Comparative profile of cutaneous adverse events: BRAF/MEK inhibitor combination therapy versus BRAF monotherapy in melanoma.

BACKGROUND: BRAF inhibitor (BRAFi) and MEK inhibitor (MEKi) frequently cause cutaneous adverse events. OBJECTIVE: We sought to investigate the cutaneous safety profile of BRAFi versus BRAFi and MEKi combination regimens. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study, collecting data from 44 patients with melanoma treated either with BRAFi (vemurafenib or dabrafenib) or BRAFi and MEKi combination regimens (vemurafenib + cobimetinib or dabrafenib + trametinib). Patient characteristics, and the occurrence and severity of cutaneous adverse events, are described. RESULTS: The development of cutaneous adverse events was significantly less frequent (P = .012) and occurred after longer treatment time (P = .025) in patients treated with BRAFi and MEKi combination regimen compared with patients treated with BRAFi monotherapy. Among patients who received both BRAFi and the combination of BRAFi and MEKi at different time points during their treatment course, the development of squamous cell carcinoma or keratoacanthoma was significantly less frequent when they received the combination regimen (P = .008). Patients receiving vemurafenib developed more cutaneous adverse events (P = .001) and in particular more photosensitivity (P = .010) than patients who did not. LIMITATIONS: There were a limited number of patients. CONCLUSION: Combination regimen with BRAFi and MEKi shows fewer cutaneous adverse events and longer cutaneous adverse event-free interval compared with BRAFi monotherapy.

Bleeding and thrombosis in acute promyelocytic leukemia.

Acute promyelocytic leukemia (APL) has evolved from being a deadly to a highly curable disease, due to targeted molecular therapy with all-trans retinoic acid (ATRA). As a result, the incidence of early hemorrhagic deaths for which APL is notorious has reduced to 5-10% as reported in clinical trials. These results are not replicated outside of clinical trials as is evident from recent population-based registries. High incidence of early hemorrhagic deaths remains the greatest contributor to treatment failure in this otherwise curable leukemia. Additionally, thrombosis is now being increasingly recognized in APL patients and may be associated with ATRA usage.

Patients' preferences for biopsy result notification in an era of electronic messaging methods.

IMPORTANCE: Effective patient-physician communication is essential for optimal health care. Recent introduction of online patient portals to access test results are changing the communication landscape, but regulatory guidelines for the online release of biopsy results vary from state to state. OBJECTIVES: To assess patient preferences for receiving skin biopsy results to rule out melanoma and to compare those preferences to current physicians' practices for notification. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: English-speaking individuals 18 years or older were recruited consecutively from melanoma clinics at 3 academic tertiary referral medical centers: University of California, San Francisco, University of Pennsylvania, and Duke University. Patients were surveyed from July 1, 2012, through July 31, 2013. A second survey of physicians at these institutions was conducted to assess physician notification practices. RESULTS: A total of 301 of 305 patients agreed to participate (98.7 response rate). Most of the patients (67.1%) preferred to speak directly with their physician by telephone to receive their skin biopsy results, followed by a distant second choice (19.5%) of being notified in person at a clinic visit. Voice message or online patient portal were each the preferred method of communication for 5.1% of patients. The most important consideration for patients was a communication modality that provided test results in the most rapid manner; 51.7% wanted a method that was rapid, and 7.8% preferred a method that was not only speedy but also allowed them an opportunity to ask questions. A total of 59.5% of the study participants would choose the same communication method regardless of the biopsy results, but 40.5% preferred a different mode of notification if their biopsy results revealed a malignant tumor. Younger and more highly educated patients favored the online portal. Of 84 physicians surveyed, 47 responded (56% response rate). Physicians' overall preferred method of contacting patients aligned with patient preference for speaking by telephone (56.5%). However, for benign results, 31.2% of physicians chose to speak by telephone, whereas patients preferred voicemail (32.1%). There was physician uncertainty as to guidelines regarding communication of test results. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Patient preference has shifted from face-to-face visit to discussion over the telephone because of a desire for rapid notification. Experience with online portal delivery of results favorably inclined patients toward that modality. We recommend that patients be queried regarding their notification preference on the biopsy consent form.

International prevalence of indoor tanning: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IMPORTANCE: Indoor tanning is a known carcinogen, but the scope of exposure to this hazard is not known. OBJECTIVE: To summarize the international prevalence of exposure to indoor tanning. DATA SOURCES: Studies were identified through systematic searches of PubMed (1966 to present), Scopus (1823 to present), and Web of Science (1898 to present) databases, last performed on March 16, 2013. We also hand searched reference lists to identify records missed by database searches and publicly available data not yet published in the scientific literature. STUDY SELECTION: Records reporting a prevalence of indoor tanning were eligible for inclusion. We excluded case-control studies, reports with insufficient study information, and reports of groups recruited using factors related to indoor tanning. Two independent investigators performed searches and study selection. Our search yielded 1976 unique records. After exclusions, 161 records were assessed for eligibility in full text, and 88 were included. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS: Two independent investigators extracted data on characteristics of study participants, inclusion/exclusion criteria, data collection format, outcomes, and statistical methods. Random-effects meta-analyses were used to summarize the prevalence of indoor tanning in different age categories. We calculated the population proportional attributable risk of indoor tanning in the United States, Europe, and Australia for nonmelanoma skin cancer (NMSC) and melanoma. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Ever and past-year exposure to indoor tanning. RESULTS: The summary prevalence of ever exposure was 35.7% (95% CI, 27.5%-44.0%) for adults, 55.0% (33.0%-77.1%) for university students, and 19.3% (14.7%-24.0%) for adolescents. The summary prevalence of past-year exposure was 14.0% (95% CI, 11.5%-16.5%) for adults, 43.1% (21.7%-64.5%) for university students, and 18.3% (12.6%-24.0%) for adolescents. These results included data from 406 696 participants. The population proportional attributable risk were 3.0% to 21.8% for NMSC and 2.6% to 9.4% for melanoma, corresponding to more than 450 000 NMSC cases and more than 10 000 melanoma cases each year attributable to indoor tanning in the United States, Europe, and Australia. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Exposure to indoor tanning is common in Western countries, especially among young persons. Given the large number of skin cancer cases attributable to indoor tanning, these findings highlight a major public health issue.