Clinico-morphological features of BRAF inhibition-induced proliferative skin lesions in cancer patients

Ocular side effects of anticancer agents used in the treatment of gynecologic cancers

The treatment landscape of gynecologic cancers has expanded in recent years to include targeted and immune-based therapies. These therapies often have ocular side effects not seen with conventional chemotherapies, some of which can cause significant visual impairment if not recognized in a timely fashion. Clinicians must know how to appropriately identify, mitigate, and treat these ocular adverse events. Management often involves working with an interdisciplinary team of eye specialists, and it is important to know when to refer patients for specialized care. Proactive identification of eye specialists, especially in rural and community settings where access to care can be limited, may be necessary. Here, we discuss the management of common ocular toxicities seen with novel anticancer agents used to treat gynecologic cancers.

Cutaneous toxicities from targeted therapies used in oncology: Literature review of clinical presentation and management

•

Cutaneous toxicities are frequent with targeted therapies.

•

Managing cutaneous toxicities is critical for life-saving treatment continuation.

•

Dermatologists can provide a key input in preventing and managing these toxicities.

With the development of molecular targeted therapies, a wide array of dermatologic toxicities is appearing. Their prevention, recognition, and management by dermatologists is critical to ensure antineoplastic treatment continuation. The objective of this study was to provide a literature review of the most common dermatologic toxicities due to targeted therapies in oncologic patients, including their clinical presentation, prevention, and management.

Spironolactone-Induced Lichenoid Drug Reaction and Subsequent Diffuse Eruptive Squamous Cell Carcinomas Successfully Treated With Systemic Methotrexate

Antihypertensive agents such as spironolactone have been reported to cause lichenoid drug eruptions. Eruptive keratoacanthomas (KA), considered to be well-differentiated squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), may develop in the setting of such lichenoid reactions. Thus, definitive treatment is imperative. This case report describes a patient on spironolactone who developed a lichenoid drug eruption followed by eruptive KAs and SCC. The treatment approach used systemic methotrexate. While most treatment regimens for widespread eruptive KA/SCC employ intralesional methotrexate, this case demonstrated the utility of its systemic counterpart. This may have also facilitated the resolution of the patient’s lichenoid eruption. There are only three other reports in the literature describing a spironolactone-induced lichenoid drug eruption. Further investigations are needed to evaluate the adverse cutaneous effects of spironolactone as well as the efficacy of systemic methotrexate in treating patients with a significant number of SCCs arising from lichenoid drug eruptions.

Hyperkeratotic Skin Adverse Events Induced by Anticancer Treatments: A Comprehensive Review

Hyperkeratotic skin adverse events are a group of toxic effects, characterized by the disruption of epidermal homeostasis and interaction with keratinocyte proliferation/differentiation or keratinocyte survival, and frequently reported with systemic anticancer treatments. These types of reactions include hand-foot skin reaction or palmoplantar keratoderma, induced psoriasis, keratosis pilaris-like or pityriasis rubra pilaris-like rashes, Grover's disease, and contact hyperkeratosis. Cutaneous squamoproliferative lesions are also described because of the presence of abnormal keratinocyte proliferation. They are usually observed with tyrosine kinase inhibitors but have also been described in association with cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents. Their pathogenesis is related mainly to the disruption of epidermal homeostasis and interaction with keratinocyte proliferation/differentiation or keratinocyte survival caused by anticancer treatment. Early recognition and adequate management are critical to prevent exacerbation of the lesions, to limit treatment interruption, and to minimize impairment of quality of life. This review summarizes the current knowledge concerning the presentation, pathogenesis, and management of secondary hyperkeratotic reactions to anticancer therapies. It also includes hyperkeratotic reactions that have been more recently described with newly approved targeted therapies or immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as keratosis pilaris-like exanthema with second-generation BCR-ABL inhibitors, lamellar ichthyosis-like lesions with ponatinib, pityriasis rubra pilaris with the newly approved selective phosphoinositide 3 kinase inhibitor idelalisib, or psoriasis with anti-programmed death-1 and programmed death ligand-1.

