Vemurafenib-Induced Neutrophilic Panniculitis: A New Case and Review of the Literature

Cutaneous Side Effects of Modern Targeted Therapy and Immunotherapy in Patients with Dermatological Malignancies

The advent of immunotherapy and targeted therapies in treating dermatological malignancies has dramatically changed the landscape of dermato-oncology in recent years. Their superior efficacy compared to previous therapeutic options, such as chemotherapy, has resulted in their use in treating devastating malignancies, such as melanoma or unresectable/metastatic basal cell and squamous cell carcinoma. Skin toxicity is a critical safety consideration, among other adverse reactions, that can occur under treatment with these agents. This article aims to summarize the cutaneous side effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors and targeted dermato-oncological therapies. Although the skin side effects of these agents are primarily mild, they can occasionally affect the decision for treatment continuation and the quality of life of the affected patients. Therefore, physicians must be acquainted with the specific cutaneous toxicity profile of such treatments to mitigate their impact on the patients and optimize the overall outcome of dermato-oncological therapy.

Erdheim-Chester disease and vemurafenib: a review of ophthalmic presentations and clinical outcomes

PURPOSE

To provide a comprehensive review of ocular and orbital manifestations of Erdheim-Chester Disease (ECD) and compare clinical outcomes with vemurafenib (INN) to historical treatments (HT). Primary outcomes are ophthalmic findings on presentation, changes in visual acuity, and mortality rate. Secondary outcomes include the progression of ocular findings, systemic involvements, and treatment modalities.

METHODS

All published literature from January 1983 to March 2021 was searched for ophthalmic manifestations of ECD. Clinical outcomes following HT were collected and compared with INN.

RESULTS

Forty-seven patients with ECD and ophthalmic presentations were identified. The mean age was 49.6 years (SD = 15.0). Proptosis (65.6%) and extraocular muscle restrictions (42.5%) were the most common presenting signs. Of 41 (87.2%) patients with orbital masses on radiologic examination, 90.2% were bilateral, and 53.7% were located in the intraconal space. Ophthalmic examination was significant for xanthelasma (27.2%), optic disc edema (34.0%), and subretinal changes (21.3%). Common treatments were systemic steroids (76.6%), interferon-α (17.0%), and cyclophosphamide (14.9%). INN was less commonly used (12.8%). The mean change in logMAR visual acuity declined with HT (29.9%) but improved with INN (79.1%) (p > 0.05). The proportion of eyes with complete vision loss increased after HT (p < 0.05). The overall mortality rate was 27.7% and notably higher in the HT group (29.3%) when compared to the INN group (16.7%) (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

ECD presents with many ophthalmic manifestations. Although the intraocular treatments remain controversial, INN should be highly considered in treating orbital ECD patients with BRAF-V600E mutations to prevent and reverse vision loss.

Suggestions for a New Clinical Classification Approach to Panniculitis Based on a Mayo Clinic Experience of 207 Cases

BACKGROUND

Panniculitis, or inflammation of adipose tissue, includes a heterogeneous group of disorders with similar morphologic presentations. Currently, panniculitides are classified based on histopathologic findings only.

OBJECTIVE

In this retrospective study of 207 cases of biopsy-proven panniculitis over 20 years at Mayo Clinic, we aimed to propose a new classification that integrates the clinical morphologic features with the histopathology of panniculitis.

METHODS

We collected patient demographic and lesion morphologic characteristics using lesion photographs and physician notes for each of our 207 cases, including location, ulceration, scale, pattern (unilateral versus circumferential), atrophy/sclerosis (cicatricial), redness, and swelling.

RESULTS

The panniculitides most likely to ulcerate were calciphylaxis (85.7% ulcerating), pancreatic panniculitis (66.6%), and α₁-antitrypsin deficiency-associated panniculitis (100%). The panniculitides least likely to ulcerate were erythema nodosum and medication-induced and granulomatous panniculitis. This retrospective study used only descriptions in clinical notes and available medical photographs.

CONCLUSION

We present an updated classification schema of panniculitides based on clinical findings. The primary distinctions are based on ulceration, location, and number of lesions. Although complete distinction of all panniculitides based on clinical examination alone is not possible, we hope the proposed schema allows clinicians to tailor differential diagnoses.

Cutaneous adverse events in children treated with vemurafenib for refractory BRAFV600E mutated Langerhans cell histiocytosis

BACKGROUND

The somatic BRAF^V600E mutation occurs in 38-64% of pediatric cases of Langerhans cell histiocytosis (LCH). Vemurafenib (VMF), a BRAF inhibitor, was approved for refractory BRAF^V600E 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.

