Skip to main content
Top
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer 4/2018

Open Access 01-04-2018 | Original Article

A survey of patient and physician acceptance of skin toxicities from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapies

Authors: Bernd Tischer, Martina Bilang, Matthias Kraemer, Philippe Ronga, Mario E. Lacouture

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 4/2018

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Inhibition of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) extends patient survival in multiple tumor types. Skin toxicities are the most common adverse event (AE) elicited by EGFR inhibitors. Here, we provide deeper insights into patients’ and physicians’ acceptance of the risk/benefit trade-offs of skin toxicities during cancer therapy, including comparison of their perceptions and experiences with dermatologic AEs.

Methods

A multinational survey of 195 patients and 120 physicians was conducted to gauge attitudes regarding skin toxicities as an AE during cancer therapy.

Results

Skin toxicities were identified by patients and physicians as the AE that is most discouraging to patients when undergoing cancer therapies. Skin toxicities were cited as causing pain, impairing quality of life, and proving difficult to manage. Despite these negative influences, the majority of patients (71%) indicated they were willing to accept skin toxicities as an AE of an effective therapy. Indeed, the majority of patients and physicians preferred a more effective therapy that induces more severe skin toxicities than a less efficacious therapy that induces less severe skin toxicities; interestingly, patients were willing to accept a higher likelihood of severe skin toxicities than physicians.

