Management of cutaneous toxicities under amivantamab (anti MET and anti EGFR bispecific antibody) in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer harboring EGFR Exon20ins: towards a proactive, multidisciplinary approach.

CONTEXTE: The Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor (EGFR) is mutated in 10-15% of patients with lung adenocarcinoma. At metastatic stage EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are used front line for patients harboring targetable mutations. Novel anti-EGFR therapies are being developed. Amivantamab is a bispecific anti-EGFR and anti-MET antibody with expected skin toxicities. OBJECTIVE: We developed here guidelines for prevention and treatment of cutaneous toxicities under amivantamab according to our experience at Institut Curie. MATERIEL & METHOD: The first patients with metastatic lung cancer harboring EGFR Exon20ins mutation, included in the phase 1 CHRYSALIS trial and cured at Institute Curie from November 1st 2019 until December 31st 2021 were selected for this work. Retrospectively, all cutaneous adverse events were registered and classified according to the CTCAE 6.0 classification, and actions we implemented to minimize and treat these adverse events were collected. We then developed guidelines based on these datas. RESULTS: A total of seven patients started amivantamab as monotherapy. The two most frequent dermatological adverse events were: acneiform rash and paronychia (100 % of patients). Other adverse events presented by the patients were reported: modification of hair growth with hypertrichosis in 50 % of men (n = 1/2) and hirsutism in 80 % of women (n = 4/5); skin abrasion of the scalp in 71 % (n = 5/7); and skin fissure in 57 % (n = 4/7). We recommend first a rigorous inspection of the skin and teguments to determine the risk rate to have dryer skin under treatment; second a prevention of paronychia/acneiform rash/and skin fissures with prophylactic tetracycline, skin moisturizing, and hygienic measures starting at least 14 days before treatment initiation; third a particular attention to the psychological impact of skin toxicities with access to psychological support. CONCLUSION: We propose here guidelines for the management of dermatological toxicities under amivantamab with a multidisciplinary approach for the proactive management of cutaneous toxicities with a focus on preventive actions.

At-home compounding preparation of slow desensitization of elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor for delayed hypersensitivity rash.

As elexacaftor/tezacaftor/ivacaftor has proven to have robust clinical efficacy for eligible persons with cystic fibrosis, desensitization should be offered to those with maculopapular eruption hypersensitivity reactions to achieve tolerance. As presented in this case, if provided with tools for crushing and mixing the medication, a successful escalation protocol can be completed at home without coordinating the help of a compound pharmacy.

Prevention of Pemetrexed-Induced Rash Using Low-Dose Corticosteroids: A Phase II Study.

BACKGROUND: Rash eruptions are a common side-effect of pemetrexed, for which the administration of 8 mg/day of dexamethasone for 3 days from the day preceding pemetrexed administration is recommended. This study aimed to prospectively assess the effectiveness of prophylactic administration of low-dose dexamethasone for pemetrexed-induced rashes. METHODS: This single-arm, phase II study recruited patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer and malignant pleural mesothelioma scheduled to receive chemotherapy including pemetrexed. Patients received 2 mg of dexamethasone daily from days 2 to 6 after chemotherapy with pemetrexed. The primary endpoint was the 3-week incidence of rash eruptions. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled between September 2017 and May 2019. The incidence of rash after 3 weeks was 16.7%. Rashes erupted mainly on the upper half of the body, such as the chest and neck, and were of grades 1 and 2 in 2 patients each. No rashes of grade 3 or higher were observed, and there were no adverse events associated with additional corticosteroids. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic administration of low-dose dexamethasone for 5 days from the day after pemetrexed administration resulted in a milder incidence and severity of rash. These findings may provide a standard preventative strategy for pemetrexed-induced rashes. (Trial identifier: UMIN000025666).

Preceding bortezomib administration for a certain period reduces the risk of lenalidomide-induced skin rash.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: It was previously reported that the incidence of lenalidomide (LEN)-induced skin rash is reduced by administration of bortezomib (BOR) prior to LEN administration in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Therefore, we investigated whether LEN-induced skin rash is affected by the duration of BOR administration and the dosing interval between BOR and LEN administration. METHOD: A retrospective investigation was conducted among MM patients who received BOR treatment prior to LEN treatment in Eiju General Hospital from May 2010 to December 2020. We investigated whether the BOR administration duration and interval duration from the completion of BOR administration to the initial LEN administration affect the development of LEN-induced skin rash. RESULT AND DISCUSSION: Twenty-eight of the 81 patients exhibited LEN-induced skin rash (34.6%). The administered duration, but not the interval, was significantly longer in the group without skin rash. Cut-off values were set for the duration of administration and interval, which were 35 days and 30 days, respectively. Multivariate analysis was performed on patients which are administered duration of more than 35 days and intervals of less than 30 days, and those who are not applicable. A significant difference was observed in the incidence of skin rash for each factor. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: The risk of reduced LEN-induced skin rash is affected not only by the presence of prior BOR administration, but also by the duration of BOR and the interval from the completion of BOR to the initial LEN administration.

