ABSTRACT
Cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (SCCs) are a major complication of some subtypes of epidermolysis bullosa (EB), with high morbidity and mortality rates and unmet therapeutic needs. The high rate of endogenous mutations and the fibrotic stroma are considered to contribute to the pathogenesis. Patients with dystrophic EB (DEB) and Kindler EB (KEB) have the highest propensity for developing SCCs. Another patient group that develops high-risk SCCs is immunosuppressed (IS) patients, especially after organ transplantation. Herein, we interrogate whether immune checkpoint proteins and immunosuppressive enzymes are dysregulated in EB-associated SCCs as an immune resistance mechanism and compare the expression patterns with those in SCCs from IS patients, who frequently develop high-risk tumors and sporadic SCCs, and immunocompetent (IC) individuals. The expression of indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase (IDO), programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1), programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1), T cell immunoglobulin and mucin-domain-containing protein-3 (TIM-3), lymphocyte activation gene-3 (LAG-3), and inflammatory infiltrates (CD4, CD8, and CD68) was assessed via immunohistochemistry and semi-quantitative analysis in 30 DEB-SCCs, 22 KEB-SCCs, 106 IS-SCCs, and 100 sporadic IC-SCCs. DEB-SCCs expressed significantly higher levels of IDO and PD-L1 in tumor cells and PD-1 in the tumor microenvironment (TME) compared with SCCs from IC and IS individuals. The number of CD4-positive T cells per mm2 was significantly lower in DEB-SCCs compared with IC-SCCs. KEB-SCCs showed the lowest expression of the exhaustion markers TIM-3 and LAG-3 compared with all other groups. These findings identify IDO, PD-1, and PD-L1 to be increased in EB-SCCs and candidate targets for combinatory treatments, especially in DEB-SCCs.
ABSTRACT
Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) is a major complication of recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa (RDEB) that has high morbidity and mortality rates and unmet therapeutic needs. The aim of this study was to evaluate the molecular pattern of cSCC and the clinical course of immunotherapy in 2 RDEB patients with multiple advanced cSCC. Clinical course and disease staging were evaluated retrospectively. The tumour tissues were subjected to immunohistochemical staining. DNA from the blood and cSCC samples was subjected to massive parallel sequencing, and somatic mutations were determined. Patient 1 survived for over 2 years as disease control was achieved with cemiplimab and intralesional interleukin-2. The target advanced cSCC demonstrated a high rate of somatic mutations and strong expression of the immune markers, indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase, programmed cell death protein ligand 1, and lymphocyte-activation gene 3. The patient ultimately succumbed to complications of oesophageal carcinoma. Patient 2 had an undifferentiated cSCC on the foot, which displayed a low mutational burden and did not express immune markers. The tumour progressed quickly even with cemiplimab therapy. These 2 cases underscore the challenges of cSCC treatment for RDEB. Multiple tumours with different molecular and immune profiles occur concomitantly or sequentially, and surgical excision is not always possible because of the anatomical and tissue constraints imposed by the disease itself. In conclusion, programmed cell death protein 1 inhibitors are approved and effective in treating metastatic and locally advanced cSCC. Our experience and the literature suggest that cemiplimab is an option in patients with RDEB if surgery is not. Somatic mutations and the immune microenvironment should be characterized to predict therapeutic response, particularly in aggressive undifferentiated tumours.
