OBJECTIVE: Therapeutic strategies for prostate cancer are currently undergoing a paradigm shift due to the advent of next-generation androgen receptor inhibitors. Among these inhibitors, apalutamide is regarded as a key drug because of its effectiveness. However, risk factors for and the timing of the onset of apalutamide-related cutaneous adverse events remain unclear. Therefore, the present study investigated key risk factors for and timing of the onset of apalutamide-related cutaneous adverse events.
METHODS: Sixty-two Japanese patients with non-metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer treated with 240 mg/day of apalutamide were enrolled in the present study.
RESULTS: Twenty-four patients (38.7%) developed cutaneous adverse events. Multivariable logistic regression analysis of age, height, and body weight identified body weight as a significant predictive factor for the incidence of cutaneous adverse events (p=0.019). When the mean body weight of patients (63.80 kg) was set as the cut-off value, the Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed that the risk of cutaneous adverse events was significantly increased in those with a body weight <63.8 kg (p=0.003, the log-rank test). The analysis also showed that cutaneous adverse events developed within the first 6 months regardless of body weight.
CONCLUSIONS: A lower body weight is a significant risk factor for apalutamide-related cutaneous adverse events and their onset is within 6 months of initiation of therapy.

BACKGROUND: The somatic BRAFV600E mutation occurs in 38-64% of pediatric cases of Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH). Vemurafenib (VMF), a BRAF inhibitor, was approved for refractory BRAFV600E mutated LCH. In adults, VMF causes frequent cutaneous adverse events (CAE) including skin tumors (squamous cell carcinomas, melanomas), but little is known in children. The objective of this study was to evaluate the frequency, clinical spectrum, and severity of CAEs in children treated with VMF for LCH. In addition, a correlation between CAE occurrence and VMF dose, residual plasma levels (RPLs), and efficacy was searched for.
METHODS: Multicentric retrospective observational study including patients <18 years treated with VMF alone for refractory BRAFV600E mutated LCH in 13 countries between October 1, 2013 and December 31, 2018.
RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients: 56% female, median age 2.1 years (0.2-14.6), median treatment duration 4.1 months (1.4-29.7). Forty-one patients (72%) had at least one CAE: photosensitivity (40%), keratosis pilaris (32%), rash (26%), xerosis (21%), and neutrophilic panniculitis (16%). No skin tumor was observed. Five percent of CAEs were grade 3. None were grade 4 or led to permanent VMF discontinuation. Dose reduction was necessary for 12% of patients, temporary treatment discontinuation for 16%, none leading to loss of efficacy. VMF dose, median RPL, and efficacy were not correlated with CAE occurrence.
CONCLUSIONS: At doses used for pediatric LCH, CAEs are frequent but rarely severe and have little impact on the continuation of treatment when managed appropriately. Regular dermatological follow-up is essential to manage CAEs and screen for possible induced skin tumors.

Immunoglobulin E (IgE) blockade with omalizumab has demonstrated clinical benefit in pruritus-associated dermatoses (e.g. atopic dermatitis, bullous pemphigoid, urticaria). In oncology, pruritus-associated cutaneous adverse events (paCAEs) are frequent with immune checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) and targeted anti-human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) therapies. Thus, we sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of IgE blockade with omalizumab in cancer patients with refractory paCAEs related to CPIs and anti-HER2 agents.
Patients included in this multicenter retrospective analysis received monthly subcutaneous injections of omalizumab for CPI or anti-HER2 therapy-related grade 2/3 pruritus that was refractory to topical corticosteroids plus at least one additional systemic intervention. To assess clinical response to omalizumab, we used the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0. The primary endpoint was defined as reduction in the severity of paCAEs to grade 1/0.
A total of 34 patients (50% female, median age 67.5 years) received omalizumab for cancer therapy-related paCAEs (71% CPIs; 29% anti-HER2). All had solid tumors (29% breast, 29% genitourinary, 15% lung, 26% other), and most (n = 18, 64%) presented with an urticarial phenotype. In total 28 of 34 (82%) patients responded to omalizumab. The proportion of patients receiving oral corticosteroids as supportive treatment for management of paCAEs decreased with IgE blockade, from 50% to 9% (P < 0.001). Ten of 32 (31%) patients had interruption of oncologic therapy due to skin toxicity; four of six (67%) were successfully rechallenged following omalizumab. There were no reports of anaphylaxis or hypersensitivity reactions related to omalizumab.
IgE blockade with omalizumab demonstrated clinical efficacy and was well tolerated in cancer patients with pruritus related to CPIs and anti-HER2 therapies.