Discovery of N-((3S,4S)-4-(3,4-Difluorophenyl)piperidin-3-yl)-2-fluoro-4-(1-methyl-1H-pyrazol-5-yl)benzamide (Hu7691), a Potent and Selective Akt Inhibitor That Enables Decrease of Cutaneous Toxicity.

Rash is one of the primary dose-limiting toxicities of Akt (protein kinase B) inhibitors in clinical trials. Here, we demonstrate the inhibition of Akt2 isozyme may be a driver for keratinocyte apoptosis, which promotes us to search for new selective Akt inhibitors with an improved cutaneous safety property. According to our previous research, compound 2 is selected for further optimization for overcoming the disadvantages of compound 1, including high Akt2 inhibition and high toxicity against HaCaT keratinocytes. The dihedral angle-based design and molecular dynamics simulation lead to the identification of Hu7691 (B5) that achieves a 24-fold selectivity between Akt1 and Akt2. Hu7691 exhibits low activity in inducing HaCaT apoptosis, promising kinase selectivity, and excellent anticancer cell proliferation potencies. Based on the superior results of safety property, pharmacokinetic profile, and in vivo efficacy, the National Medical Products Administration (NMPA) approved the investigational new drug (IND) application of Hu7691.

Prophylactic Topical Treatment for EGFR Inhibitor-Induced Papulopustular Rash: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor (EGFRI)-induced papulopustular rash is 60-85%. OBJECTIVE: To investigate prophylactic topical treatment for EGFRI-induced rash. METHODS: A single-center, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Adult cancer patients initiating treatment with EGFRIs were randomized to receive facial topical treatment with chloramphenicol 3% + prednisolone 0.5% (CHL-PRED) ointment, chloramphenicol 3% (CHL) ointment, or aqua cream (AQUA). The primary end points were the incidence of ≥grade 3 rash using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE), on days 14 and 30. A subanalysis was conducted for incidence of a protocol-specified significant rash, defined as ≥10 facial papulopustular lesions. RESULTS: The per-protocol analysis on day 14 included 69 patients, who received CHL-PRED (21), CHL (23), or AQUA (25). The incidence of CTCAE ≥grade 3 rash was not statistically significant between arms; however, the incidence of the protocol-specified significant rash was: CHL-PRED 14%, CHL 39%, and AQUA 48% (p = 0.03, CHL-PRED vs. AQUA). At 30 days, the CTCAE ≥grade 3 incidence was similar, but the incidences of protocol-specified significant rash were 6%, 16%, and 43% (p = 0.03, CHL-PRED vs. AQUA). No significant differences were found between CHL and CHL-PRED and between CHL and AQUA. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic topical CHL-PRED was efficacious when compared to AQUA, in the treatment of EGFRI-induced facial papulopustular rash.

Growth suppression of human oral cancer cells by candidate agents for cetuximab-side effects.

Cetuximab, an inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor that is used widely to treat human cancers including oral squamous cell carcinoma (OSCC), has characteristic side effects of skin rash and hypomagnesemia. However, the mechanisms of and therapeutic agents for skin rashes and hypomagnesemia are still poorly understood. Our gene expression profiling analyses showed that cetuximab activates the p38 MAPK pathways in human skin cells (human keratinocyte cell line [HaCaT]) and inhibits c-Fos-related signals in human embryonic kidney cells (HEK293). We found that while the p38 inhibitor SB203580 inhibited the expression of p38 MAPK targets in HaCaT cells, flavagline reactivated c-Fos-related factors in HEK293 cells. It is noteworthy that, in addition to not interfering with the effect of cetuximab by both compounds, flavagline has additive effect for OSCC growth inhibition in vivo. Collectively, our results indicate that combination of cetuximab and these potential therapeutic agents for cetuximab-related toxicities could be a promising therapeutic strategy for patients with OSCC.

Preventive effect of Diallyl Trisulfide on cutaneous toxicities induced by EGFR inhibitor.

