow-up time were selected for analysis. Survival analysis was conducted using Kaplan-Meier methods. RESULTS: Among 100 mBCC cases selected for analysis, including one case with Gorlin syndrome, 50% had regional metastases (RM) and 50% had distant metastases (DM). Cases with DM were younger at mBCC diagnosis (mean age, 58.0 versus 66.3 years for RM; P=0.0013). Among 93 (of 100) cases with treatment information for metastatic disease, more DM cases received chemotherapy (36.2% versus 6.5% for RM), but more RM cases underwent surgery (87.0% versus 40.4% for DM). Among all 100 cases, median survival after mBCC diagnosis was 54 months (95% confidence interval (CI), 24-72), with shorter survival in DM (24 months; 95% CI, 12-35) versus RM cases (87 months; 95% CI, 63-not evaluable). CONCLUSION: Cases with RM and DM mBCC may have different clinical courses and outcomes. Based on published reports, DM cases were younger at mBCC diagnosis, with shorter median survival than RM cases. This study provides a historical context for emerging mBCC treatments.
Authors: Alvaro C Laga; Inga Marie Schaefer; Lynette M Sholl; Christopher A French; John Hanna Journal: Am J Clin Pathol Date: 2019-11-04 Impact factor: 2.493
Authors: V Kakkassery; K U Loeffler; M Sand; K R Koch; A M Lentzsch; A C Nick; I A Adamietz; L M Heindl Journal: Ophthalmologe Date: 2017-03 Impact factor: 1.059