Referral practices to dermatologists for the treatment of radiation dermatitis in the USA: a call for a multidisciplinary approach.

PURPOSE: Acute radiation dermatitis (RD) is a disfiguring and painful rash that occurs in up to 95% of patients receiving radiation therapy (RT) for cancer. Treatment for RD varies among practitioners with no evidence-based gold standard for management. While a multi-disciplinary approach has been utilized to manage other cancer-related toxicities, RD is most often managed by the treating radiation oncologist. METHODS: This study evaluated the referral practices of radiation oncologists to dermatologists for management of RD utilizing a survey of radiation oncologists across the USA. The goal was to identify the referral practices of radiation oncologists for RD and any barriers to a multidisciplinary approach. RESULTS: Of the 705 respondents, 15% reported ever referring patients to dermatology. Private practitioners referred significantly less than providers in academic or oncology centers (p < 0.01). Practitioners in urban settings were more likely to refer (p < 0.01), and radiation oncologists in the Southeastern USA were less likely to refer (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Lack of timely access to dermatologists in various geographic areas in addition to radiation oncologists' preference to treat RD are barriers to multidisciplinary management of RD. Inclusion of dermatologists and wound care specialists in cancer treatment teams could improve patient care and stimulate needed research into strategies for treatment and prevention of RD.

Cryptococcus-like changes in the setting of vasculitis.

Cutaneous vasculitis has many underlying causes, and the clinical and histological findings often overlap. Inflammatory vasculitis can mimic infection; however, distinction is critical for the timely institution of appropriate therapy. We present two patients who had generalized polymorphous eruptions whose cutaneous pathology showed vasculitis with unusual haloed yeast-like cells within the inflammatory infiltrate, mimicking Cryptococcus. The unusual cells stained negatively with Gomori methenamine silver and periodic acid-Schiff fungal stains, but positively for CD68 and had cytoplasmic reactivity with antibody to myeloperoxidase (MPO). Both patients had positive serum anti-MPO antibodies. The first patient experienced a rapidly fatal course, whereas the second patient improved with prompt initiation of systemic corticosteroids. Interestingly, the second case had prior biopsy showing Sweet syndrome with crypotoccoid-appearing cells. Cryptococcoid cells have been described previously in association with neutrophilic dermatoses, but not in the setting of vasculitis as was seen in our patients. Our cases add to the existing literature on crypotoccoid mimickers, and are the first to be reported in association with vasculitis.

Practice patterns for the prophylaxis and treatment of acute radiation dermatitis in the United States.

PURPOSE: Due to the inconclusive evidence for available treatment options, management of radiation dermatitis (RD) varies among practitioners. This study defines and reviews the current treatment patterns for RD in the USA, providing guidance for practicing physicians as well as directions for future research. METHODS: An online survey of 21 questions was emailed to all 5626 members of the 2013 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) directory, which included radiation oncologists, residents, fellows, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, registered nurses and other care providers. The questions were designed to evaluate demographics of responders, their training and comfort in the management RD, and their patterns of care regarding prophylaxis and treatment of RD. Data was analyzed using simple summary and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Out of the 5626 emails sent, we were left with 709 physician respondents for our analysis, or a response rate of 12.9%. Although 84.7% of physicians felt that RD had a moderate or large impact on patients' quality of life during cancer treatment, only 30.1% received special training or specific instructional courses in treating RD during their medical training in residency or fellowship. Eighty-nine percent of surveyed physicians rely on observational and/or anecdotal findings to guide treatment decisions, and 51.4% reported using evidence-based treatments. CONCLUSION: The results of our study show that there is great variability in the topical agents and dressings used in practice by radiation oncologists to prevent and treat RD. This information may be useful to other practitioners to develop their own personal recommendations and can guide further research into strategies to prevent and treat radiation dermatitis.

Topical drug-induced subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus isolated to the hands.

Subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus (SCLE) is a well-defined subtype of lupus erythematosus, characterised by photosensitivity, annular and/or psoriasiform lesions, variable systemic involvement and presence of circulating SSA/anti-Ro antibodies. SCLE may be idiopathic or drug-induced. Both the idiopathic and drug-induced forms of SCLE are analogous in their clinical, serological and histological features. Drug-induced SCLE has been reported with various oral agents, but to our knowledge this is the first reported case due to a topical medication. A 34-year-old female foot masseuse presented with a 2-month history of scaly, erythematous lesions isolated to the dorsal hands and interdigital spaces. She had used topical terbinafine, a topical antifungal cream, to her clients' feet for a number of years. ANA and anti-SSA/Ro antibodies were positive. Physical examination, serology and histopathology were consistent with SCLE. We propose that our patient's unique presentation of SCLE may be explained by a prolonged occupational exposure to topical terbinafine as a foot masseuse. While oral terbinafine is a drug known to cause drug-induced SCLE, to our knowledge, this is the first topically induced form of the disease.