Top

Published in:

01-04-2010 | Original Article

A proposed EGFR inhibitor dermatologic adverse event-specific grading scale from the MASCC skin toxicity study group

Authors: Mario E. Lacouture, Michael L. Maitland, Siegfried Segaert, Ann Setser, Robert Baran, Lindy P. Fox, Joel B. Epstein, Andrei Barasch, Lawrence Einhorn, Lynne Wagner, Dennis P. West, Bernardo L. Rapoport, Mark G. Kris, Ethan Basch, Beth Eaby, Sandra Kurtin, Elise A. Olsen, Alice Chen, Janet E. Dancey, Andy Trotti

Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer | Issue 4/2010

Abstract

Background

Accurate grading of dermatologic adverse events (AE) due to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors (EGFRIs) is necessary for drug toxicity determinations, interagent comparisons, and supportive care trials. The most widely used severity grading scale, the National Cancer Institute’s Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.0 (NCI-CTCAE v4.0), was not designed specifically for this class of agents and may result in underreporting and poor grading of distinctive adverse events. We believe a class-specific grading scale is needed to help standardize assessment and improve reporting of EGFRI-associated dermatologic AEs.

Methods

The Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC) Skin Toxicity Study Group conducted an international multidisciplinary meeting that included 20 clinicians and researchers from academic centers and government agencies. Experts from different disciplines presented current information specific to EGFRI-induced dermatologic toxicities: grading scale development, pharmacovigilance safety reporting, health-related quality of life, patient reporting, and pharmacology. Group discussions, literature reviews, and professional expertise established the theoretical foundation for the proposed grading scale.

Results

A new grading system is proposed for the most common events associated with EGFRI-induced dermatologic AEs: papulopustular reaction or acneiform rash, nail changes, erythema, pruritus, xerosis, hair changes, telangiectasias, hyperpigmentation, mucositis, flushing, radiation dermatitis, hyposalivation, and taste changes. The proposed scale maintains consistency with the grading principles and language of the existing CTCAE version 4.0 and MedDRA terminology and includes relevant patient-reported health-related quality of life factors.

Conclusions

A grading scale specific to EGFR inhibitor dermatologic AEs is presented for formal integration into future versions of CTCAE and for validation in clinical trial settings. The study group designed this scale to detect and report EGFRI-related toxicities with greater sensitivity, specificity, and range than the scales currently used. This scale should serve as a foundation for efforts to perform objective interdrug comparisons and assessments of supportive care treatment strategies more effectively than with current methods.

CTC v2.0 and common terminology criteria for adverse events v3.0 (CTCAE). Available at http://ctep.cancer.gov/reporting/index.html. Accessed on 4 Mar 2008. CTCAE v4.0 available on May 28, 2009 at https://cabig-kc.nci.nih.gov/Vocab/KC/index.php/CTCAE

Edgerly M, Fojo T (2008) Is there room for improvement in adverse event reporting in the era of targeted therapies? J Natl Cancer Inst 100(4):240–242CrossRefPubMed

Roé E, García Muret MP, Marcuello E, Capdevila J, Pallarés C, Alomar A (2006) Description and management of cutaneous side effects during cetuximab or erlotinib treatments: a prospective study of 30 patients. J Am Acad Dermatol 55(3):429–437CrossRefPubMed

Wagner LI, Lacouture ME (2007) Dermatologic toxicities associated with EGFR inhibitors: the clinical psychologist’s perspective. Impact on health-related quality of life and implications for clinical management of psychological sequelae. Oncology 21:34–36PubMed

Boone SL, Rademaker A, Liu D, Pfeiffer C, Mauro DJ, Lacouture ME (2007) Impact and management of skin toxicity associated with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor therapy: survey results. Oncology 72(3–4):152–159CrossRefPubMed

Hynes NE, Lane HA (2005) ERBB receptors and cancer: the complexity of targeted inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer 5:341–354CrossRefPubMed

Dancey J, Sausville EA (2003) Issues and progress with protein kinase inhibitors for cancer treatment. Nat Rev Drug Discov 2:296–313CrossRefPubMed

Lacouture ME (2006) Mechanisms of cutaneous toxicities to EGFR inhibitors. Nat Rev Cancer 6(10):803–12CrossRefPubMed

Perez-Soler R, Saltz L (2005) Cutaneous adverse effects with HER1/EGFR-targeted agents: is there a silver lining? J Clin Oncol 23:5235–5246CrossRefPubMed

10.

Segaert S, Van Cutsem E (2005) Clinical signs, pathophysiology and management of skin toxicity during therapy with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors. Ann Oncol 16(9):1425–1433CrossRefPubMed

11.

Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) term and code. Available at http://www.meddramsso.org

12.

Trotti A, Colevas AD, Setser A, Basch E (2007) Patient-reported outcomes and the evolution of adverse event reporting in oncology. J Clin Oncol 25(32):5121–5127CrossRefPubMed

13.

Bruner DW, Bryan CJ, Aaronson N, Blackmore CC, Brundage M, Cella D, National Cancer Institute et al (2007) Issues and challenges with integrating patient-reported outcomes in clinical trials supported by the National Cancer Institute—sponsored clinical trials networks. J Clin Oncol 25(32):5051–5057CrossRefPubMed

14.

Sloan JA, Berk L, Roscoe J, Fisch MJ, Shaw EG, Wyatt G, National Cancer Institute et al (2007) Integrating patient-reported outcomes into cancer symptom management clinical trials supported by the National Cancer Institute—sponsored clinical trials networks. J Clin Oncol 25(32):5070–5077CrossRefPubMed

15.

