Severe cutaneous adverse reactions.

Severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs), which include Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis, drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (also known as drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome), acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis, and generalized bullous fixed drug eruption, are life-threatening conditions. The pathogenesis of SCARs involves T cell receptors recognizing drug antigens presented by human leukocyte antigens, triggering the activation of distinct T cell subsets. These cells interact with keratinocytes and various immune cells, orchestrating cutaneous lesions and systemic manifestations. Genetic predisposition, impaired drug metabolism, viral reactivation or infections, and heterologous immunity influence SCAR development and clinical presentation. Specific genetic associations with distinct SCAR phenotypes have been identified, leading to the implementation of genetic screening before prescription in various countries to prevent SCARs. Whilst systemic corticosteroids and conventional immunomodulators have been the primary therapeutic agents, evolving strategies, including biologics and small molecules targeting tumour necrosis factor, different cytokines, or Janus kinase signalling pathways, signify a shift towards a precision management paradigm that considers individual clinical presentations.

Genotyping HLA alleles to predict the development of Severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions (SCARs): state-of-the-art.

Introduction: Pharmacogenomics has great potential in reducing drug-induced severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions (SCARs). Pharmacogenomic studies have revealed an association between HLA genes and SCARs including acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP), drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS), and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN).Areas covered: Pharmacogenomics-guided therapy could prevent severe drug hypersensitivity reactions. The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC), and Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) provided guidelines in the translation of clinically relevant and evidence-based SCARs pharmacogenomics research into clinical practice. In this review, we intended to summarize the significant HLA alleles associated with SCARs induced by different drugs in different populations. We also summarize the SCARs associated with genetic and non-genetic factors and the cost-effectiveness of screening tests.Expert opinion: The effectiveness of HLA screening on a wider scale in clinical practice requires significant resources, including state-of-the-art laboratory; multidisciplinary team approach and health care provider education and engagement; clinical decision support alert system via electronic medical record (EMR); laboratory standards and quality assurance; evidence of cost-effectiveness; and cost of pharmacogenomics tests and reimbursement.

Systemic Medications of Dermatological Importance in COVID-19.

Early December 2019 witnessed an international outbreak of a novel coronavirus (COVID 19) designated severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-Cov-2). Since then, a number of therapeutic molecules have been explored to have potential efficacy against the SARS-Cov-2 per se or its sequelae. There are no Food and Drug Administration specific therapies approved so far; however, numerous drugs based on varying levels of evidence, in vitro studies and compassionate drug trials are being established as therapeutic agents, especially drugs approved for previous emergence of the severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS-CoV-1) and Middle east respiratory syndrome coronavirus (MERS-Cov). Numerous active clinical trials for COVID-19 with more than 150 drugs and products are under study. Needless to say, many dermatological drugs are being employed to mitigate this pandemic threat. We aim to review drugs with potential against SARS-Cov-2 widely used in dermatology practice. Additionally, rampant and overzealous use of these drugs as well as introduction of new molecules might lead to emergence of adverse effects associated with these agents. Dermatologists must be on lookout for any cutaneous adverse effects of these drugs. J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19(9):889-892. doi:10.36849/JDD.2020.5323.

Common Skin Conditions in Children: Noninfectious Rashes.

Cutaneous adverse drug reactions are among the most common noninfectious rashes of childhood. Cutaneous adverse drug reactions are classified as morbilliform, urticarial, bullous, pustular, or psoriasiform. Atopic dermatitis is one of the most common inflammatory cutaneous eruptions, and is characterized by pruritus and flexural distribution. Emollients and topical corticosteroids are first-line therapies. Topical calcineurin inhibitors are second-line, steroid-sparing drugs for certain conditions, such as face and eyelid eczema. Systemic and immunologic conditions have mucocutaneous features, such as malar rash, discoid lupus, and photosensitivity in systemic lupus erythematosus; lip, oral, and extremity changes as well as polymorphous rash in Kawasaki disease; erythematous, scaly plaques in psoriasis; and xerosis and face, hand, and leg skin changes in type 1 diabetes. Genetic conditions that manifest as changes in skin pigmentation are important to recognize because of the thorough diagnostic evaluation they warrant, the often challenging interventions they necessitate, and the permanent disability that frequently accompanies them. These conditions include neurofibromatosis, LEOPARD syndrome, incontinentia pigmenti, congenital hemidysplasia with ichthyosiform erythroderma and limb defects syndrome, hypomelanosis of Ito, and acanthosis nigricans. Childhood dermatologic emergencies often are associated with infection and drugs and require early recognition and intervention.