Toxic Side Effects of Targeted Therapies and Immunotherapies Affecting the Skin, Oral Mucosa, Hair, and Nails

Targeted therapies and immunotherapies are associated with a wide range of dermatologic adverse events (dAEs) resulting from common signaling pathways involved in malignant behavior and normal homeostatic functions of the epidermis and dermis. Dermatologic toxicities include damage to the skin, oral mucosa, hair, and nails. Acneiform rash is the most common dAE, observed in 25–85% of patients treated by epidermal growth factor receptor and mitogen-activated protein kinase kinase inhibitors. BRAF inhibitors mostly induce secondary skin tumors, squamous cell carcinoma and keratoacanthomas, changes in pre-existing pigmented lesions, as well as hand-foot skin reactions and maculopapular hypersensitivity-like rash. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) most frequently induce nonspecific maculopapular rash, but also eczema-like or psoriatic lesions, lichenoid dermatitis, xerosis, and pruritus. Of the oral mucosal toxicities observed with targeted therapies, oral mucositis is the most frequent with mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors, followed by stomatitis associated to multikinase angiogenesis and HER inhibitors, geographic tongue, oral hyperkeratotic lesions, lichenoid reactions, and hyperpigmentation. ICIs typically induce oral lichenoid reactions and xerostomia. Targeted therapies and endocrine therapy also commonly induce alopecia, although this is still underreported with the latter. Finally, targeted therapies may damage nail folds, with paronychia and periungual pyogenic granuloma distinct from chemotherapy-induced lesions. Mild onycholysis, brittle nails, and a slower nail growth rate may also be observed. Targeted therapies and immunotherapies often profoundly diminish patients’ quality of life, which impacts treatment outcomes. Close collaboration between dermatologists and oncologists is therefore essential.

Cutaneous toxicities of new treatments for melanoma

New drugs against advanced melanoma have emerged during last decade. Target therapy and immunotherapy have changed the management of patients with metastatic disease. Along with its generalized use, drug toxicities have appeared and the skin is the target organ of a significant part of them. This revision summarizes the most common side effects and consensus management to improve the compliance of therapies and patients' quality of life. Among the BRAF inhibitors, main cutaneous side effects are photosensitivity, plantar hyperkeratosis, and the appearance of verrucal keratosis or squamous cell carcinoma. Special attention must be paid to the development of new primary melanomas or changes on nevi during BRAF inhibitor therapy. The most common cutaneous side effects of immunotherapy are rash, pruritus, and vitiligo. It remains controversial the possible role of these toxicities as markers of response to therapy.

Management of the cutaneous adverse effects of antimelanoma therapy

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.

Response and Resistance to Paradox-Breaking BRAF Inhibitor in Melanomas In Vivo and Ex Vivo

FDA-approved BRAF inhibitors produce high response rates and improve overall survival in patients with BRAF V600E/K-mutant melanoma, but are linked to pathologies associated with paradoxical ERK1/2 activation in wild-type BRAF cells. To overcome this limitation, a next-generation paradox-breaking RAF inhibitor (PLX8394) has been designed. Here, we show that by using a quantitative reporter assay, PLX8394 rapidly suppressed ERK1/2 reporter activity and growth of mutant BRAF melanoma xenografts. Ex vivo treatment of xenografts and use of a patient-derived explant system (PDeX) revealed that PLX8394 suppressed ERK1/2 signaling and elicited apoptosis more effectively than the FDA-approved BRAF inhibitor, vemurafenib. Furthermore, PLX8394 was efficacious against vemurafenib-resistant BRAF splice variant-expressing tumors and reduced splice variant homodimerization. Importantly, PLX8394 did not induce paradoxical activation of ERK1/2 in wild-type BRAF cell lines or PDeX. Continued in vivo dosing of xenografts with PLX8394 led to the development of acquired resistance via ERK1/2 reactivation through heterogeneous mechanisms; however, resistant cells were found to have differential sensitivity to ERK1/2 inhibitor. These findings highlight the efficacy of a paradox-breaking selective BRAF inhibitor and the use of PDeX system to test the efficacy of therapeutic agents. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(1); 84-95. ©2017 AACR.