Cutaneous toxicities are the commonest side effects in patients with cancer treated using epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors such as erlotinib. For patients with such toxicities, there is a lack of safe, effective pharmacological agents. Here we established a skin toxicity model and investigated the preventive and therapeutic effect of Diallyl Trisulfide (DATS) in vivo. The mouse skin toxicities model was established through continuous administration of erlotinib for 49 days. Meanwhile, the mice in the experimental group underwent DATS treatment for 49 days. Hematoxylin and eosin (HE) staining and oil red O staining of back and limb skin was performed to determine whether DATS aqueous extract can reverse the skin toxicities caused by erlotinib. Compared with the erlotinib group, the incidence of rash in the DATS group was lower. In addition, in the DATS group, the degree of skin redness and herpes was mild, the body weight was stable, and the activity was favorable. By comparing the HE and oil red O staining results for the mouse skin, the degree of keratin hyperplasia was determined to be lower in the experimental group than in the erlotinib group, and the number of purulent neutrophils decreased. The number of follicles was relatively less. The release of TNF-α, IL-6 and other inflammatory factors was reduced by DATS. Erlotinib hydrochloride can cause severe skin toxicities, and DATS prevents skin toxicities, its mechanism may be related to DATS reduced erlotinib-induced inflammatory injury.

Using PARP Inhibitors in Advanced Ovarian Cancer.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) proteins are used by cells in several DNA repair processes. PARP inhibition can result in preferential death of cancer cells when another mechanism for repairing DNA is defective. Two PARP inhibitors, olaparib and rucaparib, have been approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of recurrent, BRCA-associated ovarian cancer. More recently, these two and a third PARP inhibitor, niraparib, were approved by the FDA as maintenance therapy following platinum-based chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer. This has caused a paradigm shift in disease management and a challenge for clinicians, who must decide how best to use these agents in individualized treatment. The oral formulation is attractive to patients, but adverse effects such as nausea and fatigue can impact quality of life. As clinicians become comfortable selecting PARP inhibitors and managing associated toxicities, future steps will be to investigate how to safely administer them in combination with other therapies.

EVITA-a double-blind, vehicle-controlled, randomized phase II trial of vitamin K1 cream as prophylaxis for cetuximab-induced skin toxicity.

Background: Acne-like skin rash is a frequently occurring adverse event associated with drugs against the epidermal growth factor receptor. This randomized vehicle-controlled study investigated the addition of vitamin K1 cream to doxycycline in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab. Patients and methods: Patients receiving first-line cetuximab + FOLFIRI were randomly assigned to prophylactic treatment with doxycylin and vitamin K1 cream or doxycycline and the vehicle. The primary end point of the study was the incidence of grade ≥ 2 skin rash (NCI CTCAE version 4.02) during 8 weeks of skin treatment. Secondary end points comprised skin rash according to a more thorough tripartite skin toxicity score (WoMo), quality of life, efficacy, and compliance. The study had 80% power to show a 20% reduction of the incidence of grade ≥ 2 skin rash. Results: A total of 126 patients were analyzed. The incidence of skin rash grade ≥ 2 was comparable between the arms. Likewise, no difference was seen in the WoMo score with respect to the percentage of skin affected. However, starting in week 5 and increasing over time patients treated with vitamin K1 cream had less severe rash and fewer fissures. Quality of life as well as efficacy and compliance with study medication and anticancer treatment was comparable in both arms. Conclusion: The primary end point of decreasing grade ≥ 2 skin rash was not met. However, using vitamin K1 cream as part of prophylactic treatment decreased the severity of acne-like skin rash according to WoMo, an alternative and more thorough skin toxicity scoring tool.

Dermatux: phase IV trial of Cetuximab plus FOLFIRI in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer receiving a pre-defined skin care.

PURPOSE: Cetuximab-induced skin rash Gd3+ occurs in ≥16% patients (pts) (Heinemann et al., Lancet Oncol 15(10):1065-1075, 2014; Van Cutsem et al. J Clin Oncol 27(19):3117-25; 2009b). Survival, response, and toxicity parameters were re-evaluated under a pre-defined skin prophylaxis consistent of vitamin K1 ointment and oral doxycycline. METHODS: This is a national, multicenter, phase 4, first-line mCRC (K-RAS wt) trial. Pts received irinotecan 180 mg/m² (d1), FA 400 mg/m² (d1), 5-FU 400 mg/m² (d1), 5-FU 2400 mg/m² (d1-2), and cetuximab [400 mg/m² (d1), and then 250 mg/m² qw], prophylactic 0.1% vitamin K1 ointment qd, and oral doxycycline 100 mg bid. PRIMARY OBJECTIVE: 1-year PFS rate; secondary objectives: skin side-effects (grade, onset), objective response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), progression-free survival (PFS) time, and overall survival (OS) time and safety. RESULTS: Twenty centers recruited 55 patients. Recruitment started Q1 2011 and ended Q3 2013 due to slow accrual. Characteristics were in line with CRYSTAL trial except for age and colonic location. 1-year PFS rate was 25.9%, mOS 21.8 months (m), and mPFS 8.5 m. ORR was 63.0%, DCR 77.8%. Rash Gd2+ occurred in 42.6% [median onset was 4.0 weeks (w)]; paronychia Gd2+ occurred in 22.2% (median onset 15.4w.); skin fissures Gd2+ occurred in 31.5% (median onset 19.9 weeks) 7% pts abandoned cetuximab treatment due to toxicity. CONCLUSION: Our data reveal encouraging improvements in skin reactions and their time to occurrence due to a pre-defined skin care.

