N Mittmann1, S J Seung. 1. HOPE Research Centre, Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre, Toronto, ON.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Currently marketed epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (egfris) have been associated with high rates of dermatologic toxicity. METHODS: We formally reviewed the literature at medline and embase. Additional searches were conducted using Internet search engines. Studies were eligible if they were randomized controlled clinical trials of egfris, specifically cetuximab and panitumumab, in which at least one arm consisted of a non-egfri treatment and rash safety data were reported. The random effects method was used to pool differences in incident rash rates. Results are summarized as differences in incident rash (egfri therapy rate minus the non-egfri therapy rate) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (cis) for all severity grades of rash and for grades 3 and 4 rash. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met the initial inclusion criteria of randomized controlled trials comparing egfri with non-egfri therapy. Seven publications that provided information on all severity grades of rash were found to have an overall difference in incident rash rate of 0.74 (95% ci: 0.68 to 0.81; p < 0.01). Thirteen studies that reported the incidence of grades 3 and 4 rash showed an overall difference in the incident rash rate of 0.12 (95% ci: 0.09 to 0.14; p < 0.01) between egfri and non-egfri therapy. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results were generally robust, but sensitive to small samples. CONCLUSIONS: Results quantify the difference in rash rates between egfri and non-egfri therapy.
INTRODUCTION: Currently marketed epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (egfris) have been associated with high rates of dermatologic toxicity. METHODS: We formally reviewed the literature at medline and embase. Additional searches were conducted using Internet search engines. Studies were eligible if they were randomized controlled clinical trials of egfris, specifically cetuximab and panitumumab, in which at least one arm consisted of a non-egfri treatment and rash safety data were reported. The random effects method was used to pool differences in incident rash rates. Results are summarized as differences in incident rash (egfri therapy rate minus the non-egfri therapy rate) with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (cis) for all severity grades of rash and for grades 3 and 4 rash. RESULTS: Sixteen studies met the initial inclusion criteria of randomized controlled trials comparing egfri with non-egfri therapy. Seven publications that provided information on all severity grades of rash were found to have an overall difference in incident rash rate of 0.74 (95% ci: 0.68 to 0.81; p < 0.01). Thirteen studies that reported the incidence of grades 3 and 4 rash showed an overall difference in the incident rash rate of 0.12 (95% ci: 0.09 to 0.14; p < 0.01) between egfri and non-egfri therapy. Sensitivity analyses showed that the results were generally robust, but sensitive to small samples. CONCLUSIONS: Results quantify the difference in rash rates between egfri and non-egfri therapy.
Authors: Jeroen J Lammerts van Bueren; Wim K Bleeker; Annika Brännström; Anne von Euler; Magnus Jansson; Matthias Peipp; Tanja Schneider-Merck; Thomas Valerius; Jan G J van de Winkel; Paul W H I Parren Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2008-04-21 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: R Rosell; G Robinet; A Szczesna; R Ramlau; M Constenla; B C Mennecier; W Pfeifer; K J O'Byrne; T Welte; R Kolb; R Pirker; A Chemaissani; M Perol; M R Ranson; P A Ellis; K Pilz; M Reck Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2007-10-17 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Lynne I Wagner; Jennifer L Beaumont; Beiying Ding; Jennifer Malin; Amy Peterman; Elizabeth Calhoun; David Cella Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2007-07-10 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Jolien Tol; Miriam Koopman; Annemieke Cats; Cees J Rodenburg; Geert J M Creemers; Jolanda G Schrama; Frans L G Erdkamp; Allert H Vos; Cees J van Groeningen; Harm A M Sinnige; Dirk J Richel; Emile E Voest; Jeroen R Dijkstra; Marianne E Vink-Börger; Ninja F Antonini; Linda Mol; Johan H J M van Krieken; Otilia Dalesio; Cornelis J A Punt Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-02-05 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Lei Chen; Jacqueline Brown; Dale Quentin Marmaduke; Carlos Mayo; Gerrit Grau; Yiu-Keung Lau; Coleman K Obasaju Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2018-02-08 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Mario E Lacouture; Zev A Wainberg; Anisha B Patel; Milan J Anadkat; Salomon M Stemmer; Einat Shacham-Shmueli; Egmidio Medina; Galit Zelinger; Noa Shelach; Antoni Ribas Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2021-04-28 Impact factor: 39.397
Authors: Angela Stover; Debra E Irwin; Ronald C Chen; Bhishamjit S Chera; Deborah K Mayer; Hyman B Muss; Donald L Rosenstein; Thomas C Shea; William A Wood; Jessica C Lyons; Bryce B Reeve Journal: EGEMS (Wash DC) Date: 2015-10-29