Actionable Risk Thresholds for Adjuvant Radiation Therapy and Surveillance Imaging in High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma

Main Article Content

Milaan Shah
Danny Zakria
Jason H. Rogers
Lenka V. Hurton
Brian J. Martin
Joshua Burshtein

Keywords

cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC), clinical impact, 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP), Adjuvant radiation therapy (ART), risk stratification, treatment decisions

Abstract

Aim: Assess the actionable clinical risk thresholds for patients with high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) that clinicians use to guide adjuvant radiation therapy (ART) and surveillance imaging decisions and how the 40-gene expression profile (40-GEP) test impacts management decisions.


Methods: Physician, Physician’s Assistant, and Nurse Practitioner clinicians with at least ten recent or 12 total 40-GEP requisitions were invited to complete an online survey.


Results: In total, 244 out of 752 (32.4%) invited clinicians completed the survey. Preferred formalized staging or risk assessment strategies (AJCC, BWH, NCCN, or individual risk factors) were highly variable. Clinicians most commonly reported recommending ART at 20% risk of local recurrence or regional/distant metastasis and surveillance imaging for patients who had at least a 10% risk. ART was considered at a minimum risk threshold of 10% for local recurrence or regional/distant metastasis. A 40-GEP Class 2B result was ranked among the top two most important high-risk factors for ART and surveillance image decision-making, along with extensive perineural invasion.


Conclusion: Clinicians considered 10% and 20% risk of local recurrence or regional/distant metastasis as clinically relevant thresholds for recommending use of surveillance imaging or ART, respectively. Clinicians reported the 40-GEP test results to be one of the most important factors in assessing risk of disease progression used to guide management decisions regarding ART and surveillance imaging, and the 40-GEP can be used to guide risk-aligned management in patients with high risk cSCC.

References

1. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines®) for Squamous Cell Skin Cancer V.1.2025. https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/squamous.pdf

2. Amin MB, Edge S, Greene F, et al., eds. AJCC Cancer Staging Manual, Eighth Edition (2017). Springer International Publishing; 2017.

3. Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, Kanetsky PA, Karia PS, et al. Evaluation of AJCC Tumor Staging for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma and a Proposed Alternative Tumor Staging System. JAMA Dermatol. 2013;149(4):402. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.2456

4. Rentroia-Pacheco B, Tokez S, Bramer EM, et al. Personalised decision making to predict absolute metastatic risk in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: development and validation of a clinico-pathological model. eClinicalMedicine. 2023;63:102150. doi:10.1016/j.eclinm.2023.102150

5. Jambusaria-Pahlajani A, Jeanselme V, Wang DM, et al. riSCC: A personalized risk model for the development of poor outcomes in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2025;93(1):73-81. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2025.02.076

6. Ran NA, Granger EE, Brodland DG, et al. Risk Factor Number and Recurrence, Metastasis, and Disease-Related Death in Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma. JAMA Dermatol. 2025;161(6):597-604. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2025.0128

7. Shahwan KT, Walker TD, Tan A, et al. Identifying the Impact of Minor Risk Factors in Brigham and Women’s Hospital Stage T1 Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinomas on Risk of Poor Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study. J Am Acad Dermatol. Published online February 24, 2025:S0190-9622(25)00345-7. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2025.02.052

8. Gupta N, Weitzman RE, Murad F, et al. Identifying Brigham and Women’s Hospital stage T2a cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas at risk of poor outcomes. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2022;86(6):1301-1308. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2021.11.046

9. Karia PS, Morgan FC, Califano JA, Schmults CD. Comparison of Tumor Classifications for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck in the 7th vs 8th Edition of the AJCC Cancer Staging Manual. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154(2):175. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.3960

10. Zakhem GA, Qiblawi S, Shelton E, Xu YG. Prevalence of poor outcomes in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma by AJCC and BWH tumor stages, a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2025;Published online(Ahead of print):S0190-9622(25)00151-3. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2024.11.082

11. Ruiz ES, Karia PS, Besaw R, Schmults CD. Performance of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Staging Manual, 8th Edition vs the Brigham and Women’s Hospital Tumor Classification System for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma. JAMA Dermatol. 2019;155(7):819. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2019.0032

12. Venables ZC, Tokez S, Hollestein LM, et al. Validation of Four Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma Staging Systems Using Nationwide Data. Br J Dermatol. Published online December 3, 2021. doi:10.1111/bjd.20909

13. Farberg AS, Fitzgerald AL, Ibrahim SF, et al. Current Methods and Caveats to Risk Factor Assessment in Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC): A Narrative Review. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2022;12(2):267-284. doi:10.1007/s13555-021-00673-y