Practical recommendation for rash and diarrhea management in Indian patients treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are a pharmaceutical class of small molecules, orally available with manageable safety profile, approved worldwide for the treatment of several neoplasms, including lung, breast, kidney and pancreatic cancer as well as gastro-intestinal stromal tumours and chronic myeloid leukaemia. In recent years, management of lung cancer has been moving towards molecular-guided treatment, and the best example of this new approach is the use of the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in patients with mutations in the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). The identification of molecular predictors of response can allow the selection of patients who will be the most likely to respond to these tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events (AEs) are frequently observed in patients receiving EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy and are most impactful on the patient's quality of life. Dermatologic side effects are also relatively common among patients treated with EGFR inhibitors. Evidence has emerged in recent years to suggest that the incidence and severity of rash, positively correlated with response to treatment.These skin disorders are generally mild or moderate in severity and can be managed by appropriate interventions or by reducing or interrupting the dose. Appropriate and timely management make it possible to continue a patient's quality of life and maintain compliance; however if these adverse events (AEs) are not managed appropriately, and become more severe, treatment cessation may be warranted compromising clinical outcome. Strategies to improve the assessment and management of TKI related skin AEs are therefore essential to ensure compliance with TKI therapy, thereby enabling patients to achieve optimal benefits. This article provides a consensus on practical recommendation for the prevention and management of diarrhoea and rash in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC) patients receiving TKIs.

Doxycycline for prevention of erlotinib-induced rash in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of first-line chemotherapy: A randomized, open-label trial.

BACKGROUND: Rash is a common epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-induced toxicity that can impair quality of life and treatment compliance. OBJECTIVE: We sought to evaluate the efficacy of doxycycline in preventing erlotinib-induced rash (folliculitis) in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: This open-label, randomized, prospective, phase II trial was conducted in 147 patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer progressing after first-line chemotherapy, randomized for 4 months with erlotinib alone 150 mg/d per os (control arm) or combined with doxycycline 100 mg/d (doxycycline arm). Incidence and severity of rash, compliance, survival, and safety were assessed. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the 147 patients were well balanced in the intent-to-treat population. Folliculitis occurred in 71% of patients in the doxycycline arm and 81% in the control arm (P = .175). The severity of folliculitis and other skin lesions was lower in the doxycycline arm compared with the control arm. Other adverse events were reported at a similar frequency across arms. There was no significant difference in survival between treatment arms. LIMITATIONS: The open-label design of the study and the duration of the treatment with doxycycline are limitations. CONCLUSION: Doxycycline did not reduce the incidence of erlotinib-induced folliculitis, but significantly reduced its severity.

Skin problems and EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibition is a good target for the treatment of lung, colon, pancreatic and head and neck cancers. Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor was first approved for the treatment of advanced lung cancer in 2002. Epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor plays an essential role in the treatment of cancer, especially for patients harbouring epidermal growth factor receptor activating mutation. Hence, skin toxicity is the most concerning issue for the epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor treatment. Skin toxicity is bothersome and sometimes affects the quality of life and treatment compliance. Thus, it is important for physicians to understand the background and how to manage epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor-associated skin toxicity. Here, the author reviewed the mechanism and upfront preventive and reactive treatments for epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-associated skin toxicities.

