Mucocutaneous toxicities from MEK inhibitors: a scoping review of the literature.

BACKGROUND: MEK inhibitors cause a wide spectrum of mucocutaneous toxicities which can delay or interrupt life-saving therapy. PURPOSE: To summarize the morphology, incidence, and clinical presentation of mucocutaneous toxicities from MEK inhibitors via a scoping review of the literature. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review of the published literature, including clinical trials, retrospective and prospective studies, reviews, and case reports and series. All included literature was analyzed by a panel of pediatric and adult oncodermatologists. RESULTS: Of 1626 initial citations, 227 articles met final inclusion criteria. Our review identified follicular reactions, ocular toxicities, xerosis, eczematous dermatitis, edema, and paronychia as the most common mucocutaneous side effects from MEK inhibitor therapy. Grade 1 and 2 reactions were the most prevalent and were typically managed while continuing treatment; however, grade 3 toxicities requiring dose reductions or treatment interruptions were also reported. CONCLUSION: Mucocutaneous toxicities to MEK inhibitor therapy are common and most often mild in severity. Early recognition and treatment can mitigate disruptions in oncologic therapy.

Diagnostic accuracy of general dermatologists and supportive oncodermatologists for biopsied cutaneous immune-related adverse events.

PURPOSE: Supportive oncodermatology has been shown to improve several aspects of care for patients with cancer, but research showing improved diagnostic accuracy as a benefit of supportive oncodermatology is largely lacking. We thus aimed to evaluate different dermatologist groups' diagnostic accuracy for heterogenous cutaneous toxicities, using cutaneous immune-related adverse events (cirAEs) from immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) as a test model. METHODS: Billing/requisition codes were used to identify patients who initiated programmed death-1/ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) ICIs between 2010 and 2019 at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Brigham and Women's Hospital/Massachusetts General Hospital and underwent a subsequent skin biopsy. For each biopsied cirAE, pre-biopsy clinical diagnoses and post-biopsy clinico-pathologic diagnoses were retrospectively obtained from the medical record. Each biopsy-ordering dermatology provider was categorized as a general dermatologist or supportive oncodermatologist on the basis of providing clinical care within a cancer-center or attending on a hospital/clinic service dedicated to anti-cancer drug-related skin toxicities. RESULTS: Of 4,183 patients who initiated anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy between 2010 and 2019, 101 (2.4%) patients collectively had 104 biopsied cirAEs. In more than one-third of all reviewed biopsied cirAEs (n = 39, 37.5%), histopathology results frequently led to revision of the pre-biopsy clinical diagnosis. The rate of initial cirAE misclassification amongst supportive oncodermatologists was significantly lower than that amongst general dermatologists (18/66, 27.3% vs. 21/38, 55.3%; Fischer's-exact-test p = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Experienced supportive oncodermatologists may benefit patient care through increased diagnostic accuracy for skin toxicities from ICIs. Collectively, these results underscore that both skin biopsy from any dermatology provider and oncodermatology referral (where available) are valuable resources that should be integrated into supportive cancer care.

Dermatologic support for oncology: Quantifying the consultative services received by hospitalized oncology patients.

Hospitalized oncology patients often require multidisciplinary care. Inpatient consultative dermatologists can provide expertise in the management of cutaneous complications that patients with cancer may experience. The goal of this study was to quantify the types of consults received by hospitalized oncology patients to better understand the utilization of dermatology consults in this population. Hospital billing codes were used to identify inpatient oncology patients and the types of consults they received at a single quaternary care hospital center. Between July 1, 2015, and January 31, 2020, 14,175 patients were admitted to an oncology service for more than 24 hours, and 5,243 (37%) of these patients received at least 1 consultation during their hospital admission. These patients received a total of 10,492 consults from 101 different services. Dermatology had the fifth-highest number of consults (n = 623; 5.9%). Among patients receiving consults, 608 (11.6%) received inpatient dermatology consults. Infectious disease was the service with the most consults (n = 1,485; 14.2%) and was also the service most commonly co-consulted with dermatology (n = 262; 42.1%). The inpatient consultative dermatology service is highly utilized among hospitalized oncology patients, suggesting that expertise in dermatologic care is valued by oncology teams.

Supportive oncodermatology-a narrative review of its utility and the way forward.

Supportive oncodermatology is an interdisciplinary field, emerging due to increasing dermatological morbidity in patients with cancer and the recognition of the need for greater collaborative and integrated care to improve patient outcomes. These two unique fields (Oncology and Dermatology) may be integrated in various ways, such as through specialised combined clinics, protocols for expedited access, multidisciplinary groups and meetings, and the development of best practices guidelines. This narrative review consolidates the small but growing literature surrounding supportive oncodermatology; discusses the potential benefit and disadvantages, and areas for future research; and suggests a framework for implementation.

Cutaneous Toxicities of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors: The Role of the Dermatologist.

