Yellow skin discoloration associated with sorafenib use for treatment of metastatic renal cell carcinoma

Drug-Induced Pigmentation: A Review

Drug-induced pigmentation (DIP) is estimated to account for 20% of all cases of acquired hyperpigmentation. Over 50 agents have been implicated, including antibiotics, antimalarials, antiretrovirals, antipsychotics, prostaglandin analogs, heavy metals, and chemotherapeutic agents. The skin, mucosal surfaces, nails, and hair can all be affected, with the color, distribution, onset, and duration of pigmentation varying between offending agents. Both a thorough physical examination and medication history are necessary to determine the offending agent. In terms of mechanism, DIP occurs most frequently through the accumulation of melanin within the dermis but also by drug accumulation, pigment synthesis, and iron deposition. Photoprotection, including applying a broad-spectrum sunscreen, wearing photoprotective clothing, and seeking shade, plays an important role in the prevention of exacerbation of DIP. Multiple lasers, including the picosecond alexandrite, Q-switched Nd:YAG, Q-switched alexandrite, and Q-switched ruby lasers, have been successful in obtaining clearance of DIP. In this review, we examine the unique characteristics of each of the inciting agents in terms of incidence, clinical presentation, time to onset and resolution, and pathogenesis.

Herb-anticancer drug interactions in real life based on VigiBase, the WHO global database

Cancer patients could combine herbal treatments with their chemotherapy. We consulted VigiBase, a WHO database of individual case safety reports (ICSRs) which archives reports of suspected Adverse Drug Reactions (ADRs) when herbal products are used in conjunction with anti-cancer treatment. We focused on the possible interactions between antineoplastic (L01 ATC class) or hormone antagonists (L02B ATC class) with 10 commonly used herbs (pineapple, green tea, cannabis, black cohosh, turmeric, echinacea, St John’s wort, milk thistle and ginger) to compare ADRs described in ICSRs with the literature. A total of 1057 ICSRs were extracted from the database but only 134 were complete enough (or did not concern too many therapeutic lines) to keep them for analysis. Finally, 51 rationalizable ICSRs could be explained, which led us to propose a pharmacokinetic or pharmacodynamic interaction mechanism. Reports concerned more frequently women and half of the rationalizable ICSRs involved Viscum album and Silybum marianum. 5% of the ADRs described could have been avoided if clinicians had had access to the published information. It is also important to note that in 8% of the cases, the ADRs observed were life threatening. Phytovigilance should thus be considered more by health care professionals to best treat cancer patients and for better integrative care.

An Update on Drug-Induced Pigmentation

Drug-induced pigmentation accounts for up to 20% of all cases of acquired pigmentation. A thorough review of medical history and previous and ongoing medications as well as a complete skin examination can guide diagnosis. Implicated agents include alkylating/cytotoxic agents, analgesics, antiarrhythmics, anticoagulants, antiepileptics, antimalarials, antimicrobials, antiretrovirals, metals, prostaglandin analogs, and psychotropic agents, among others. Confirming true drug associations can be challenging, especially in the setting of delayed onset of pigmentation and coexisting polypharmacy.

Pigmentary changes in patients treated with targeted anticancer agents: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The discovery of signaling networks that drive oncogenic processes has led to the development of targeted anticancer agents. The burden of pigmentary adverse events from these drugs is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review and meta-analysis of published clinical trials and determine the incidence and risk of development of targeted therapy-induced pigmentary changes.

METHODS

A comprehensive search was conducted to identify studies reporting targeted therapy-induced pigmentary changes. The incidence and relative risk were calculated. Case reports and series were reviewed to understand clinical characteristics.

RESULTS

A total of 8052 patients from 36 clinical trials were included. The calculated overall incidences of targeted cancer therapy-induced all-grade pigmentary changes in the skin and hair were 17.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 11.9-25.4) and 21.5% (95% CI, 14.9-30.1), respectively. The relative risk of all-grade pigmentary changes of skin and hair were 93.7 (95% CI, 5.86-1497.164) and 20.1 (95% CI, 8.35-48.248). Across 53 case reports/series (N = 75 patients), epidermal growth factor receptor and breakpoint cluster region-abelson inhibitors were the most common offending agents.