Pan Canadian Rash Trial: A Randomized Phase III Trial Evaluating the Impact of a Prophylactic Skin Treatment Regimen on Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor-Induced Skin Toxicities in Patients With Metastatic Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Erlotinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor approved for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) whose epidermal growth factor receptor expression status is positive or unknown. Although it is efficacious, erlotinib can cause skin toxicity. This prospective, randomized phase III trial examined the effect of prophylactic treatment of erlotinib-induced skin rash. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients receiving erlotinib in the second- or third-line setting for advanced NSCLC were randomly assigned to prophylactic minocycline (100 mg twice per day for 4 weeks), reactive treatment (after rash developed, per grade of rash), or no treatment unless severe (grade 3). Rash incidence and severity, time to maximal rash, time to resolution, and overall survival (OS) were compared among treatment groups. RESULTS: In all, 150 patients were randomly assigned, 50 to each of three treatment arms. The incidence of skin toxicity was 84% regardless of treatment arm. Prophylactic treatment with minocycline significantly lengthened the time to the most severe grade of rash. Grade 3 rash was significantly higher in the no-treatment arm. OS was not significantly different among treatment arms, but patients receiving prophylactic or reactive treatments had a longer OS (7.6 and 8 months, respectively) than those who received no rash treatment (6 months). Rash was not self-limiting. CONCLUSION: The incidence of all grades of rash did not differ statistically among the three arms, so the trial was negative. The incidence of grade 3 skin toxicities was reduced in patients who were treated with prophylactic minocycline or reactive treatment. Efficacy was not compromised. Prophylactic minocycline and reactive treatment are both acceptable options for the necessary treatment of erlotinib-induced rash in the second- or third-line setting of metastatic NSCLC.

Prophylactic versus reactive treatment of acneiform skin rashes from epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in metastatic colorectal cancer.

PURPOSE: There are concerns regarding potential negative effects of prophylactic treatment of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-inhibitor-related rashes on metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) outcomes. We aimed to characterize treatment patterns of EGFR-inhibitor-induced rashes and evaluate prophylactic versus reactive approaches to rash management in relation to overall survival (OS). METHODS: Patients diagnosed with KRAS wild-type mCRC from July 2010 to June 2012 in British Columbia and prescribed cetuximab or panitumumab were reviewed to describe patterns of use of oral antibiotics and steroid creams. Using Cox regression, the relationship between prophylactic versus reactive rash management and OS was characterized. RESULTS: A total 119 patients were analyzed: median age was 63 years, 61 % were male, 34 % received cetuximab, 66 % received panitumumab, and median number of EGFR inhibitor treatment was nine cycles. Rash occurred in >90 % of patients, and reactive was favored over prophylactic treatment (66 vs. 34 %). Older patients and those with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0/1 were more likely to receive prophylactic creams (44 vs. 20 % for age <60, p = 0.01) and oral antibiotics (62 vs. 12 % for ECOG ≥2, p = 0.01), respectively. Median OS was 7.0 months. The number of treatment cycles and OS were similar in both prophylactic and reactive groups (both p > 0.05). In Cox regression, ECOG >2 correlated with worse survival (hazard ratio (HR) 22.01, 95 % confidence interval (CI) 5.25-92.30, p < 0.01). However, survival outcomes were similar between patients prescribed antibiotics prophylactically versus reactively (HR = 1.10, 95 % CI 0.43-2.80, p = 0.85), and steroid creams prophylactically versus reactively (HR = 2.00, 95 % CI 0.58-6.92, p = 0.27). CONCLUSION: Prophylactic treatment of EGFR-inhibitor-related rashes is associated with similar outcomes compared to reactive rash treatment in mCRC.

Pemetrexed-Induced Rash May Be Prevented by Supplementary Corticosteroids.

Pemetrexed, a chemotherapeutic drug, is highly active in non-small cell lung cancer and malignant pleural mesothelioma. Unfortunately, rashes are more commonly associated with pemetrexed than other chemotherapies, and it is recommended that patients receive corticosteroids (8 mg/d of dexamethasone) for 3 d, including the day of pemetrexed administration (day 1). However, the efficacy of corticosteroids in this context has not been fully verified. In this retrospective study, we evaluated the medical records of 78 patients who received pemetrexed between April 2009 and March 2014, to confirm whether supplementary corticosteroids prevented rash development. The incidence of rash was lower in the 47 patients who received supplementary corticosteroids (after day 1) compared with the incidence among the 31 patients who did not receive supplementary corticosteroids (19.1% vs. 38.7%). The average cutoff dosage of supplementary corticosteroids on day 2 and day 3 was 1.5 mg/d of dexamethasone, as calculated using the receiver operating characteristic curve, and the odds ratio was 0.33 (95% confidence interval: 0.12-0.94). Administration of ≥1.5 mg of corticosteroids on day 2 and day 3 significantly reduced the severity of the rash compared to no supplementary treatment (grades 2/3, 13.3% vs. 33.3%, p<0.05). However, increasing the dose of corticosteroids had no additional effect on rash development. These results suggest that ≥1.5 mg of supplementary dexamethasone on day 2 and day 3 (in addition to day 1) may be necessary for preventing pemetrexed-induced rash, but high doses of dexamethasone (e.g., 8 mg/d) are unnecessary.