Low incidence of anti-drug antibodies in patients with type 2 diabetes treated with once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist dulaglutide.

Therapeutic administration of peptides may result in anti-drug antibody (ADA) formation, hypersensitivity adverse events (AEs) and reduced efficacy. As a large peptide, the immunogenicity of once-weekly glucagon-like peptide-1 (GLP-1) receptor agonist dulaglutide is of considerable interest. The present study assessed the incidence of treatment-emergent dulaglutide ADAs, hypersensitivity AEs, injection site reactions (ISRs), and glycaemic control in ADA-positive patients in nine phase II and phase III trials (dulaglutide, N = 4006; exenatide, N = 276; non-GLP-1 comparators, N = 1141). Treatment-emergent dulaglutide ADAs were detected using a solid-phase extraction acid dissociation binding assay. Neutralizing ADAs were detected using a cell-based assay derived from human endothelial kidney cells (HEK293). A total of 64 dulaglutide-treated patients (1.6% of the population) tested ADA-positive versus eight (0.7%) from the non-GLP-1 comparator group. Of these 64 patients, 34 (0.9%) had dulaglutide-neutralizing ADAs, 36 (0.9%) had native-sequence GLP-1 (nsGLP-1) cross-reactive ADAs and four (0.1%) had nsGLP-1 neutralization ADAs. The incidence of hypersensitivity AEs and ISRs was similar in the dulaglutide versus placebo groups. No dulaglutide ADA-positive patient reported hypersensitivity AEs. Because of the low incidence of ADAs, it was not possible to establish their effect on glycaemic control.

Beyond the dose-limiting toxicity period: Dermatologic adverse events of patients on phase 1 trials of the Cancer Therapeutics Evaluation Program.

BACKGROUND: Dermatologic adverse events (AEs) can be key determinants of overall drug tolerability and of the maximum tolerated and recommended phase 2 doses in phase 1 trials. The authors present the largest dedicated analysis of dermatologic AEs on phase 1 trials to date. METHODS: Data from a prospectively maintained database of patients with solid tumors who were enrolled onto Cancer Therapeutics Evaluation Program (CTEP)-sponsored phase 1 trials of cytotoxic or molecularly targeted agents (MTAs) from 2000 to 2010 were analyzed. Cumulative incidence, site, and type of drug-related dermatologic AEs were described and compared. The timing of worst drug-related dermatologic AEs was summarized. RESULTS: In total, 3517 patients with solid tumors and 6165 unique, drug-related dermatologic AEs were analyzed, including 1545 patients on MTA-only trials, 671 on cytotoxic-only trials, and 1392 on combination MTA and cytotoxic trials. Of 1270 patients who had drug-related dermatologic events, the timing of the worst AE was as follows: 743 (cycle 1), 303 (cycle 2), and 224 (cycle 3 or later). Although the cumulative incidence of grade ≥3 drug-related AEs increased to 2.4% by cycle 6, it was only 1.6% at the end of cycle 1. The cumulative incidence of drug-related AEs was highest in patients who received MTA-only therapy (P < .001) and differed by dose level (P < .001). In patients who received MTA-only therapy, drug-related AEs were most common for combination kinase inhibitor-containing therapy (P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: A substantial proportion of drug-related dermatologic AEs occur after the traditional dose-limiting toxicity monitoring period of phase 1 clinical trials. Future designs should account for late toxicities.

Erlotinib-Induced Transverse Fissure-Like Skin Lesions of Fingers.