BRAF inhibitor-associated cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma: new mechanistic insight, emerging evidence for viral involvement and perspectives on clinical management

Mutations in the BRAF proto-oncogene occur in the majority of cutaneous melanomas. The commonly detected valine (V) to glutamate (E) mutation (V600E) is known to drive melanomagenesis and has thus been the target of two highly selective chemotherapeutic agents: vemurafenib and dabrafenib. While BRAF inhibitor therapy has revolutionized the treatment of metastatic melanoma, unanticipated cutaneous toxicities, including the development of cutaneous squamous cell carcinomas (cSCCs), are frequently reported and hinder therapeutic durability. However, the mechanisms by which BRAF inhibitors induce cutaneous neoplasms are poorly understood, thus posing a challenge for specific therapies. In this review, we summarize the clinical and molecular profiles of BRAF inhibitor-associated cSCCs, with a focus on factors that may contribute to disease pathogenesis. In particular, we discuss the emerging evidence pointing towards viral involvement in BRAF inhibitor-induced cutaneous neoplasms and offer new perspectives on future therapeutic interventions. Continued clinical and mechanistic studies along this line will not only allow for better understanding of the pathogenic progression of BRAF inhibitor-induced cSCCs, but will also lead to development of new therapeutic and preventative options for patients receiving targeted cancer therapy.

Eruptive Keratoacanthomas Associated With Pembrolizumab Therapy

Importance

To our knowledge, there have been no previous reports of eruptive keratoacanthomas (KAs) in patients receiving pembrolizumab.

Objective

To report the cases of 3 consecutive patients with pembrolizumab-induced eruptive KAs and their management.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Case report study of 3 patients from 2 centers with pembrolizumab-treated cancer who all developed eruptive KAs.

Interventions

All 3 patients had AK treatment with clobetasol ointment and intralesional triamcinolone; 2 patients also underwent open superficial cryosurgery.

Results

Three consecutive patients with cancer, 2 men and 1 woman (median age, 83 years; range 77-91 years), experienced pembrolizumab-associated eruptive KAs. All patients presented with a sudden onset of multiple lesions on sun-exposed areas of their extremities after a median of 13 months (range, 4-18 months) of pembrolizumab therapy. On lesional biopsy, a lichenoid infiltrate was observed in the underlying dermis, predominantly composed of CD3+ T cells, scattered CD20+ B cells, and relatively few PD-1+ (programmed cell death 1-positive) T cells, an immunophenotypic pattern also observed in other cases of anti-PD-1-induced lichenoid dermatitis. Patients were treated with clobetasol ointment and intralesional triamcinolone, alone or in combination with open superficial cryosurgery. All KAs resolved in all patients, and no new lesions occurred during close follow-up. Pembrolizumab treatment was continued without disruption in all 3 cases, and all patients had complete responses of their primary cancers.

Conclusions and Relevance

Pembrolizumab is used in advanced melanoma, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer, and in head and neck cancer. A variety of dermatologic immune-related adverse events including maculopapular eruption, lichenoid reactions, pruritus, and vitiligo have been described. This case series demonstrates that pembrolizumab therapy may also be associated with eruptive KAs with characteristic dermal inflammation, which improved with corticosteroid treatment (topical and intralesional) alone or in combination with cryosurgery, allowing patients to continue therapy with pembrolizumab.

