Factors influencing receipt and time to treatment of immunotherapy relative to chemotherapy in stage III and stage IV melanoma.

BACKGROUND: Immunotherapies have changed the landscape of late-stage melanoma; however, data evaluating timely access to immunotherapy are lacking. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study utilizing the National Cancer Database was conducted. Stage III and IV melanoma cases diagnosed between 2011 and 2018 that received systemic treatment with either immunotherapy or chemotherapy were included. Chemotherapy included BRAF/MEK inhibitors. Multivariable logistic regression models were utilized to evaluate factors associated with the likelihood of receiving immunotherapy as primary systemic treatment relative to chemotherapy; additionally, Cox proportional hazards models were utilized to incorporate time from diagnosis to primary systemic therapy into the analysis. RESULTS: The study population was comprised of 14,446 cases. The cohort included 12,053 (83.4%) immunotherapy and 2393 (16.6%) chemotherapy cases. In multivariable logistic regression analysis, factors significantly associated with immunotherapy receipt included population density, circle distance, year of diagnosis, Breslow thickness, and cancer stage. Immunotherapy timing was evaluated using multivariable Cox regression analysis. Minorities were less likely to receive timely immunotherapy than non-Hispanic Whites (HR 0.83, CI 0.74-0.93, p = 0.001). Patients at circle distances of 10-49 miles (HR 0.94, CI 0.89-0.99, p = 0.02) and ≥50 miles (HR 0.83, CI 0.77-0.90, p < 0.001) were less likely to receive timely immunotherapy. CONCLUSION: Patients traveling ≥10 miles and minorities have a decreased likelihood of receiving timely immunotherapy administration for primary systemic treatment. Future research is needed to identify what barriers and approaches can be leveraged to address these inequities.

Racial/Ethnic Disparities in Dermatology Research Fellowship Funding.

Dermatology is a competitive field for applicants pursuing a residency, and many applicants turn to dedicated research years to try and increase their competitiveness. Our study aimed to determine the financial costs of a research year and uncover how the costs of a research year vary for different demographic groups. We administered an anonymous survey through various dermatology listservs and social media platforms to prior, current, and future dermatology applicants who had completed a research fellowship during or after medical school. We found the median total fellowship cost ($26,443.20) was higher than the median fellowship income ($23,625.00). Furthermore, we found minority respondents had significantly lower total income, lower fellowship income, and higher net fellowship cost (p<0.05). Ninety participants completed surveys, and over half reported their research year as financially stressful. The majority did state that if given the opportunity, they would choose to do their research year again. Given the overall high costs of research years and the disparity in funding of these years, steps should be taken to address the disparities in fellowship funding or de-emphasize the importance of research fellowships in the dermatology residency selection process.

Skin Cancer Knowledge, Attitudes and Sun Protection Practices in the Hispanic Population: A Cross-Sectional Survey.

Hispanics are more likely to be diagnosed with skin cancer at a later stage and experience worse overall survival than Whites. The objective of this cross-sectional study was to assess the skin cancer knowledge, attitudes, perceived risk, and sun protection practices among an underserved population in the Phoenix area. We recruited participants from the greater Phoenix area to undergo skin examination and complete a questionnaire. 208 participants were included. The majority were Hispanic (64.9%). Of this Hispanic group, most were from Mexico (87.9%). The Hispanic cohort had an overall mean skin cancer knowledge score of 3.68/6, the lowest of any other racial/ethnic group, but had the highest desire to learn more about skin cancer (64.6%, "strongly agree"). They were the most concerned about developing skin cancer (50.4%, "very concerned") but had relatively lower rates of sun protection practices (7.9% "always use" sunscreen, 22.0% "always use" sun-protective clothing). Limitations of this study include a small sample size, lack of validation for the skin cancer knowledge score, lack of season as a covariate in the multivariate analysis, lack of follow-up, and lack of robust skin cancer risk assessment. In conclusion, despite poorer skin cancer knowledge and sun protection practices, the Hispanic population had the highest concern for developing skin cancer and desire to learn more about skin cancer. Targeted and culturally relevant skin cancer and sun protection education for this group is needed.

The role of race and ethnicity in the dermatology applicant match process.