LIMITATIONS

Potential under-reporting and variability in oncologists reporting these events.

CONCLUSION

There is a significant risk of development of pigmentary changes during treatment with targeted anticancer therapies. Appropriate counseling and management are critical to minimize psychosocial impairment and deterioration in quality of life.

Yellow Feet in a Patient with Breast and Thyroid Carcinoma, Due to Oral Intake of Turmeric

Yellow discoloration of the skin may be caused by several etiologies, including jaundice, hypervitaminosis, drug reaction or chemical exposure. Herein we describe a 68-year-old woman with a history of breast and thyroid carcinoma, presenting with a yellow discoloration of her soles, after ingestion of one capsule a day of turmeric root extract (Bluebonnet Turmeric Root, 500 mg, Vcap), taken for its anti-cancer properties, for 4 months. After drug cessation, the yellow hue disappeared completely. A Naranjo assessment score of 5 was obtained, indicating a probable relationship between the patient’s symptom and her use of the drug. Curcumin, a mixture of diferuloymethane derivatives known as curcuminoids, is a yellow pigment present in the spice turmeric. Topical application of curcumin to the human skin is joined by orange-yellow discoloration. To the best of our knowledge, yellow skin discoloration after oral intake of turmeric is not mentioned in the medical literature.

Sorafenib-associated facial acneiform eruption

INTRODUCTION

Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that targets tumor cell angiogenesis and proliferation. Drug-associated cutaneous adverse events, such as alopecia and hand-foot skin reaction, occur frequently. Sorafenib-related side effects affecting hair, nails, and skin are summarized and the characteristics of sorafenib-treated patients who developed acneiform facial lesions are reviewed to present the clinical features of these individuals.

CASE REPORT

A man with sorafenib-associated facial acneiform lesions mimicking those of chloracne is described.

DISCUSSION

PubMed was used to search the following terms, separately and in combination: acne, acneiform eruption, chloracne, cutaneous adverse events, hepatocellular carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, skin side effects, and sorafenib. Inclusion criteria for selecting papers to be reviewed included case reports and studies that described cutaneous and mucosal adverse side effects associated with sorafenib. All papers fulfilling inclusion criteria were reviewed and relevant manuscripts, along with their reference citations, were evaluated. Five patients-a woman with liver epithelioid hemangioendothelioma, three men with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and a man with hepatocellular carcinoma-have developed sorafenib-associated facial acneiform eruption. The eruption typically occurred after 4 weeks of treatment at a dose of 400 mg twice daily. The lesions presented as either papules and pustules (2 patients) or, similar in appearance and distribution to chloracne, only open and closed comedones (3 patients). The sorafenib-associated facial acneiform eruption partially improved after initiating topical antibiotics, keratolytics, and/or retinoids; however, progressive improvement or resolution occurred after lowering the daily dose or discontinuation of sorafenib.

CONCLUSIONS

Sorafenib-associated facial acneiform eruption is a rarely occurring cutaneous adverse event that has only been observed in five individuals. The skin lesions usually presented after 4 weeks of sorafenib (at a dose of 400 mg twice daily) treatment. The morphology and distribution of the lesions mimicked those of chloracne in three of the patients. Two of the patients also had other drug-related skin side effects. Topical acne-directed therapy was only partially effective in clearing the lesions; lowering the dose or discontinuation of sorafenib resulted in progressive improvement or resolution of the facial acneiform eruption.

Sorafenib is an inhibitor of UGT1A1 but is metabolized by UGT1A9: implications of genetic variants on pharmacokinetics and hyperbilirubinemia

PURPOSE

Several case reports suggest sorafenib exposure and sorafenib-induced hyperbilirubinemia may be related to a (TA)(5/6/7) repeat polymorphism in UGT1A1*28 (UGT, uridine glucuronosyl transferase). We hypothesized that sorafenib inhibits UGT1A1 and individuals carrying UGT1A1*28 and/or UGT1A9 variants experience greater sorafenib exposure and greater increase in sorafenib-induced plasma bilirubin concentration.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Inhibition of UGT1A1-mediated bilirubin glucuronidation by sorafenib was assessed in vitro. UGT1A1*28 and UGT1A9*3 genotypes were ascertained with fragment analysis or direct sequencing in 120 cancer patients receiving sorafenib on five different clinical trials. Total bilirubin measurements were collected in prostate cancer patients before receiving sorafenib (n = 41) and 19 to 30 days following treatment and were compared with UGT1A1*28 genotype.