OBJECTIVE: Although strategies to prevent premature sensor loss for flash glucose monitoring (FGM) systems may have substantial benefit, limited data are available. This study among youth with high-risk type 1 diabetes evaluated whether an additional adhesive patch over FGM sensors would reduce premature sensor loss frequency and not cause additional cutaneous adverse events (AEs).
METHODS: This is a six-month, open-label, randomized crossover trial. Participants were recruited at completion of prior \'Managing Diabetes in a Flash\' randomized controlled trial and allocated to three months of Freestyle Libre FGM sensors with either standard adhesive (control) or additional adhesive patches (RockaDex, New Zealand) (intervention), before crossing over to the opposite study arm. Participants self-reported patch use or non-use, premature sensor loss and cutaneous AEs fortnightly via an electronic questionnaire.
RESULTS: Thirty-four participants were enrolled: mean age (± SD) 17.0 (± 2.2) years; mean HbA1c (± SD) 89 (± 16) mmol/mol (10.3% ± 1.4%). The response rate of questionnaires was 77% (314/408). Premature sensor loss was reported in 18% (58/314) of questionnaires: 20% (32/162) from intervention and 17% (26/152) from control (p = 0.56). Thirty-eight percent (118/314) of questionnaires were non-compliant to protocol allocation. However, per-protocol analysis showed similar findings. No significant difference in AEs was reported between compliant adhesive patch use and non-use (6% [5/78] and 3% [3/118], respectively, p = 0.27).
CONCLUSIONS: The adhesive patch investigated in this study does not appear to prevent premature FGM sensor loss. However, the low risk of AEs and low cost of an adhesive patch suggest an individualized approach to their use may still be warranted. Further research is needed to explore alternative strategies to prevent sensor loss.

We present the first detailed report of acneiform eruptions in patients on CTLA-4 inhibitor therapy. Acneiform eruptions commonly occur (up to 75-100%) as a cutaneous adverse event associated with EGFR inhibition; however, acneiform eruptions have not been highly reported as a cutaneous adverse event associated with CTLA-4 inhibitor therapy. We conducted a retrospective chart review of our institution\'s database to assess cutaneous adverse events associated with ipilimumab and tremelimumab, identifying 12 patients with acneiform eruptions (2 on tremelimumab and 10 on ipilimumab). The median time to onset of rash was 3 weeks after starting CTLA-4 inhibitor therapy, ranging from 0.7-45 weeks. Median time to cutaneous resolution was 6 weeks, ranging from 2 to 282 weeks. Treatment included oral and topical antibiotics, antihistamines, and oral or topical corticosteroids with four patients receiving no treatment. Acneiform eruptions are seen less commonly with CTLA-4 inhibitors than other cancer therapies, but awareness that it does occur is important for clinical practice. Better description is a necessary help to aid in early diagnosis and intervention. While EGFR inhibitor-associated acneiform eruptions are associated with clinical benefit, our sample size is too small to determine whether CTLA-4 inhibitor associated acneiform eruptions display the same correlation.