Conclusion

In this examination of patients’ perspectives, we found that patients were willing to accept skin toxicities if they were the anticipated byproduct of a more effective therapeutic regimen. Important differences were observed between patients’ and physicians’ attitudes regarding risk/benefit trade-offs during cancer therapy, suggesting that patient’s considerations and shared decision-making are key to cancer care.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Van Cutsem E, Kohne CH, Hitre E et al (2009) Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 360(14):1408–1417CrossRefPubMed Van Cutsem E, Kohne CH, Hitre E et al (2009) Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 360(14):1408–1417CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J et al (2006) Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med 354(6):567–578CrossRefPubMed Bonner JA, Harari PM, Giralt J et al (2006) Radiotherapy plus cetuximab for squamous-cell carcinoma of the head and neck. N Engl J Med 354(6):567–578CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference Pirker R, Pereira JR, Szczesna A et al (2009) Cetuximab plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (FLEX): an open-label randomised phase III trial. Lancet 373(9674):1525–1531CrossRefPubMed Pirker R, Pereira JR, Szczesna A et al (2009) Cetuximab plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (FLEX): an open-label randomised phase III trial. Lancet 373(9674):1525–1531CrossRefPubMed
4.
go back to reference Lacouture ME, Keefe DM, Sonis S et al (2016) A phase II study (ARCHER 1042) to evaluate prophylactic treatment of dacomitinib-induced dermatologic and gastrointestinal adverse events in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol 27(9):1712–1718CrossRefPubMed Lacouture ME, Keefe DM, Sonis S et al (2016) A phase II study (ARCHER 1042) to evaluate prophylactic treatment of dacomitinib-induced dermatologic and gastrointestinal adverse events in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Ann Oncol 27(9):1712–1718CrossRefPubMed
5.
go back to reference Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J et al (2007) Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 25(15):1960–1966CrossRefPubMed Moore MJ, Goldstein D, Hamm J et al (2007) Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 25(15):1960–1966CrossRefPubMed
6.
go back to reference Perez-Soler R, Van Cutsem E (2007) Clinical research of EGFR inhibitors and related dermatologic toxicities. Oncology (Williston Park) 21(11 Suppl 5):10–16 Perez-Soler R, Van Cutsem E (2007) Clinical research of EGFR inhibitors and related dermatologic toxicities. Oncology (Williston Park) 21(11 Suppl 5):10–16
7.
go back to reference Sipples R (2006) Common side effects of anti-EGFR therapy: acneform rash. Semin Oncol Nurs 22(1 Suppl 1):28–34CrossRefPubMed Sipples R (2006) Common side effects of anti-EGFR therapy: acneform rash. Semin Oncol Nurs 22(1 Suppl 1):28–34CrossRefPubMed
8.
go back to reference Eilers RE Jr, Gandhi M, Patel JD et al (2010) Dermatologic infections in cancer patients treated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 102(1):47–53CrossRefPubMed Eilers RE Jr, Gandhi M, Patel JD et al (2010) Dermatologic infections in cancer patients treated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor therapy. J Natl Cancer Inst 102(1):47–53CrossRefPubMed
9.
go back to reference Lacouture ME (2007) Insights into the pathophysiology and management of dermatologic toxicities to EGFR-targeted therapies in colorectal cancer. Cancer Nurs 30(4 Suppl 1):S17–S26CrossRefPubMed Lacouture ME (2007) Insights into the pathophysiology and management of dermatologic toxicities to EGFR-targeted therapies in colorectal cancer. Cancer Nurs 30(4 Suppl 1):S17–S26CrossRefPubMed
10.
go back to reference Lacouture ME (2006) Mechanisms of cutaneous toxicities to EGFR inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer 6(10):803–812CrossRefPubMed Lacouture ME (2006) Mechanisms of cutaneous toxicities to EGFR inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer 6(10):803–812CrossRefPubMed
12.
go back to reference Valentine J, Belum VR, Duran J et al (2015) Incidence and risk of xerosis with targeted anticancer therapies. J Am Acad Dermatol 72(4):656–667CrossRefPubMed Valentine J, Belum VR, Duran J et al (2015) Incidence and risk of xerosis with targeted anticancer therapies. J Am Acad Dermatol 72(4):656–667CrossRefPubMed
13.
go back to reference Lacouture ME, Anadkat MJ, Bensadoun RJ et al (2011) Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of EGFR inhibitor-associated dermatologic toxicities. Support Care Cancer 19(8):1079–1095CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Lacouture ME, Anadkat MJ, Bensadoun RJ et al (2011) Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of EGFR inhibitor-associated dermatologic toxicities. Support Care Cancer 19(8):1079–1095CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
14.
go back to reference Rosen AC, Case EC, Dusza SW et al (2013) Impact of dermatologic adverse events on quality of life in 283 cancer patients: a questionnaire study in a dermatology referral clinic. Am J Clin Dermatol 14(4):327–333CrossRefPubMed Rosen AC, Case EC, Dusza SW et al (2013) Impact of dermatologic adverse events on quality of life in 283 cancer patients: a questionnaire study in a dermatology referral clinic. Am J Clin Dermatol 14(4):327–333CrossRefPubMed
15.
go back to reference Joshi SS, Ortiz S, Witherspoon JN et al (2010) Effects of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-induced dermatologic toxicities on quality of life. Cancer 116(16):3916–3923CrossRefPubMed Joshi SS, Ortiz S, Witherspoon JN et al (2010) Effects of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor-induced dermatologic toxicities on quality of life. Cancer 116(16):3916–3923CrossRefPubMed
16.
go back to reference Burtness B, Anadkat M, Basti S et al (2009) NCCN task force report: management of dermatologic and other toxicities associated with EGFR inhibition in patients with cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7(Suppl 1):S5–21 quiz S22-4CrossRefPubMed Burtness B, Anadkat M, Basti S et al (2009) NCCN task force report: management of dermatologic and other toxicities associated with EGFR inhibition in patients with cancer. J Natl Compr Canc Netw 7(Suppl 1):S5–21 quiz S22-4CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Tischer B, Huber R, Kraemer M, Lacouture ME (2017) Dermatologic events from EGFR inhibitors: the issue of the missing patient voice. Support Care Cancer 25(2):651–660CrossRefPubMed Tischer B, Huber R, Kraemer M, Lacouture ME (2017) Dermatologic events from EGFR inhibitors: the issue of the missing patient voice. Support Care Cancer 25(2):651–660CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Di Maio M, Gallo C, Leighl NB et al (2015) Symptomatic toxicities experienced during anticancer treatment: agreement between patient and physician reporting in three randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 33(8):910–915CrossRefPubMed Di Maio M, Gallo C, Leighl NB et al (2015) Symptomatic toxicities experienced during anticancer treatment: agreement between patient and physician reporting in three randomized trials. J Clin Oncol 33(8):910–915CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Basch E, Jia X, Heller G et al (2009) Adverse symptom event reporting by patients vs clinicians: relationships with clinical outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(23):1624–1632CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Basch E, Jia X, Heller G et al (2009) Adverse symptom event reporting by patients vs clinicians: relationships with clinical outcomes. J Natl Cancer Inst 101(23):1624–1632CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
