Severe cutaneous adverse reactions induced by targeted anticancer therapies and immunotherapies.

Introduction

There has been rapidly increasing use of targeted anticancer therapies and immunotherapies in the clinical oncology field. Although targeted agents used for cancer treatment are generally better tolerated than conventional chemotherapy, cutaneous adverse events following the administration of targeted agents are not sparse. Manifestations of cutaneous adverse reactions induced by targeted agents vary greatly due to distinct molecular and pathological mechanisms, such as rashes, alopecia, hand–foot skin reactions, nail changes, and hair changes. 1 However, it has been reported that an increasing number of targeted agents induce life-threatening severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs), including Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS)/toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS)/drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS), and acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP). 2 Unlike mild forms of cutaneous toxicity, these SCARs are idiosyncratic and potentially fatal. 3 However, the risk of SCARs caused by targeted anticancer therapies and immunotherapies remains poorly characterized. SJS/TEN typically present as a rapidly developing blistering exanthema of purpuric macules and target-like lesions accompanied by mucosal and skin detachment, in which SJS involves <10% of body surface area skin detachment and TEN >30%. 4 Although rare, they are potentially fatal, with a mortality rate of 10% for SJS, 30% for SJS–TEN overlapping, and 50% for TEN ( Figure 1 ). 4 – 6 SJS/TEN also commonly causes long-term sequelae of the skin and eyes. 7 In addition, DRESS or DIHS usually manifest with a complex natural course, including fever, cutaneous involvement with typical skin eruptions (eg, generalized maculopapular exanthema, facial edema, infiltration, and purpuric change other than lower extremities), laboratory abnormalities (atypical lymphocytosis and eosinophilia), lymphadenopathy, and systemic organ involvement (eg, liver, kidneys, and lungs; Figure 2 ). 8 , 9 The mortality rate for DRESS is approximately up to 10%. 10 AGEP, another phenotype of SCAR, is characterized by a sudden eruption of mainly small nonfollicular pustules on a background of erythema with systemic involvement associated with fever and neutrophilia. 11 The course is relatively benign, but 4% of AGEP cases still develop to life-threatening situations. 11 Due to the high morbidity and mortality, early diagnosis of SCAR and prompt medication discontinuation are required for better management. This review article summarizes SCARs induced by distinct targeted anticancer agents and immunotherapies and also delineates the clinical course, duration of anticancer drugs, concomitant medication, tolerability of rechallenge or alternative agents, tumor response with regard to the occurrence of SCAR, and mortality rate associated with these devastating conditions.

Search strategy and selection criteria

A literature search was performed for papers from 1950 to September 2017 on Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Ovid using the terms Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS), toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN), drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS), drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome (DIHS), or acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) combined with targeted therapy drugs and immunotherapies. Primary case reports, case series, reports from clinical trials, and postmarketing surveillance were included. All published peer-reviewed literature from the search was reviewed (reports were limited to the English language only, with inclusion of selected non-English reports with abstracts in English). Histopathologic confirmation for the diagnosis of SCAR was not required for the inclusion criteria. Clinical course, duration of anticancer drugs, concomitant medication, tolerability of rechallenge or alternative agents, tumor response with regard to the occurrence of SCARs, and mortality were analyzed.

Clinical course

Characteristics and demographic data

A search of peer-reviewed literature yielded 73 reports of SCARs: SJS/TEN (n=54), DRESS (n=8), AGEP (n=10), and DRESS–AGEP overlapping (n=1; Table 1 ). These reported SCAR cases were associated with 17 targeted anticancer agents and immunotherapies, including EGFR inhibitors (afatinib, cetuximab, erlotinib, gefitinib, panitumumab, and vandetanib), multikinase inhibitors (imatinib), antiangiogenic agents (sorafenib), proteasome (bortezomib), anti-CD20 (rituximab), anti-CD30 (brentuximab vedotin), BRAF inhibitors (vemurafenib), recombinant IL2 (aldesleukin), recombinant IL2 and diphtheria toxin (denileukin), anti-PD1 (nivolumab and pembrolizumab), and anti-CTLA4 (ipilimumab). Among 54 cases of SJS-TEN, there were 29 SJS, four SJS–TEN overlapping, and 20 TEN cases. Imatinib (n=12), vemurafenib (n=7), and rituximab (n=5) were identified as the top three offending medications to cause SJS/TEN. EGFR inhibitors (n=12) were the most common group of drugs to induce SJS/TEN, including cetuximab (n=4), afatinib (n=2), gefitinib (n=2), vandetanib (n=2), erlotinib (n=1), and panitumumab (n=1). Imatinib was also the most common offending drug to induce DERSS and AGEP. One infrequent overlapping DRESS–AGEP case was reported in one vemurafenib user. 12 For newly developed immunomodulatory therapeutic antibodies targeting inhibitory receptors expressed by T cell, such as CTLA4 and PD1, there was one ipilimumab SJS, one ipilimumab TEN, one ipilimumab DRESS, one ipilimumab AGEP, two nivolumab TEN, and four pembrolizumab SJS. In total, latent periods of the anticancer agents were variable in different drug classes, from 5.5 days (aldesleukin) to 91 days (denileukin) (median).

