Immunosuppression Outweighs Clinical AEIOU Heuristics in Predicting Disease Progression of Merkel Cell Carcinoma: A Retrospective Cohort Study
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.2340/actadv.v106.adv-2026-0443Keywords:
merkel cell carcinoma, immunosuppression, disease progression, skin cancer prognosis, risk stratification, clinical predictorsAbstract
Merkel cell carcinoma (MCC)is a rare but aggressive cutaneous malignancy with increasing incidence and poor prognosis. Host immune status is a key determinant of MCCmerkel cell carcinoma development and outcome. While the AEIOU criteria are widely used to facilitate clinical recognition, their value for prognostic assessment remains unclear. To evaluate the association between individual AEIOU presentation features and disease progression in patients with merkel cell carcinoma, with particular emphasis on immunosuppression. We performed a retrospective single-centre cohort study including 400 patients diagnosed with merkel cell carcinoma. Disease progression, defined as local recurrence, nodal involvement or distant metastasis, served as the primary endpoint. AEIOU criteria were assessed at diagnosis and analysed using logistic regression. Complete follow-up data were available for 241 patients, of whom 81 (33.6%) experienced disease progression. Patients with progression were significantly older and more frequently male. Among the AEIOU components, immunosuppression was the only criterion significantly associated with disease progression, conferring an increased risk compared with immunocompetent patients (p<0.001). Other AEIOU features showed no consistent prognostic association. Complete follow-up data were available for 241 patients, of whom 81 (33.6%) experienced disease progression. Patients with progression were significantly older and more frequently male. Among the AEIOU components, immunosuppression was the only criterion significantly associated with disease progression, conferring an increased risk compared with immunocompetent patients (p<0.001). Other AEIOU features showed no consistent prognostic association.
Downloads
References
Schadendorf D, Lebbé C, Zur Hausen A, Avril MF, Hariharan S, Bharmal M, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma: epidemiology, prognosis, therapy and unmet medical needs. Eur J Cancer 2017; 71: 53–69. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2016.10.022
Fitzgerald TL, Dennis S, Kachare SD, Vohra NA, Wong JH, Zervos EE. Dramatic increase in the incidence and mortality from Merkel cell carcinoma in the United States. Am Surg 2015; 81: 802–806. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/000313481508100819
Becker JC. Merkel cell carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2010; 21 Suppl 7: vii81–5. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdq366
Lyhne D, Lock-Andersen J, Dahlstrøm K, Drzewiecki KT, Balslev E, Muhic A, et al. Rising incidence of Merkel cell carcinoma. J Plast Surg Hand Surg 2011; 45: 274–280. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/2000656X.2011.613233
Lemos B, Nghiem P. Merkel cell carcinoma: more deaths but still no pathway to blame. J Invest Dermatol 2007; 127: 2100–2103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jid.5700925
Agelli M, Clegg LX. Epidemiology of primary Merkel cell carcinoma in the United States. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003; 49: 832–841. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0190-9622(03)02108-X
Saleem N, Wang J, Rejuso A, Teixeira-Pinto A, Stephens JH, Wilson A, et al. Outcomes of solid organ transplant recipients with advanced cancers receiving immune checkpoint inhibitors: a systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. JAMA Oncol 2025; 11: 1150–1159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamaoncol.2025.2374
Heath M, Jaimes N, Lemos B, Mostaghimi A, Wang LC, Peñas PF, et al. Clinical characteristics of Merkel cell carcinoma at diagnosis in 195 patients: the AEIOU features. J Am Acad Dermatol 2008; 58: 375–381. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2007.11.020
Koljonen V, Sahi H, Böhling T, Mäkisalo H. Post-transplant Merkel cell carcinoma. Acta Derm Venereol 2016; 96: 442–447. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2340/00015555-2284
Lanoy E, Costagliola D, Engels EA. Skin cancers associated with HIV infection and solid-organ transplantation among elderly adults. Int J Cancer 2010; 126: 1724–1731. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.24931
Fields RC, Busam KJ, Chou JF, Panageas KS, Pulitzer MP, Allen PJ, et al. Five hundred patients with Merkel cell carcinoma evaluated at a single institution. Ann Surg 2011; 254: 465–473. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/SLA.0b013e31822c5fc1
Iyer JG, Storer BE, Paulson KG, Lemos B, Phillips JL, Bichakjian CK, et al. Relationships among primary tumor size, number of involved nodes, and survival for 8044 cases of Merkel cell carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol 2014; 70: 637–643. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2013.11.031
Harms KL, Healy MA, Nghiem P, Sober AJ, Johnson TM, Bichakjian CK, et al. Analysis of prognostic factors from 9387 Merkel cell carcinoma cases forms the basis for the new 8th edition AJCC staging system. Ann Surg Oncol 2016; 23: 3564–3571. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1245/s10434-016-5266-4
Tarantola TI, Vallow LA, Halyard MY, Weenig RH, Warschaw KE, Grotz TE, et al. Prognostic factors in Merkel cell carcinoma: analysis of 240 cases. J Am Acad Dermatol 2013; 68: 425–432. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jaad.2012.09.036
Bichakjian CK, Olencki T, Aasi SZ, Alam M, Andersen JS, Blitzblau R, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma, version 1.2018, NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2018; 16: 742–774. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2018.0055
Moshiri AS, Nghiem P. Milestones in the staging, classification, and biology of Merkel cell carcinoma. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 2014; 12: 1255–1262. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6004/jnccn.2014.0123
Naseri S, Steiniche T, Ladekarl M, Bønnelykke-Behrndtz ML, Hölmich LR, Langer SW, et al. Management recommendations for Merkel cell carcinoma—a Danish perspective. Cancers 2020; 12: 554. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/cancers12030554
Becker JC, DeTemple VK, Wesling Klinikum Minden Thomas Eigentler J, Grabbe S, Höller U, Klumpp B, et al. S2k-Leitlinie-Merkelzellkarzinom-Update 2022 # S2k-Guideline-Merkel cell carcinoma [MCC, neuroendocrine carcinoma of the skin]-Update 2022 # Kurztitel: S2k-Leitlinie Merkelzellkarzinom-Update 2022 Short title: S2k-Guideline Merkel Cell Carcinoma-Update 2022.