Erlotinib is an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase (EGFR-TK) antagonist used in the therapy of non-small cell lung cancer. This agent has been associated with several dermatologic side effects, the most common being acneiform rash involving the face, neck, chest, and back. The occurrence of skin side effects has been correlated with both therapeutic efficacy and increased overall survival in these patients. We report herein unusual erlotinib-induced skin lesions affecting fingers, with a transverse fissure-like appearance and beefy-red laceration-like center. A unique feature is their location on adductor surfaces and more proximal aspects of the phalanges. This erlotinib side effect has not been previously reported in the medical literature.

Cetuximab plus pemetrexed as second-line therapy for fluorouracil-based pre-treated metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of cetuximab and pemetrexed as the second-line treatment for advanced esophageal cancer patients, who had undergone treatment with the standard cisplatin and 5-FU regimens. METHODS: A total of 29 patients accepted this treatment. Cetuximab was administered at an initial dose of 400 mg/m(2) IV followed by weekly doses of 250 mg/m(2) IV, whereas pemetrexed 500 mg/m(2) was administered on day 1 every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Twelve patients (41.4 %) presented PR, ten (34.5 %) had SD, and seven (24.1 %) had PD. The response rate was 41.4 %. The median PFS was 4.5 months (95 % CI 4.1-4.9), and the median OS was 9.4 months (95 % CI 8.4-10.5). The expression levels of serum miR-335 were determined, and the subsequent analysis suggested that PFS was significantly different between the patients with higher level of serum miR-335 and those with low level of serum miR-335. The former had a PFS of 4.9 months (95 % CI 4.2-5.7) and the latter 4.1 months (95 % CI 3.7-4.5) (log rank = 0.025). None of the patients experienced grade 4 toxicity. Twenty-four patients presented rash. CONCLUSIONS: A combination of cetuximab plus pemetrexed was marginally effective and well tolerated in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma as the second-line treatment.

Possible Role of Interleukin-31/33 Axis in Imatinib Mesylate-Associated Skin Toxicity.

Imatinib mesylate is a small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKi) designed to target c-ABL and BCR-ABL, approved for the treatment of chronic myeloid leukemia and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. Adverse cutaneous reactions induced by imatinib are frequent, generally moderate, and dose-dependent. The aim of this work was to investigate the possible contribution of interleukin (IL)-33 and IL-31, cytokines involved in disorders associated with itching, in the pathogenesis of pruritus in a patient undergoing imatinib mesylate treatment. His IL-31 and IL-33 serum levels were significantly higher than in the control group (respectively 96.6 pg/mL vs. 7.623±7.681 pg/mL and 27.566 pg/mL vs. 6.170±7.060 pg/mL). In light of these findings, imatinib mesylate-related symptoms of dermatologic toxicities might be related to the release of IL-31 and IL-33. In particular, it is supposable that TKi usage could cause keratinocyte injury, the release of IL-33, and the consequent interaction with its receptor on mast cells that induces the secretion of several factors capable of causing skin manifestations, including IL-31, a known pruritus-inducing cytokine. This report, to the best of our knowledge, is the first work describing the possible involvement of the IL-31/IL-33 axis in the pathogenesis of skin side effects related to imatinib mesylate treatment.

A phase I open-label trial evaluating the cardiovascular safety of regorafenib in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: To characterize the cardiovascular safety profile of regorafenib in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Patients received regorafenib 160 mg/day for 21 days followed by a 7-day break. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in QTcF at the regorafenib t(max) (Day 21, Cycle 1 or 2) and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline on Cycle 2, Day 21. Secondary objectives were pharmacokinetics, safety, anti-tumor activity and effects on electrocardiogram intervals. QT intervals were corrected using the methods of Fridericia (QTcF) and Bazett (QTcB). LVEF was assessed by multigated acquisition scanning. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients were enrolled, and all received at least one dose of regorafenib 160 mg. Twenty-five patients received regorafenib for 21 days without dose reduction. The mean change from baseline in QTcF at t(max) was (-)2 ms (90 % CI -8, 3). No patient experienced a change from baseline in QTcF > 60 ms, and two had QTcF changes between 30 and 60 ms. No patient had a QTcF or QTcB > 480 ms. In 27 patients who received at least 80 mg of regorafenib, the mean change from baseline in LVEF% ± SD was 1.7 ± 7.8. In 14 patients without a dose reduction, the mean change from baseline in LVEF% was (-)0.1 ± 8.6 at Cycle 2, Day 21. Four patients experienced a LVEF decrease between 10 and 20 %. CONCLUSION: The effects of regorafenib on the QT/QTc interval and LVEF were modest and unlikely to be of clinical significance in the setting of advanced cancer therapy.

