4.7 Article

Combination of Pembrolizumab and Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy in Recurrent Metastatic Penile Squamous Cell Carcinoma: A Case Study

期刊

BIOMEDICINES
卷 10, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biomedicines10123033

关键词

penile squamous cell carcinoma; metastatic; recurrent; combination therapy; pembrolizumab; stereotactic body radiation therapy; durable response

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this case report, a male patient with penile squamous cell carcinoma achieved a complete durable treatment response using pembrolizumab and stereotactic body radiation therapy, despite having genomic features of an immunologically cold tumor. This case highlights the importance of investigating treatment options for tumors that lack genomic features susceptible to immunotherapy.
The prognosis for patients with penile squamous cell carcinoma metastatic to regional lymph nodes or distant sites remains poor with limited treatment options, especially after the failure of first-line chemotherapy. Clinical trials evaluating the use of checkpoint inhibitor therapy, or the use of checkpoint inhibitor therapy with stereotactic body radiation therapy for the treatment of metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma, are currently unavailable. In this case report, we present a patient with relapsed advanced penile squamous cell carcinoma and an unknown (human papilloma virus) HPV status and borderline programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L)1 status who was treated with pembrolizumab and stereotactic body radiation therapy. This patient achieved a complete durable treatment response despite having genomic features of an immunologically cold tumor. This case highlights the importance of investigating more into the treatment of these tumors that lack genomic features that classically have been observed to be susceptible to treatment with immunotherapy or immunotherapy augmented with stereotactic body radiation therapy in solid tumors, particularly in metastatic penile squamous cell carcinoma.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据