Safety and tolerability of sorafenib in patients with radioiodine-refractory thyroid cancer

Effective adverse event (AE) management is critical to maintaining patients on anticancer therapies. The DECISION trial was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, Phase 3 trial which investigated sorafenib for treatment of progressive, advanced, or metastatic radioactive iodine-refractory, differentiated thyroid carcinoma. Four hundred and seventeen adult patients were randomized (1:1) to receive oral sorafenib (400 mg, twice daily) or placebo, until progression, unacceptable toxicity, noncompliance, or withdrawal. Progression-free survival, the primary endpoint of DECISION, was reported previously. To elucidate the patterns and management of AEs in sorafenib-treated patients in the DECISION trial, this report describes detailed, by-treatment-cycle analyses of the incidence, prevalence, and severity of hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR), rash/desquamation, hypertension, diarrhea, fatigue, weight loss, increased serum thyroid stimulating hormone, and hypocalcemia, as well as the interventions used to manage these AEs. By-cycle incidence of the above-selected AEs with sorafenib was generally highest in cycle 1 or 2 then decreased. AE prevalence generally increased over cycles 2-6 then stabilized or declined. Among these AEs, only weight loss tended to increase in severity (from grade 1 to 2) over time; severity of HFSR and rash/desquamation declined over time. AEs were mostly grade 1 or 2, and were generally managed with dose interruptions/reductions, and concomitant medications (e.g. antidiarrheals, antihypertensives, dermatologic preparations). Most dose interruptions/reductions occurred in early cycles. In conclusion, AEs with sorafenib in DECISION were typically grade 1 or 2, occurred early during the treatment course, and were manageable over time.

[Management of the cutaneous side effects of chemotherapies and targeted therapies]

The treatments used in oncology cause frequent cutaneous side effects. The different types of cutaneous toxicities depend on the class of anti-tumour therapies and can involve the skin, mucosa, nails and hair. Effectively managing these cutaneous toxicities requires adapted preventive and curative measures in order to reduce their impact, notably on patients' quality of life.

Contribution of Beta-HPV Infection and UV Damage to Rapid-Onset Cutaneous Squamous Cell Carcinoma during BRAF-Inhibition Therapy

PURPOSE

BRAF-inhibition (BRAFi) therapy for advanced melanoma carries a high rate of secondary cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) and risk of other cancers. UV radiation and α-genus human papillomavirus (HPV) are highly associated with SCC, but a novel role for β-genus HPV is suspected in BRAFi-cSCC. Cutaneous β-HPV may act in concert with host and environmental factors in BRAFi-cSCC.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Primary BRAFi-cSCC tissue DNA isolated from patients receiving vemurafenib or dabrafenib from two cancer centers was analyzed for the presence of cutaneous oncogenic viruses and host genetic mutations. Diagnostic specimens underwent consensus dermatopathology review. Clinical parameters for UV exposure and disease course were statistically analyzed in conjunction with histopathology.

RESULTS

Twenty-nine patients contributed 69 BRAFi-cSCC lesions. BRAFi-cSCC had wart-like features (BRAFi-cSCC-WF) in 22% of specimens. During vemurafenib therapy, BRAFi-cSCC-WF arose 11.6 weeks more rapidly than conventional cSCC when controlled for gender and UV exposure (P value = 0.03). Among all BRAFi-cSCC, β-genus HPV-17, HPV-38, HPV-111 were most frequently isolated, and novel β-HPV genotypes were discovered (CTR, CRT-11, CRT-22). Sequencing revealed 63% of evaluated BRAFi-cSCCs harbored RAS mutations with PIK3CA, CKIT, ALK, and EGFR mutations also detected.

CONCLUSIONS

We examined clinical, histopathologic, viral, and genetic parameters in BRAFi-cSCC demonstrating rapid onset; wart-like histomorphology; β-HPV-17, HPV-38, and HPV-111 infection; UV damage; and novel ALK and CKIT mutations. Discovered β-HPV genotypes expand the spectrum of tumor-associated viruses. These findings enhance our understanding of factors cooperating with BRAF inhibition that accelerate keratinocyte oncogenesis as well as broaden the knowledge base of multifactorial mediators of cancer in general.