First-line gefitinib treatment in elderly patients (aged ≥75 years) with non-small cell lung cancer harboring EGFR mutations.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of gefitinib [an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor] in elderly patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and EGFR mutation has not been elucidated. Therefore, the objective of this study was to investigate the efficacy and feasibility of gefitinib in elderly chemotherapy-naive patients with NSCLC harboring sensitive EGFR mutations. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the clinical effects of gefitinib as a first-line treatment for elderly (≥75 years) NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations (exon 19 deletion or exon 21 L858R mutation). All patients were initially treated with gefitinib (250 mg/day) at seven institutions. RESULTS: Between January 2006 and December 2012, 62 patients (17 men, 45 women) with a median age of 80 years (range, 75-89 years) were included in our analysis. The overall response and disease control rates were 61.2 and 83.8 %, respectively, and the median progression-free survival and overall survival were 13.2 and 19.0 months, respectively. Common adverse events included rash, diarrhea, and liver dysfunction. Major grade 3 or 4 toxicities included skin rash (3.2 %) and increased levels of aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase (21.0 %). Gefitinib treatment was discontinued owing to adverse events of liver dysfunction in 3 patients, drug-induced pneumonitis in 2, and diarrhea in 1. CONCLUSION: First-line gefitinib could be a preferable standard treatment in elderly patients with advanced NSCLC harboring sensitive EGFR mutations.

Baboon syndrome and toxic erythema of chemotherapy: Fold (intertriginous) dermatoses.

Three decades ago, researchers described an eruption with a very characteristic distribution pattern that was confined to the buttocks and the intertriginous and flexor areas. They gave this reaction pattern one of the most unforgettable names in dermatology, baboon syndrome (BS), due to the characteristic, bright-red, well-demarcated eruption predominantly on the buttocks and genital area, reminiscent of the red bottom of a baboon. The authors described three cases provoked by ampicillin, nickel, and mercury. They were convinced that BS represented a special form of hematogenous or systemic contact-type dermatitis, but several important papers that appeared during the past decade disagreed and suggested that BS should be distinguished from hematogenous or systemic contact-type dermatitis. A new acronym, SDRIFE (symmetrical drug-related intertriginous and flexoral exanthema), was proposed along with five diagnostic criteria: (1) exposure to a systemically administered drug at the time of first or repeated doses (contact allergens excluded), (2) sharply demarcated erythema of the gluteal/perianal area and/or V-shaped erythema of the inguinal/perigenital area, (3) involvement of at least one other intertriginous/flexural fold, (4) symmetry of affected areas, and (5) absence of systemic symptoms and signs. Although there are merits to the arguments in favor of SDRIFE, many of us still prefer to use the wittier name baboon syndrome, and even more authors use both terms. We confess that we find it difficult to relinquish the term BS, which has served us so well for years; however, recognition, familiarity, and knowledge of the characteristics of this form of drug eruption must supersede sentimental attachment to a certain nomenclature and so, however reluctantly, we must embrace change. Another intertriginous drug eruption is the one induced by chemotherapy. Toxic erythema of chemotherapy (TEC) is a useful clinical term that recently has been introduced to describe this group of chemotherapy-induced eruptions. This group of overlapping toxic reactions is characterized by areas of painful erythema often accompanied by edema usually involving the hands and feet, intertriginous zones (eg, axilla, groin), and, less often, the elbows, knees, and ears. Toxic erythema of chemotherapy is briefly discussed.