A National Survey of Medical Oncologist's Opinions and Perceptions for Managing Rash Among mCRC Patients Treated with Panitumumab

Navigating metastatic colorectal treatment options in the USA: a survey of patient acceptance of skin toxicities associated with Vectibix

Abstract

Purpose

To understand the extent to which metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients receive education on the prevention and management associated with skin rash following Vectibix treatment. Furthermore, to investigate how this adverse event affects a patient’s quality of life (QoL) and influences their treatment decisions.

Methods

A cross-sectional survey was administered to 200 mCRC patients (100 Vectibix users and 100 Vectibix non-users). After excluding respondents who had used cetuximab, 61 Vectibix users and 56 Vectibix non-users remained.

Results

Most Vectibix users (79%) experienced a skin rash in response to treatment of which 65% considered the rash moderate, 27% mild, and 8% severe. Vectibix users generally felt they were adequately informed about the rash (83%), with the most common messages received related to sun protection. However, sunscreen was used by only 42% of patients prior to rash and 60% of patients following the appearance of rash. The use of oral antibiotics was low prior to rash (21%) and following rash (46%). Among patients experiencing a rash within the past week (n=16), 75% reported the rash had a large negative impact on their QoL based on the Dermatology Life Quality Index.

Conclusion

There was a disconnect between patients feeling they were adequately informed and use of prevention and management strategies such as sun protection. This suggests a gap in patient education and adoption currently exists on management strategies both prior to and following the appearance of rash. Given the negative impact that skin toxicity has on the patient’s quality of life, it is essential that patients receive and subsequently utilize all information that can minimize rash severity.

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.

The extent to which the last decade has yielded additional treatment options for EGFR-associated rash besides classic treatment with antibiotics and corticosteroids - A systematic review

PURPOSE

To investigate the effectiveness of different interventions for the prevention and treatment of EGFRI treatment-induced rash (EGFRIr) that appeared in the last decade, excluding antibiotics and steroids products alone.

METHOD

A systematic review was performed in 2019 and was updated in 2020. The search strategy was limited to studies published within the last 10 years on the Medline database accessed via Pubmed and the Cochrane database. The search was performed using keywords combined with AND, OR.

RESULTS

The search yielded thirteen studies. The studies were divided into two categories, based on the intervention method used: four studies used creams containing vitamin K1 or vitamin K3 (henceforth classified as "Category A″) and nine studies ("Category B″) focused on different intervention methods such as laser treatment, Polydatin (PD) cream treatment, treatment with sunscreen, Adapalene gel treatment, topical aloe vera treatment, topical hydration treatment, the impact of a pre-emptive skin treatment and, finally, epidermal growth factor (EGF) ointment treatment. From "Category A″, the results vary as two studies found no benefit from cream use, while two studies indicated a possible improvement on skin reactions from cream use. In "Category B″, a benefit due to laser treatment was indicated, Polydatin-containing moisturizer showed a reduction in the incidence of rash grade ≥ II in patients treated with afatinib, while treatment with sunscreen demonstrated no benefit for the prevention of EGFRIr. Additionally, Adapalene gel use is not recommended as prophylaxis for EGFRIr, topical aloe vera may be used in the management for EGFRIr due to cetuximab, topical hydration resolved the EFGRIr, the pre-emptive skin treatment routine was well tolerated and the epidermal growth factor ointment improved all the symptoms due to EGFRI.

CONCLUSIONS

The results from the studies vary, although this study focuses on reviewing treatment interventions that can be utilized, apart from antibiotics and steroids, in order to alleviate the problems of the patients suffering from EGFRIr. More specifically, the authors of this review cannot draw a conclusion from "Category A″, as the efficacy of vitamin K for the management of EGFRIr is controversial. From "Category B″, some of the suggested treatments show encouraging results, while others may prove ineffective and rather harmful for the patients.