Subcutaneous injection of azacitidine (AZA) is an important treatment option for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), which improves overall survival. In hematology, the incidence of AZA-induced cutaneous adverse events (AE) has been known to be relatively high, which has not been well recognized by dermatologists. Discontinuation of AZA can result in the deterioration of MDS disease activity. Therefore, on dermatological consultation, precise evaluation of AE severity and careful consideration is required for post-AE medication management. To enhance our understanding of AZA-induced cutaneous AE, we report four cases with two representative cutaneous AE subtypes and summarize the clinicopathological phenotypes and courses of the cases in the published work. Case 1, a 71-year-old man, developed neutrophilic dermatosis involving the dermis and subcutaneous tissue. The other three cases, a 75-year-old man, a 78-year-old woman and a 68-year-old man, presented injection-site erythema associated with flare-up reaction. Discontinuation of AZA was necessary for case 1 alone. The published work review delineated three major subtypes of AZA-induced cutaneous AE: systemic cutaneous reaction, neutrophilic dermatosis type and erythematous type injection-site reaction. Histologically, the first two subtypes are mostly characterized by neutrophil infiltration, while the third subtype presents lymphocytic cell infiltration. Neither AZA discontinuation nor intensive interventions were required for the erythematous type injection-site reaction, while AZA termination or systemic treatments, represented by corticosteroid administration, were preferentially conducted for the systemic cutaneous reaction or the neutrophilic dermatosis type injection-site reaction subgroup. These observations support the necessity of subtype-dependent treatment strategies for the management of AZA-induced cutaneous AE.

BACKGROUND: Anti-programmed cell death-1 (PD-1) immunotherapy using antibodies such as nivolumab or pembrolizumab has shown promise for treating various types of cancer. In this study, we reviewed the frequency and spectrum of cutaneous adverse events (AEs) caused by PD-1 antibodies and their possible correlation with treatment response.
METHODS: We reviewed records of all patients from a single institution treated with either nivolumab or pembrolizumab from August 1, 2014 to April 1, 2017.
RESULTS: Of 211 patients included in the study, 134 (63.5%) were treated with nivolumab and 77 (36.5%) with pembrolizumab. Thirty-five patients (16.4%) developed cutaneous AEs. Cutaneous AEs were significantly associated with longer treatment cycles (P = 0.001). The prevalence of cutaneous AEs did not differ between nivolumab (17.2%) and pembrolizumab (15.6%). Patient age, gender, baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group scale and underlying malignancy were not associated with development of cutaneous AEs. Median time until onset of cutaneous AEs was 50.0 days (range, 1-378 days). Anti-PD-1 therapy was tolerable in most of patients with grade 1 (65.2%) and grade 2 (23.9%) cutaneous AEs. Pruritus (32.6%) and eczema (21.7%) were the most commonly reported cutaneous AEs. In lung cancer patients, cutaneous AEs were not associated with better treatment outcomes after adjusting for the number of treatment cycles.
CONCLUSIONS: Both pembrolizumab and nivolumab exhibited tolerable cutaneous safety profiles in a variety of cancer patients undergoing anti-PD-1 therapy. Cutaneous AEs of anti-PD-1 therapy were not associated with antibody type, underlying malignancy, patient characteristics, or improved response.

暂无摘要。

The advent of targeted therapy and immunotherapy has revolutionized the management of advanced melanoma. However, these novel therapies are associated with adverse effects (AEs), of which cutaneous toxicities are the most frequently observed. These cutaneous AEs can exert significant morbidity and impact on patient quality of life, hence the recognition and management of AEs is fundamental in preventing interruption or cessation of survival-prolonging treatments. Additionally, knowledge of these AEs are necessary in order for healthcare professionals to counsel patients when starting treatment and in the initiation of AE prophylaxis. The incidence and clinical presentation of the cutaneous toxicities of novel melanoma therapies will be discussed, and treatment guidelines provided.

The relationship between treatment outcome and cutaneous toxicity induced by anticancer therapy has gained attention in the past decade. In this article, we have provided an overview of the 3 main classes of anticancer agents-specifically, molecularly targeted kinase inhibitors, immune checkpoint inhibitors, and cytotoxic chemotherapeutics-and described the data evaluating the association between cutaneous toxicity induced by these agents and survival benefit. Although preliminary studies are promising with regard to the potential role of cutaneous toxicities as a surrogate biomarker of efficacy of treatment, larger prospective studies are needed to confirm this relationship. Dermatologists have a unique opportunity to collaborate with oncologists in the multidisciplinary treatment paradigm by helping to identify and manage these dermatologic events in patients with cancer. A heightened awareness of these toxicities is critical, as it can potentially allow recognition of the efficacy of anticancer therapy and may influence treatment decisions and patient outcomes.