Busam KJ, Capodieci P, Motzer R, Kiehn T, Phelan D, Halpern AC (2001) Cutaneous side-effects in cancer patients treated with the antiepidermal growth factor receptor antibody C225. Br J Dermatol 144(6):1169–1176CrossRefPubMed

16.

Fox LP (2007) Nail toxicity associated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor therapy. J Am Acad Dermatol 56(3):460–465 Epub 2006 Dec 4CrossRefPubMed

17.

Baran RL (2004) A nail psoriasis severity index. Br J Dermatol 150(3):568–569CrossRefPubMed

18.

Bauer KA, Hammerman S, Rapoport B, Lacouture ME (2008) Completeness in the reporting of dermatologic adverse drug reactions associated with monoclonal antibody epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors in Phase II and III colorectal cancer clinical trials. Clin Colorectal Cancer 7(5):309–314CrossRefPubMed

19.

Olsen EA, Hordinsky MK, Price VH, Roberts JL, Shapiro J, Canfield D et al (2004) Alopecia areata investigational assessment guidelines, Part II. J Am Acad Dermatol 51:440–447CrossRefPubMed

20.

Tejwani A, Wu S, Jia Y, Agulnikγ M, Millender L, Lacouture ME (2009) Increased risk of high-grade dermatologic toxicities with combined radiation plus EGFR inhibitor therapy. Cancer 115(6):1286–1299CrossRefPubMed

21.

Bentzen SM, Trotti A (2007) Evaluation of early and late toxicities in chemoradiation trials. J Clin Oncol 25(26):4096–4103CrossRefPubMed

22.

Tykerb Package Insert (2007) Glaxo Smith Kline (Research Triangle Park, NC). http://us.gsk.com/products/assets/us_tykerb.pdf. Accessed 11 July 2007

23.

Basti S (2007) Ocular toxicities of epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors and their management. Cancer Nurs 30(4 Suppl 1):S10–S16CrossRefPubMed

24.

Cunningham D, Humblet Y, Siena S, Khayat D, Bleiberg H, Santoro A et al (2004) Cetuximab monotherapy and cetuximab plus irinotecan in irinotecan-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 351(4):337–345CrossRefPubMed

25.

Erbitux Package Insert. (2006) ImClone Systems Incorporated and Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (Branchburg and Princeton, NJ). http://erbitux.com/erb/pdf/PI.pdf. Accessed 24 May 2007

26.

Vectibix Package Insert. Amgen, Inc. Thousand Oaks, CA. U.S. Food and Drug Administration website. http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2006/125147s0000lbl.pdf. Accessed 14 May 2007

27.

Shepherd FA, Rodrigues Pereira J, Ciuleanu T, Tan EH, Hirsh V, Thongprasert S et al (2005) Erlotinib in previously treated non-small-cell lung cancer. N Engl J Med 353(2):123–132CrossRefPubMed

28.

Tarceva Package Insert (2005) OSI Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Melville, NY). http://www.gene.com/gene/products/information/pdf/tarceva-prescribing.pdf. Accessed 24 May 2007

29.

Geyer CE, Forster J, Lindquist D, Chan S, Romieu CG, Pienkowski T et al (2006) Lapatinib plus capecitabine for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer. N Engl J Med 355(26):2733–2743CrossRefPubMed

30.

Lapatinib Package Insert (2007) Glaxo Smith Cline (Research Triangle Park, NC). http://www.tykerb.com/hcp/index.htm

31.

Van Cutsem E, Peeters M, Siena S, Humblet Y, Hendlisz A, Neyns B et al (2007) Open-label phase III trial of panitumumab plus best supportive care compared with best supportive care alone in patients with chemotherapy-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 25(13):1658–1664CrossRefPubMed

Title: A proposed EGFR inhibitor dermatologic adverse event-specific grading scale from the MASCC skin toxicity study group
Authors: Mario E. Lacouture
Michael L. Maitland
Siegfried Segaert
Ann Setser
Robert Baran
Lindy P. Fox
Joel B. Epstein
Andrei Barasch
Lawrence Einhorn
Lynne Wagner
Dennis P. West
Bernardo L. Rapoport
Mark G. Kris
Ethan Basch
Beth Eaby
Sandra Kurtin
Elise A. Olsen
Alice Chen
Janet E. Dancey
Andy Trotti
Publication date: 01-04-2010
Publisher: Springer-Verlag
Published in: Supportive Care in Cancer / Issue 4/2010
Print ISSN: 0941-4355
Electronic ISSN: 1433-7339
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-009-0744-x

Webinar | 19-02-2024 | 17:30 (CET)

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer

Watch now

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

At a glance: The STEP trials

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2010

Personality predicts perceived availability of social support and satisfaction with social support in women with early stage breast cancer

Aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting associated with a broad range of moderately emetogenic chemotherapies and tumor types: a randomized, double-blind study

Osteotomy and primary wound closure in bisphosphonate-associated osteonecrosis of the jaw: a prospective clinical study with 12 months follow-up

A qualitative study of decision-making by breast cancer patients about telling their children about their illness

Development and feasibility assessment of telephone-delivered supportive care to improve outcomes for patients with colorectal cancer: pilot study of the CONNECT intervention

Ways of talking about illness and prognosis in palliative cancer care consultations—two interactional frames

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on antibody–drug conjugates in cancer