Clinical Review

Systemic Targeted Treatments for Basal Cell Carcinoma

Author and Disclosure Information

 

References

Drug Resistance

Treatment resistance to SHH inhibitors, though uncommon, is a growing concern. Acquired mutations in the SMO binding site or downstream mediators of the SHH pathway have been shown to confer resistance to vismodegib and sonidegib.72,81-83 In addition, it appears that there may be shared resistance among the drugs in this class. One study assessing the efficacy of sonidegib in 9 patients with laBCC resistant to vismodegib found that these patients also did not respond to sonidegib.84 Interestingly, 1 case report documented tumor regression of an intracranial BCC in a patient treated with sonidegib and itraconazole after failure with vismodegib.85 An in vitro study also found that itraconazole maintained SHH inhibitory activity for all drug-resistant SMO mutations that have been reported.72 Therefore, itraconazole monotherapy or combination therapy with a canonical SHH inhibitor may be considered for patients with recalcitrant BCC and warrants further investigation.

Taladegib is a newly developed SMO inhibitor that may serve as another promising alternative for patients who develop resistance to vismodegib or sonidegib. A phase 1 trial of taladegib for advanced BCC found an ORR of 69% (11/16) in the SHH inhibitor–naïve group and an ORR of 36% (11/32) in the group previously treated with a SHH inhibitor.86 Additionally, the safety profile and frequency of adverse effects appear to be similar to those associated with vismodegib and sonidegib.86,87 Unfortunately, no clinical trials evaluating taladegib for BCC are ongoing or in development at this time.

Recurrence

There appears to be a relatively high rate of recurrence for BCC patients who achieve a CR to SHH inhibitors. In a retrospective study of 116 laBCC patients who experienced a CR after vismodegib therapy, 54 patients (47%) relapsed at 36 months. Among the 54 patients that relapsed, 27 were re-treated with vismodegib, which resulted in an ORR of 85% (23/27), a CR rate of 37% (10/27), and a PR rate of 48% (13/27).88 Another retrospective study of 35 laBCC patients who relapsed after vismodegib treatment reported a 31% (11/35) clinical recurrence rate at 6-month follow-up.89 An observational retrospective study also assessed the efficacy of SHH inhibitor maintenance therapy for advanced BCC patients who achieved a CR.90 In the study, 27 (64%) patients received a maintenance dose of 150 mg vismodegib once per week for 1 year, while 15 (36%) patients decided not to take a maintenance dose following CR of their BCC. All patients who took the maintenance therapy did not experience clinical recurrence at 1-year follow-up, whereas 26% of patients not on the maintenance dose relapsed.90 Consequently, these results indicate that BCC recurrence is frequent after SHH inhibitor therapy and highlights the importance of close surveillance after CR is attained. Nevertheless, most patients still respond to treatment with SHH inhibitors after relapsing, and intermittent maintenance doses may be an effective means to reduce risk of recurrence.

Conclusion

Vismodegib and sonidegib are SHH inhibitors approved for the treatment of laBCC and mBCC. Cemiplimab is now also approved for patients who do not respond to SHH inhibitors or for whom SHH inhibitors are not tolerable. Although these systemic targeted therapies can lead to notable tumor shrinkage and even complete regression in some patients, recurrence is common, and adverse effects may limit their use. Drug resistance is an emerging issue that requires additional examination. Further clinical studies are needed to determine which patients are likely to respond to these targeted treatments.

Various intermittent and maintenance drug regimens should be evaluated for their potential to mitigate adverse effects and reduce risk of recurrence, respectively. The synergistic effects of these medications with other therapies as well as their neoadjuvant and adjuvant roles should be further investigated. For example, administration of an SHH inhibitor prior to surgical excision of a BCC may allow for a smaller surgical defect size, thereby improving cosmetic and functional outcomes. Moreover, these systemic targeted medications may allow for previously inoperable tumors to become amenable to surgical treatment.

Although SHH inhibitors and PD-1 inhibitors represent a major advancement in the field of oncodermatology, real-world efficacy and safety data in the upcoming years will be important for elucidating their true benefit for patients with BCC.

Pages

Recommended Reading

Skin Cancer Education in the Medical School Curriculum
MDedge Dermatology
Bupivacaine following Mohs surgery reduces opioid use, study finds
MDedge Dermatology
Topical tranexamic acid reduces postop bleeding following Mohs surgery
MDedge Dermatology
Fractional lasers appear to treat more than a fraction of skin, expert says
MDedge Dermatology
Studies address ibrutinib bleeding risk in patients with CLL receiving Mohs surgery
MDedge Dermatology
Adjunctive confocal microscopy found to reduce unnecessary skin excisions
MDedge Dermatology
What’s ahead for laser-assisted drug delivery?
MDedge Dermatology
Mohs surgery in the elderly: The dilemma of when to treat
MDedge Dermatology
Surgical site infections not increased in immunocompromised patients after Mohs surgery
MDedge Dermatology
Study finds higher risk of skin cancer after childhood organ transplant
MDedge Dermatology