21.
go back to reference Basch EM, McDonough T, Iasonos A et al (2006) Patient versus clinician symptom reporting using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. J Clin Oncol 24(18_suppl):8515 Basch EM, McDonough T, Iasonos A et al (2006) Patient versus clinician symptom reporting using the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. J Clin Oncol 24(18_suppl):8515
22.
go back to reference Fowler FJ Jr, Gerstein BS, Barry MJ (2013) How patient centered are medical decisions?: results of a national survey. JAMA Intern Med 173(13):1215–1221CrossRefPubMed Fowler FJ Jr, Gerstein BS, Barry MJ (2013) How patient centered are medical decisions?: results of a national survey. JAMA Intern Med 173(13):1215–1221CrossRefPubMed
23.
go back to reference Scope A, Agero AL, Dusza SW et al (2007) Randomized double-blind trial of prophylactic oral minocycline and topical tazarotene for cetuximab-associated acne-like eruption. J Clin Oncol 25(34):5390–5396CrossRefPubMed Scope A, Agero AL, Dusza SW et al (2007) Randomized double-blind trial of prophylactic oral minocycline and topical tazarotene for cetuximab-associated acne-like eruption. J Clin Oncol 25(34):5390–5396CrossRefPubMed
24.
go back to reference Deplanque G, Gervais R, Vergnenegre A et al (2016) Doxycycline for prevention of erlotinib-induced rash in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of first-line chemotherapy: a randomized, open-label trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 74(6):1077–1085 Deplanque G, Gervais R, Vergnenegre A et al (2016) Doxycycline for prevention of erlotinib-induced rash in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after failure of first-line chemotherapy: a randomized, open-label trial. J Am Acad Dermatol. 74(6):1077–1085
25.
go back to reference Lacouture ME, Mitchell EP, Piperdi B et al (2010) Skin toxicity evaluation protocol with panitumumab (STEPP), a phase II, open-label, randomized trial evaluating the impact of a pre-emptive skin treatment regimen on skin toxicities and quality of life in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 28(8):1351–1357CrossRefPubMed Lacouture ME, Mitchell EP, Piperdi B et al (2010) Skin toxicity evaluation protocol with panitumumab (STEPP), a phase II, open-label, randomized trial evaluating the impact of a pre-emptive skin treatment regimen on skin toxicities and quality of life in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 28(8):1351–1357CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Melosky B, Anderson H, Burkes RL et al (2015) Pan Canadian rash trial: a randomized phase III trial evaluating the impact of a prophylactic skin treatment regimen on epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor-induced skin toxicities in patients with metastatic lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 10;34(8):810–815 Melosky B, Anderson H, Burkes RL et al (2015) Pan Canadian rash trial: a randomized phase III trial evaluating the impact of a prophylactic skin treatment regimen on epidermal growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitor-induced skin toxicities in patients with metastatic lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 10;34(8):810–815
27.
go back to reference Arrieta O, Vega-Gonzalez MT, Lopez-Macias D et al (2015) Randomized, open-label trial evaluating the preventive effect of tetracycline on afatinib induced-skin toxicities in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Lung Cancer 88(3):282–288CrossRefPubMed Arrieta O, Vega-Gonzalez MT, Lopez-Macias D et al (2015) Randomized, open-label trial evaluating the preventive effect of tetracycline on afatinib induced-skin toxicities in non-small cell lung cancer patients. Lung Cancer 88(3):282–288CrossRefPubMed
28.
go back to reference Kobayashi Y, Komatsu Y, Yuki S et al (2015) Randomized controlled trial on the skin toxicity of panitumumab in Japanese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: HGCSG1001 study; J-STEPP. Future Oncol 11(4):617–627CrossRefPubMed Kobayashi Y, Komatsu Y, Yuki S et al (2015) Randomized controlled trial on the skin toxicity of panitumumab in Japanese patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: HGCSG1001 study; J-STEPP. Future Oncol 11(4):617–627CrossRefPubMed
29.
go back to reference Hofheinz RD, Deplanque G, Komatsu Y et al (2016) Recommendations for the prophylactic management of skin reactions induced by epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in patients with solid tumors. Oncologist 21(12):1483–1491CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Hofheinz RD, Deplanque G, Komatsu Y et al (2016) Recommendations for the prophylactic management of skin reactions induced by epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in patients with solid tumors. Oncologist 21(12):1483–1491CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
30.
go back to reference Yamada M, Iihara H, Fujii H et al (2015) Prophylactic effect of oral minocycline in combination with topical steroid and skin care against panitumumab-induced acneiform rash in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Anticancer Res 35(11):6175–6181PubMed Yamada M, Iihara H, Fujii H et al (2015) Prophylactic effect of oral minocycline in combination with topical steroid and skin care against panitumumab-induced acneiform rash in metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Anticancer Res 35(11):6175–6181PubMed
Metadata
Title
A survey of patient and physician acceptance of skin toxicities from anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapies
Authors
Bernd Tischer
Martina Bilang
Matthias Kraemer
Philippe Ronga
Mario E. Lacouture
Publication date
01-04-2018
Publisher
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in
Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 4/2018
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-017-3938-7

Other articles of this Issue 4/2018

Supportive Care in Cancer 4/2018 Go to the issue
Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Antibody–drug conjugates (ADCs) are novel agents that have shown promise across multiple tumor types. Explore the current landscape of ADCs in breast and lung cancer with our experts, and gain insights into the mechanism of action, key clinical trials data, existing challenges, and future directions.

Dr. Véronique Diéras
Prof. Fabrice Barlesi
Developed by: Springer Medicine