14. Farberg AS, Marson JW, Glazer A, et al. Expert Consensus on the Use of Prognostic Gene Expression Profiling Tests for the Management of Cutaneous Melanoma: Consensus from the Skin Cancer Prevention Working Group. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2022;12(4):807-823. doi:10.1007/s13555-022-00709-x

15. Moody BR, Farberg AS, Somani AK, Taylor WA. Inconsistent Associations Between Risk Factor Profiles and Adjuvant Radiation Therapy (ART) Treatment in Patients with Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Utility of the 40-Gene Expression Profile to Refine ART Guidance. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2024;14(4):861-873. doi:10.1007/s13555-024-01125-z

16. Roscher I, Falk RS, Vos L, et al. Validating 4 Staging Systems for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma Using Population-Based Data: A Nested Case-Control Study. JAMA Dermatol. 2018;154(4):428. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2017.6428

17. Likhacheva A, Awan M, Barker CA, et al. Definitive and Postoperative Radiation Therapy for Basal and Squamous Cell Cancers of the Skin: Executive Summary of an American Society for Radiation Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. Pract Radiat Oncol. 2020;10(1):8-20. doi:10.1016/j.prro.2019.10.014

18. Ibrahim SF, Kasprzak JM, Hall MA, et al. Enhanced metastatic risk assessment in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma with the 40-gene expression profile test. Future Oncol. 2022;18(7):833-847. doi:10.2217/fon-2021-1277

19. Wysong A, Somani A, Ibrahim SF, et al. Integrating the 40-Gene Expression Profile (40-GEP) Test Improves Metastatic Risk-Stratification Within Clinically Relevant Subgroups of High-Risk Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC) Patients. Dermatol Ther (Heidelb). 2024;14(3):593-612.

20. Wysong A, Newman JG, Covington KR, et al. Validation of a 40-gene expression profile test to predict metastatic risk in localized high-risk cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;84(2):361-369. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.04.088

21. Ruiz ES, Brito K, Karn EE, et al. Predicting adjuvant radiation therapy benefit in cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma with the 40-gene expression profile. Future Oncol. 2024;20(35):2737. doi:10.1080/14796694.2024.2390820

22. Arron ST, Cañueto J, Siegel J, et al. Association of a 40-Gene Expression Profile With Risk of Metastatic Disease Progression of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma and Specification of Benefit of Adjuvant Radiation Therapy. International Journal of Radiation Oncology, Biology, Physics. 2024;120(3):760-771. doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2024.05.022

23. Wysong A. Squamous-Cell Carcinoma of the Skin. Longo DL, ed. N Engl J Med. 2023;388(24):2262-2273. doi:10.1056/NEJMra2206348

24. Patel VA, McCullum C, Sparks AD, Schmults CD, Arron ST, Jambusaria-Pahlajani A. Cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma staging may influence management in users: A survey study. Cancer Med. 2022;11(1):94-103. doi:10.1002/cam4.4426

25. Stevens JS, Murad F, Smile TD, et al. Validation of the 2022 National Comprehensive Cancer Network Risk Stratification for Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma. JAMA Dermatol. 2023;159(7):728-735. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2023.1353

26. Zakria D, Brownstone N, Berman B, et al. Incorporating a Prognostic Gene Expression Profile Test into the Management of Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: An Expert Consensus Panel Report. J Drugs Dermatol. 2024;23(2):54-60. doi:10.36849/JDD.7691

27. Goldberg MS, Brodsky V, Emanuel P. re: Limitations of the commercially available gene expression test in predicting cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma metastasis and clinical outcomes. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2025;Online ahead of print(In Press 15 Mar 2025):S0190-9622(25)00488-8. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2025.02.092

28. Wang DM, Vestita M, Murad FG, et al. Mohs Surgery vs Wide Local Excision in Primary High-Stage Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma. JAMA Dermatol. Published online February 19, 2025. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2024.6214

29. Somani AK, Ibrahim SF, Tassavor M, Yoo J, Farberg AS. Use of the 40-gene Expression Profile (40-GEP) Test in Medicare-eligible Patients Diagnosed with Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma (cSCC) to Guide Adjuvant Radiation Therapy (ART) Decisions Leads to a Significant Reduction in Healthcare Costs. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol. 2024;17(1):41-44.

30. Zakhem GA, Pulavarty AN, Carucci J, Stevenson ML. Association of Patient Risk Factors, Tumor Characteristics, and Treatment Modality With Poor Outcomes in Primary Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis. JAMA Dermatol. 2023;159(2):160-171. doi:10.1001/jamadermatol.2022.5508

31. Gronbeck C, Feng PW, Feng H. Comparison of practice patterns and geographic distribution of osteopathic and allopathic dermatologists. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2021;85(5):1339-1342. doi:10.1016/j.jaad.2020.10.036

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 3 > >>