PROCEDURE

Multicentric retrospective observational study including patients <18 years treated with VMF alone for refractory BRAF^V600E 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.

Neutrophilic Infiltrates in Panniculitis: Comprehensive Review and Diagnostic Algorithm Proposal

Neutrophilic infiltrates in panniculitis can be seen in different clinical-pathological entities. There are a "mostly neutrophilic inflammatory infiltrate" in some entities classically defined as neutrophilic panniculitis and already included in algorithms, such as enzymatic panniculitis, infective and factitial ones, erythema induratum, or subcutaneous Sweet syndrome, but there are also other panniculitis where neutrophils are frequently observed such as panniculitis associated with inflammatory bowel disease or rheumatoid arthritis, or drug-induced panniculitis associated with BRAF inhibitors, and finally, some panniculitis are better classified in other panniculitides groups but may present with neutrophil-rich variants, such as the neutrophil-rich subcutaneous fat necrosis of the newborn. We review the main clinical and histopathological features of most of these panniculitides and construct a diagnostic algorithm including these diseases.

BRAF inhibitor-induced panniculitis in patients treated for stage IV metastatic melanoma: a case series

BRAF and MEK inhibitor combination therapy is the standard treatment for patients with BRAF V600E mutant metastatic melanoma. Neutrophilic panniculitis is a known rare complication of BRAF inhibitor therapy and can act as a potential mimic of melanoma metastases on ¹⁸F-FDG PET/CT. In this case series, we present three cases of BRAF inhibitor-induced panniculitis in patients being treated for BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma and emphasize the use of ultrasound to differentiate between panniculitis lesions, which are typically ill-defined echogenic masses and subcutaneous soft tissue melanoma metastases, which present as hypoechoic vascular masses.

[Panniculitis during BRAF inhibitor and/or MEK inhibitor therapy: A new case report and literature review]

INTRODUCTION

BRAF inhibitors±MEK inhibitors can cause panniculitis. Since the initial case described in 2012 by Zimmer et al., some sixty further cases have been reported. Based on a clinical study and a recent and complete review of the literature, we set out in detail the characteristics of panniculitis occurring during BRAF and MEK inhibition therapy as well as the treatment thereof.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A 25-year-old-patient followed for multi-metastatic melanoma and taking dabrafenib and trametinib consulted for the appearance, twenty-two days after the start of targeted therapy (TT), of panniculitis of the legs and forearms possibly induced by the TT after other causes had been ruled out. The TT had been continued following dose reduction and corticoid therapy for ten days, and complete resolution occurred after fifteen days.

RESULTS

Fifty-three cases of panniculitis during BRAF±MEK inhibition therapy were analysed. The condition occurred mainly with BRAF inhibitors alone (especially vemurafenib), but it was also described with three combinations of BRAF and MEK inhibitors, regardless of age (median: 45 years), with a M/F ratio of 0.51, and in 50 % of cases, it occurred within the first month (time to onset: between 1 and 480 days). Non-specific biopsy is useful to rule out differential diagnoses. Symptomatic anti-inflammatory treatment, whether systemic or topical, may be given. In the absence of signs of severity, the TT may be continued.

CONCLUSION

When panniculitis occurs during BRAF±MEK inhibitor therapy, the causal role of the TT must be considered after full etiological investigation. It is essential to determine whether a causal relationship exists in order to avoid unwarranted cessation of treatment.

Neutrophilic drug reactions

Neutrophilic drug reactions are unique eruptions that can affect hospitalized patients and share a common pathophysiology with neutrophils as the key mediators of inflammation. They range in clinical presentation from papules and plaques to bullae and erosions to pustules. Although there is some overlap in presentation, each has distinguishing features that aid the clinician in differentiation from one another and from other drug hypersensitivity reactions. Much of the data on these reactions are from case reports and series or retrospective review studies. There are limited prospective observational studies dedicated to these adverse drug reactions. We review the more common and life-threatening neutrophilic drug reactions, their proposed mechanism of action, and their management.