RESULTS

Sorafenib exhibited mixed-mode inhibition of UGT1A1-mediated bilirubin glucuronidation (IC(50) = 18 μmol/L; K(i) = 11.7 μmol/L) in vitro. Five patients carrying UGT1A1*28/*28 (n = 4) or UGT1A9*3/*3 (n = 1) genotypes had first dose, dose-normalized areas under the sorafenib plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) that were in the 93rd percentile, whereas three patients carrying UGT1A1*28/*28 had AUCs in the bottom quartile of all genotyped patients. The Drug Metabolizing Enzymes and Transporters genotyping platform was applied to DNA obtained from six patients, which revealed the ABCC2-24C>T genotype cosegregated with sorafenib AUC phenotype. Sorafenib exposure was related to plasma bilirubin increases in patients carrying 1 or 2 copies of UGT1A1*28 alleles (n = 12 and n = 5; R(2) = 0.38 and R(2) = 0.77; P = 0.032 and P = 0.051, respectively). UGT1A1*28 carriers showed two distinct phenotypes that could be explained by ABCC2-24C>T genotype and are more likely to experience plasma bilirubin increases following sorafenib if they had high sorafenib exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot study indicates that genotype status of UGT1A1, UGT1A9, and ABCC2 and serum bilirubin concentration increases reflect abnormally high AUC in patients treated with sorafenib.

Chemotherapy-induced iatrogenic injury of skin: new drugs and new concepts

Chemotherapy and its cutaneous side effects are an increasingly common source of iatrogenic injury to the skin, hair, and nails. Cutaneous changes are among the most common side effects from treatment with particular targeted chemotherapeutic agents, especially those that target the epidermal growth factor receptor and small molecule multikinase inhibitors. Less common, but growing in recognition, are the development of secondary cutaneous neoplasms and subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus as a result of chemotherapy. There is considerable overlap of the multiple entities described as a side effect from conventional chemotherapeutic agents; therefore, the term "toxic erythema of chemotherapy" can be used as an easily understood name.

The histologic spectrum of epithelial neoplasms induced by sorafenib

Sorafenib is a multikinase inhibitor newly approved for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma and hepatocellular carcinoma. Multiple cutaneous adverse effects of sorafenib have been described. We present a 68-year-old patient with renal cell carcinoma who developed multiple tender hyperkeratotic papules within weeks of starting sorafenib. The degree of symptoms and size of lesions corresponded directly with his sorafenib dosing. Four biopsy specimens of representative lesions were taken. Three lesions showed keratin-filled endophytic epithelial-lined invaginations, one with a coexistent actinic keratosis. The fourth biopsy specimen revealed an invasive squamous cell carcinoma with keratoacanthoma-like features. To our knowledge, diffuse eruptions of epidermal invaginations, ectatic follicular infundibula, and follicular infundibular cysts have not been reported previously with sorafenib, although they are well known to occur with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor therapy. Keratoacanthoma and squamous cell carcinoma as a result of sorafenib use are only beginning to be reported in the literature. At the time of acceptance of our manuscript, sorafenib-induced keratoacanthoma was noted only once in the literature, and deeply invasive squamous cell carcinoma has been reported once in the setting of sorafenib and tipifarnib combination therapy. We review the spectrum of dermatologic side effects of sorafenib to facilitate their recognition.

