[Successive cutaneous adverse reactions to nilotinib and imatinib in a single patient]

[Leg ulcers occurring under tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy (sunitinib, nilotinib)]

BACKGROUND

Certain anticancer drugs are known to induce leg ulcers, mainly chemotherapy agents such as hydroxyurea. We report 2 cases of leg ulcers in cancer patients treated with the tyrosine kinase inhibitors, sunitinib and nilotinib, and we discuss the role of these treatments in the pathogenesis of leg ulcers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Case 1. A 62-year-old patient on sunitinib for intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma developed a lesion on her right foot. The vascular evaluation was negative. After progressive worsening, sunitinib was stopped and healing was observed within a few months. Case 2. A 83-year-old patient had been treated for chronic myeloid leukemia since 2005. Nilotinib was introduced in 2009. Peripheral arterial revascularization was required in May 2013. A few months later, worsening was noted with the onset of ulceration and necrosis of the third toe. Further revascularisation surgery was performed, and nilotinib was suspended and antiplatelets introduced. Healing occurred a few months later.

DISCUSSION

Many skin reactions have been described in patients on nilotinib and sunitinib, but few publications report the development of de novo ulcers in patients without risk factors. The pathophysiology of the development of ulcers in patients receiving tyrosine kinase inhibitors is not clear, and probably involves several mechanisms of action. The increasing use of this type of treatment could lead to an upsurge in the incidence of vascular complications.

CONCLUSION

We report two cases of leg ulcers developing in patients on tyrosine kinase inhibitors and raise the question of causal implication of these treatments in the pathogenesis of ulcers.

[Cutaneous drug reactions imitating dermatoses]

BACKGROUND

Cutaneous adverse drug reactions are frequent and present with heterogenous clinical manifestations.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Increasingly, case reports describe drug reactions which mimic dermatoses, although exact data on prevalence are missing. Psoriasiform, lichenoid and pityriasiform exanthems are most frequent. The differentiation of these variants from the respective authentic dermatoses is difficult and only a few clinical and histological criteria are helpful. Other dermatoses like lupus erythematosus or bullous autoimmune dermatoses (pemphigus vulgaris, bullous pemphigoid) can be induced by drugs as well. These drug-triggered variations are classified as distinct subclasses of the respective dermatosis.

CONCLUSIONS

Exact history and evaluation of the clinical course are essential for the diagnosis of drug reactions mimicking dermatoses and present an important challenge for the clinician. A clear-cut differentiation between the genuine dermatosis and its drug-driven simulator is not always possible.