OBJECTIVE: The field of dermatology is one of the least racially diverse specialties. We aimed to identify ways in which minorities become underrepresented within dermatology. METHODS: We surveyed dermatology applicants who applied to Mayo Clinic in Scottsdale, AZ during the 2018-2019 application cycle and Mayo Clinic in Rochester, Scottsdale, and Jacksonville during the 2019-2020 application cycles. Underrepresented minorities (URM) were defined as Latino/Latina, African American, American Indian/Alaska Native, or Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. RESULTS: In total, 149 and 142 dermatology applicants completed the initial 2019 and 2020 surveys, 112 and 124 completed the follow-up surveys. The racial breakdown was 69.9% Caucasian, 23.7% Asian, 5.4% African American, 0.4% American Indian/Alaska Native, and 0.7% Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander. Eight percent identified as Hispanic/Latino. Median Step 1 scores were lower for URM (p<0.01). URM had more publications (p=0.01). There were no observed differences in away rotations or interviews attended. URM were less likely to match (76.7%) vs. Whites (88.4%) and Asians (96.0%; p=0.03). CONCLUSION: URM are taking out more loans, pursuing research fellowships more often than their White counterparts, publishing more, completing the same number of away rotations and interviews, yet have lower match rates leading to underrepresentation in the field. It is important to realize how Step scores might reflect and reproduce disparities between different racial/ethnic backgrounds, in turn influencing the racial composition of dermatology residency programs.

The role research gap years play in a successful dermatology match.

BACKGROUND: A new trend includes taking a dedicated year away from medical school to complete a research fellowship. There is minimal data on the benefit of a gap year. We aimed to identify if a gap year makes a dermatology applicant more successful in The Match. METHODS: Dermatology applicants who applied to Mayo Clinic Arizona for the 2018-2019 application cycle and Mayo Clinic Rochester, Arizona, and Florida for the 2019-2020 application cycle were surveyed. RESULTS: In total, 291 dermatology applicants completed the initial survey, and 236 completed the follow-up survey. Ninety applicants took a gap year, 198 applicants did not. There was no significant difference in match rates. When comparing match rates at top dermatology residency programs, 40.6% of gap-year applicants matched to these residencies versus 19.0% of no gap-year applicants (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Applicants should weigh the opportunity costs before pursuing research gap years as they may not be universally helpful. Applicants who want to match at a top dermatology program may benefit from a research gap year. This data may have limited generalizability outside of the United States.

Rates of Upstaging, Between Diagnosis and Surgery, and Clinical Management of Metastatic Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: Cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (cSCC) have upstage rates of approximately 10.3% to 11.1%. Data are currently limited on the rate of upstaging for metastatic cSCC. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine the rates of upstaging, between diagnosis and surgery, and differences in management for metastatic and non-metastatic high-risk cSCC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a retrospective, case-control, single institution, multi-center study. Univariate analysis was used. RESULTS: Sixty-eight subjects (34 metastatic & 34 non-metastatic) with 69 tumors were included. The overall rate of upstaging was 46.4%. The most common reasons for upstage were undocumented tumor size and under-diagnosis of poor differentiation. There were no differences in rates of upstaging. Preoperative imaging was performed in 43.6% of wide local excisions (WLE) versus 3.3% of Mohs micrographic surgery (MMS; p < .001). The median days from surgery to sentinel lymph node biopsy (SLNB), or nodal dissection was shorter for WLE versus MMS (0 vs 221 days, p < .001). CONCLUSION: Improved clinical documentation, including documenting tumor size, and the identification of pathologic risk factors, including poor differentiation and depth of invasion, are needed for proper staging. Preoperative imaging and discussion of SLNB may be beneficial for high-risk T2b and T3 tumors.

Cutaneous B cell pseudolymphoma treated with rituximab and methotrexate.

Cutaneous B cell pseudolymphoma (CBPL), or cutaneous lymphoid hyperplasia, is the most common pseudolymphoma. It typically responds well to local treatment and follows a benign course. Herein, we describe the unique case of a patient with CBPL that was refractory to a variety of treatments, with subsequent response to rituximab followed by methotrexate. This case explores the complex interplay of T and B lymphocytes, and the potential role of perifollicular T cells in treatment resistant CBPL. Further, it describes the additive therapeutic effect of rituximab and methotrexate to target both B cell and T cell populations in CBPL, a strategy already employed in a number of other conditions.