The advent of immune checkpoint inhibition represents a paradigm shift in the treatment of an increasing number of cancers. However, the incredible therapeutic promise of immunotherapy brings with it the need to understand and manage its diverse array of potential adverse events. The skin is the most common site of immune-related adverse vents (irAEs), which can present with a wide variety of disparate morphologies and severities. These toxicities can endanger patient health and the ability to continue on therapy. This review summarizes our current understanding of the presentation and management of the most common and clinically significant cutaneous irAEs associated with immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy. Effective management of these cutaneous irAEs requires an understanding of their morphology, their appropriate clinical characterization, and their potential prognostic significance. Their treatment is additionally complicated by the desire to minimize compromise of the patient's anti-neoplastic regimen and emphasizes the use of non-immunosuppressive interventions whenever possible. However, though cutaneous irAEs represent a challenge to both oncologist and dermatologist alike, they offer a unique glimpse into the mechanisms that underlie not only carcinogenesis, but many primary dermatoses, and may provide clues to the treatment of disease even beyond cancer.

Cutaneous adverse effects of targeted therapies: Part I: Inhibitors of the cellular membrane.

There has been a rapid emergence of numerous targeted agents in the oncology community in the last decade. This exciting paradigm shift in drug development lends promise for the future of individualized medicine. Given the pace of development and clinical deployment of targeted agents with novel mechanisms of action, dermatology providers may not be familiar with the full spectrum of associated skin-related toxicities. Cutaneous adverse effects are among the most frequently observed toxicities with many targeted agents, and their intensity can be dose-limiting or lead to therapy discontinuation. In light of the often life-saving nature of emerging oncotherapeutics, it is critical that dermatologists both understand the mechanisms and recognize clinical signs and symptoms of such toxicities in order to provide effective clinical management. Part I of this continuing medical education article will review in detail the potential skin-related adverse sequelae, the frequency of occurrence, and the implications associated with on- and off-target cutaneous toxicities of inhibitors acting at the cell membrane level, chiefly inhibitors of epidermal growth factor receptor, KIT, and BCR-ABL, angiogenesis, and multikinase inhibitors.

Vitamin D3 and its Potential to Ameliorate Chemical and Radiation-Induced Skin Injury During Cancer Therapy.

Skin injury and dermatitis are common complications following chemotherapy and radiation administration for cancer treatment. Symptomatic relief of these complications is limited to slow-acting therapies and often results in holding or modifying cancer therapy that may impact patient outcomes. The off-label use of oral high dose vitamin D3 has demonstrated rapid clinical improvement in skin inflammation and swelling in both chemotherapy and radiation-induced injury. Furthermore, vitamin D3 has been shown to downregulate pro-inflammatory pathways and cytokines, including NFkB, and CCL2, as well as CCL20, which are not only involved in tissue injury, but may confer resistance to cancer treatment. In this paper, we discuss 2 patients with acute radiation dermatitis and acute radiation recall dermatitis following chemotherapy who received 50 000 - 100 000 IU of oral high dose vitamin D3 with improvement in their symptoms. These findings may indicate the potential use of vitamin D as a therapeutic intervention and future target for studying skin healing following chemotherapy and/ or radiation-induced cutaneous toxicity.

Pemetrexed-Induced Pseudocellulitis: A Diagnostic Conundrum.

Pemetrexed, an anti-folate, antineoplastic agent, effectively treats various malignancies such as non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and mesothelioma. Here, we report two cases of recurrent pemetrexed-induced lower extremity erythema and edema, one in a 60-year-old male and the other in a 47-year-old male, who were both treated for recurrent cellulitis on multiple occasions before finally being diagnosed with pemetrexed-induced pseudocellulitis (PIP), a rarely reported adverse effect. This is an important diagnostic pitfall for clinicians to be aware of, as early recognition may minimize patient morbidity and prevent unnecessary hospitalization and antibiotic use for presumed cellulitis.

Cutaneous Adverse Events of Targeted Therapies for Hematolymphoid Malignancies.

The identification of oncogenic drivers of liquid tumors has led to the rapid development of targeted agents with distinct cutaneous adverse event (AE) profiles. The diagnosis and management of these skin toxicities has motivated a novel partnership between dermatologists and oncologists in developing supportive oncodermatology clinics. In this article we review the current state of knowledge of clinical presentation, mechanisms, and management of the most common and significant cutaneous AEs observed during treatment with targeted therapies for hematologic and lymphoid malignancies. We systematically review according to drug-targeting pathway the cutaneous AE profiles of these drugs, and offer insight when possible into whether pharmacologic target versus immunologic modulation primarily underlie presentation. We include discussion of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, bosutinib, ponatinib), blinatumomab, ibrutinib, idelalisib, anti-B cell antibodies (rituximab, ibritumomab, obinutuzumab, ofatumumab, tositumomab), immune checkpoint inhibitors (nivolumab, pembrolizumab), alemtuzumab, brentuximab, and proteasome inhibitors (bortezomib, carfilzomib, ixazomib). We highlight skin reactions seen with antiliquid but not solid tumor agents, draw attention to serious cutaneous AEs that might require therapy modification or cessation, and offer management strategies to permit treatment tolerability. We emphasize the importance of early diagnosis and treatment to minimize disruptions to care, optimize prognosis and quality of life, and promptly address life-threatening skin or infectious events. This evolving partnership between oncologists and dermatologists in the iterative characterization and management of skin toxicities will contribute to a better understanding of these drugs' cutaneous targets and improved patient care.