Keele L, Grieve R. So many choices: a guide to selecting among methods to adjust for observed confounders. Stat Med 2025; 44: e10336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.10336
Neumann A, Billionnet C. Covariate adjustment of cumulative incidence functions for competing risks data using inverse probability of treatment weighting. Comput Methods Programs Biomed 2016; 129: 63–70. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmpb.2016.03.008
Austin PC, Stuart EA. Moving towards best practice when using inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) using the propensity score to estimate causal treatment effects in observational studies. Stat Med 2015; 34: 3661–3679. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.6607
McNeish DM. Using lasso for predictor selection and to assuage overfitting: a method long overlooked in behavioral sciences. Multivariate Behav Res 2015; 50: 471–484. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/00273171.2015.1036965
Pavlou M, Omar RZ, Ambler G. Penalized regression methods with modified cross-validation and bootstrap tuning produce better prediction models. Biom J 2024; 66: e202300245. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bimj.202300245
Lee KJ, Carlin JB. Multiple imputation for missing data: fully conditional specification versus multivariate normal imputation. Am J Epidemiol 2010; 171: 624–632. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwp425
Laqueur HS, Shev AB, Kagawa RMC. SuperMICE: an ensemble machine learning approach to multiple imputation by chained equations. Am J Epidemiol 2022; 191: 516–525. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwab271
Nattino G, Pennell ML, Lemeshow S. Assessing the goodness of fit of logistic regression models in large samples: a modification of the Hosmer-Lemeshow test. Biometrics 2020; 76: 549–560. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/biom.13249
Paul P, Pennell ML, Lemeshow S. Standardizing the power of the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness of fit test in large data sets. Stat Med 2013; 32: 67–80. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.5525
Kuss O. Global goodness-of-fit tests in logistic regression with sparse data. Stat Med 2002; 21: 3789–3801. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/sim.1421
Alba AC, Agoritsas T, Walsh M, Hanna S, Iorio A, Devereaux PJ, et al. Discrimination and calibration of clinical prediction models: users' guides to the medical literature. JAMA 2017; 318: 1377–1384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2017.12126
Becker JC, Stang A, DeCaprio JA, Cerroni L, Lebbé C, Veness M, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma. Nat Rev Dis Primers 2017; 3: 17077. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2017.77
Clarke CA, Robbins HA, Tatalovich Z, Lynch CF, Pawlish KS, Finch JL, et al. Risk of Merkel cell carcinoma after solid organ transplantation. J Natl Cancer Inst 2015; 107: dju382–dju382. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/jnci/dju382
Garrett GL, Zargham H, Schulman JM, Jafarian F, Yu SS, Arron ST. Merkel cell carcinoma in organ transplant recipients: case reports and review of the literature. JAAD Case Rep 2015; 1: S29–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdcr.2015.09.017
Sihto H, Joensuu H. Tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes and outcome in Merkel cell carcinoma, a virus-associated cancer. Oncoimmunology 2012; 1: 1420–1421. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4161/onci.21120
Sihto H, Böhling T, Kavola H, Koljonen V, Salmi M, Jalkanen S, et al. Tumor infiltrating immune cells and outcome of Merkel cell carcinoma: a population-based study. Clin Cancer Res 2012; 18: 2872–2881. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-11-3020
Feng H, Shuda M, Chang Y, Moore PS. Clonal integration of a polyomavirus in human Merkel cell carcinoma. Science 2008; 319: 1096–1100. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1152586
Gauci ML, Aristei C, Becker JC, Blom A, Bataille V, Dreno B, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of Merkel cell carcinoma: European consensus-based interdisciplinary guideline - update 2022. Eur J Cancer 2022; 171: 203–231. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2022.03.043
Tribble JT, Pfeiffer RM, Brownell I, Cahoon EK, Sargen MR, Shiels MS, et al. Merkel cell carcinoma and immunosuppression, UV radiation, and Merkel cell polyomavirus. JAMA Dermatol 2025; 161: 47–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2024.4607
Mohsin N, Martin MR, Reed DJ, Vilasi SM, Miao L, Hill NT, et al. Differences in Merkel cell carcinoma presentation and outcomes among racial and ethnic groups. JAMA Dermatol 2023; 159: 536–540. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1001/jamadermatol.2023.0061
Published
How to Cite
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
All digitalized ActaDV contents is available freely online. The Society for Publication of Acta Dermato-Venereologica owns the copyright for all material published until volume 88 (2008) and as from volume 89 (2009) the journal has been published fully Open Access, meaning the authors retain copyright to their work.
Unless otherwise specified, all Open Access articles are published under CC-BY-NC licences, allowing third parties to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format and to remix, transform, and build upon the material for non-commercial purposes, provided proper attribution to the original work.