Localized palmar-plantar epidermal hyperplasia associated with use of sorafenib

A 45-year-old man receiving oral sorafenib 400 mg twice daily for metastatic renal cell carcinoma developed pain and rash on his hands and feet 3 weeks after commencement of treatment. Dermatological examination revealed hyperkeratotic plaques surrounded by erythema and with a callus-like brownish-yellow appearance centrally, together with bullae with purulent content under the plaques. Histopathological examination revealed intense hyperkeratosis in the upper part of the epidermis and parakeratosis beneath the epidermis. The integrity of the epidermis was therefore compromised and intense neutrophilic infiltration was seen. The patient was diagnosed on clinical and histopathological grounds as having localized palmar-plantar hyperplasia associated with use of sorafenib, representing the second case reported in the literature. The patient's skin lesions improved markedly after the sorafenib dose was decreased to 200 mg twice daily, a regimen that he continues to take. In the authors' opinion, use of the term localized palmar-plantar hyperplasia, as diagnosed in this patient, is more appropriate in this clinical setting than related terms such as palmoplantar erythro-dysaesthesia or hand-foot syndrome.

Dermatologic symptoms associated with the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib

BACKGROUND

The multikinase inhibitor sorafenib (Nexavar) is associated with a relatively high incidence of dermatologic symptoms.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate and provide guidance on the diagnosis and clinical management of dermatologic symptoms associated with sorafenib in patients with advanced solid tumors.

METHODS

English-language studies representative of a patient population with a variety of tumor types, who received single-agent sorafenib, were selected. Particular emphasis was placed on the phase III Treatment Approaches in Renal Cancer Global Evaluation Trial (TARGETs).

RESULTS

Frequently observed dermatologic side effects (any grade in TARGETs) of sorafenib include rash/desquamation (40%), hand-foot skin reaction (30%), alopecia (27%), and pruritus (19%). Generally, dermatologic symptoms resolve with appropriate management, including topical treatments, dose interruptions, dose reductions, or a combination of these.

LIMITATIONS

The results presented here are based on a limited number of studies.

CONCLUSION

Although sorafenib is associated with dermatologic symptoms, these are usually resolved with appropriate intervention, patient-led practical treatment, and preventative measures.

Evolving strategies for the management of hand-foot skin reaction associated with the multitargeted kinase inhibitors sorafenib and sunitinib

The multitargeted kinase inhibitors (MKIs) sorafenib and sunitinib have shown benefit in patients with renal cell carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma (sorafenib), and gastrointestinal stromal tumor (sunitinib). Their efficacy in other malignancies is currently being investigated because of their broad range of activity. The effectiveness of these drugs is somewhat diminished by the development of a variety of toxicities, most notably hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR). Although HFSR does not appear to directly affect survival, it can impact quality of life and lead to MKI dose modification or interruption, potentially limiting the antitumor effect. Currently, no standard guidelines exist for the prevention and management of MKI-associated HFSR. To address this issue, an international, interdisciplinary panel of experts gathered in January 2008 to discuss and evaluate the best-practice management of these reactions. Based on these proceedings, recommendations for the management of HFSR have been provided to offer patients the best possible quality of life while taking these drugs and to optimize the patient benefit associated with MKI therapy.

Dermatological reactions to the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor sunitinib

BACKGROUND

The multikinase inhibitor sunitinib has enhanced the treatment of renal cell carcinoma and gastrointestinal stromal tumor through an improved clinical response with decreased systemic toxicities. However, sunitinib is frequently associated with dermatological adverse reactions. The physical and psychosocial impact of frequent dermatological toxicities can affect consistent antineoplastic therapy and quality of life.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Dermatological adverse reaction information was compiled from Pfizer Medical Information and from abstracts from the 2007 American Society of Clinical Oncology annual meeting, Prostate Cancer Symposium, and Gastrointestinal Cancers Symposium. Published clinical trials of sunitinib in MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, Cochrane Controlled Trials Register, and EMBASE Drugs and Pharmacology databases were also included. Information was accessed on or before June 30, 2007.

RESULTS

In the pooled analysis, all-grade hand-foot skin reaction occurred in 19% of patients (5% grades 3-4), skin discoloration in 28% (0% grades 3-4), dry skin in 16% (1% grades 3-4), skin rash in 13% (1% grades 3-4), dermatitis in 8% (2% grades 3-4), hair color changes in 10% (0% grades 3-4), alopecia in 6% (0% grades 3-4), and phototoxicity in <0.1%.

CONCLUSIONS

Dermatological reactions associated with sunitinib occur frequently. Evidence-based treatment recommendations are needed in order to maximize quality of life and optimize clinical outcome.