Panniculitis in a patient with pathologic complete response to talimogene laherparepvec treatment for recurrent, in-transit melanoma

Talimogene laherparepvec (T-VEC) is a novel intralesional oncolytic genetically modified herpes simplex virus type 1 vector for the treatment of unresectable cutaneous, subcutaneous, and nodal melanoma. Although immunological therapies such as T-VEC offer therapeutic promise, they carry a risk of immune-related adverse events (irAEs), the full spectrum of which is incompletely understood. We report a 63-year-old previously healthy man with cutaneous melanoma of the right ankle and progressive right lower extremity in-transit metastases despite systemic therapy with immunomodulatory and molecularly targeted treatments. T-VEC treatment resulted in a complete pathologic response on scouting biopsies. Biopsy of the right lateral calf showed lobular and septal panniculitis with lymphoplasmacytic infiltrate and lipophages. Gomori methenamine silver (GMS) stain and acid-fast bacilli (AFB) stains were negative, and no polarizable foreign material was noted. T-VEC was discontinued due to complete pathologic response and, in part, concern for development of irAEs including this panniculitis and an early concomitant autoimmune colitis. This case highlights a previously unreported irAE with this novel treatment for advanced cases of melanoma.

Clinical management of cutaneous adverse events in patients on targeted anticancer therapies and immunotherapies: a national consensus statement by the Spanish Academy of Dermatology and Venereology and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology

Progress in the understanding of many tumors has enabled the development of new therapies, such as those targeted at specific molecules involved in cell growth (targeted therapies) or intended to modulate the immune system (immunotherapy). However, along with the clinical benefit provided by these new treatments, new adverse effects have also appeared. Dermatological toxicities such as papulopustular eruptions, xerosis, and pruritus are common with EGFR inhibitors. Other adverse effects have also been described with PDGFR, BCR-ABL, and MAPK tyrosine kinase inhibitors, antiangiogenic drugs, and inhibitors at immune checkpoints such as CTLA-4 and PD-1/PD-L1. Onset of these adverse effects often causes dose reductions and/or delays in administering the prescribed therapy, which can affect patient survival and quality of life. It is, therefore, important to prevent the occurrence of these adverse effects, or to treat unavoidable ones as soon as possible. This requires cooperation between medical oncologists and dermatologists. This article reviews the various dermatological toxicities associated with targeted therapies and immunotherapies, along with their diagnosis and therapeutic management.

Erythema nodosum-like panniculitis mimicking disease recurrence: A novel toxicity from immune checkpoint blockade therapy-Report of 2 patients

Immunotherapies targeting cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 (CTLA-4) and the programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) receptor and its ligand (PD-L1) have showed substantial therapeutic benefit in patients with clinically advanced solid malignancies. However, autoimmune toxicities are common and often significant adverse events with these agents. While rash and pruritus remain the most common cutaneous complications in treated patients, novel dermatologic toxicities related to immune checkpoint blockade continue to emerge as the number of patients exposed to immunotherapy increases. Here, we describe 2 patients treated with combination immunotherapy with ipilimumab and nivolumab who developed painful subcutaneous nodules. Although the findings were clinically concerning for disease recurrence, histopathologic examination of biopsies from the lesions revealed a subcutaneous mixed septal and lobular erythema nodosum-like panniculitis. Notably, neither patient received immunosuppressive therapy for these lesions, which subsequently remained stable, and both patients' cancer remained controlled. These cases show that the dermatologic toxicity profile of immune checkpoint blockade is diverse and continues to expand, and illustrates that recognition of such toxicities is critical to optimal patient management.

Panniculitis Associated with MEK Inhibitor Therapy: An Uncommon Adverse Effect

The combination of MEK inhibitor (cobimetinib, trametinib) and BRAF inhibitor (vemurafenib, dabrafenib) is now the first-line treatment in patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma. This association reduces cutaneous adverse events induced by BRAF inhibitors alone, including photosensitivity, hand-foot syndrome, hyperkeratosis, alopecia, skin papillomas, keratoacanthomas, and squamous-cell carcinomas. While panniculitis has exceptionally been reported with BRAF inhibitors, this rare side effect has never been described with the use of MEK inhibitors. We present here the first observation of panniculitis strictly induced by MEK inhibitors. Indeed, 10 days after the initiation of combined treatment with cobimetinib and vemurafenib for metastatic melanoma, our patient developed panniculitis predominantly on the upper and lower extremities. These cutaneous nodules disappeared during cobimetinib intermissions and recurred while the molecule was resumed. Recurrence of cutaneous nodules was observed after initiation of trametinib combined with dabrafenib, and resolved once again with trametinib discontinuation. We believe that clinicians should be aware of this cutaneous adverse event in patients treated with combined therapy, which can lead to unfounded BRAF inhibitor treatment discontinuation and compromise the antitumor response. Our case suggests a class effect linked with the MEK inhibition pharmacodynamic activity. Finally, laboratory investigation and histopathological examination are mandatory to exclude other panniculitis etiologies and subcutaneous metastasis of melanoma.