The diagnosis of these SJS/TEN was mainly based on clinical manifestation, with 30 cases (55.6%) confirmed by histopathology. Direct immunofluorescence (DIF) or indirect IF (IIF) to rule out the possibility of other autoimmune diseases was performed in seven cases. For mucosal involvement of SJS/TEN, oral mucosa (35 of 54, 64.8%) was more common than ocular (20 of 54, 37%) or genital mucosa (17 of 54, 31.5%) involvement. Positive Nikolsky signs were mentioned in 17 cases. Laboratory examinations to exclude etiologies other than drug-induced SJS/TEN, such as serology data of mycoplasma, herpes simplex infection, or viral culture were done in six cases, and all showed negative results.

Tolerability

Eighteen patients underwent rechallenge of the same anticancer drugs: one aldesleukin TEN, one denileukin TEN, one erlotinib SJS, one gefitinib AGEP, seven imatinib SJS, two imatinib DRESS, one imatinib AGEP, one ipilimumab AGEP, one sorafenib SJS, one sorafenib AGEP, and one vemurafenib SJS. Among patients with rechallenge, four imatinib SJS/TEN cases tolerated well with slow titration, with systemic corticosteroid used concomitantly in three cases ( Table 2 ). In addition, one vemurafenib SJS showed recurrence with rash and fever after one 50% dose rechallenge, but then tolerated with a program of desensitization with dexamethasone. 13 However, the other 13 patients had recurrence with different manifestations after rechallenge. Among the eight patients who had received alternative agents with the same class of anticancer drugs, five of eight tolerated well: one gefitinib TEN tolerating icotinib, two imatinib SJS patients tolerating dasatinib, one imatinib DRESS patient tolerated a nilotinib replacement, and one vemurafenib TEN patient was switched successfully to dabrafenib with gradual escalation. However, one afatinib SJS patient suffered liver damage after erlotinib and gefitinib were administered, one cetuximab SJS patient progressed into SJS/TEN after panitumumab treatment, and one imatinib SJS patient had possible cross-reactivity with dasatinib concomitant with sulfamethoxazole–trimethoprim at the same time. One vemurafenib TEN patient who underwent a lymphocyte transformation test (LTT) assay confirmed the causality of vemurafenib and also showed positive cross-reactivity for dabrafenib, but was negative for trametinib. This patient did not take dabrafenib or trametinib further. 14

Mortality

A total of 14 patients died after SCAR episodes ( Table 3 ): two SJS, one SJS/TEN, and 11 TEN. In total, the mortality of SJS/TEN was 26.9% (14 of 52) and higher in TEN cases (11 of 21, 52.4%). Seven patients died due to TEN reactions: six with progression of malignancies and one secondary to acute graft-versus-host disease of the gut. No mortality was seen in DRESS or AGEP cases. These cases were mostly treated with supportive care or immunosuppressants, including corticosteroids, cyclosporine, intravenous immunoglobulin, and TNFα inhibitors (etanercept and infliximab). One rituximab TEN case showed a good outcome after etanercept treatment. 15 One nivolumab TEN case died 6 days after the onset of TEN due to septic shock and multisystem organ failure, despite treatment with infliximab, high-dose corticosteroids, intravenous immunoglobulin, and systemic antibiotics. 16

Malignancy was an independently poor prognostic factor for patients with SJS/TEN. 17 – 19 Several factors may contribute to poor prognosis in SJS/TEN patients with malignancies, including specific cancer types (hepatocellular carcinoma, colorectal cancer), chemotherapy, and malnutrition. 19 The mortality rate from the reviewed TEN cases, 52.4%, was higher than the average. 4 , 5

Prognosis and response to anticancer drugs after SCAR

Interestingly, the occurrence of some adverse cutaneous reactions was found to have a positive correlation with the patient’s response to treatment and overall survival (eg, EGFR inhibitors for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, and nivolumab or pembrolizumab for patients with melanoma). 20 – 22 However, the possible connection between treatment response to anticancer therapies and SCAR reactions remains not fully defined. Only eight of 16 reported cases (50%) showed positive clinical responses to causative anticancer drugs, including three with complete remission and five with partial response ( Table 1 ). Most patients discontinued causative agents for SCAR reactions to prevent possible recurrence of this deadly condition. This limited the assessment for the prognostic significance of SCAR related to anticancer agents.

Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis

EGFR inhibitors

EGFRs are a large family of receptor tyrosine kinases expressed in several types of cancers, including non-small-cell lung, colorectal, breast, pancreatic, head-and-neck, and esophageal cancers. 23 , 24 Clinical use of EGFR-targeted therapies has been approved for treating various cancers. 23 , 24 Despite the benefits, EGFR inhibitors cause enormous cutaneous adverse drug reactions (ADRs) with incidence up to 80%. 25 EGFR inhibitor-induced cutaneous ADRs are present in a broad spectrum, including papulopustular eruptions, mucositis, photosensitivity, xerosis, and paronychia. 1 In addition, EGFR inhibitors can induce fatal SCARs, initially mimicking mucositis or papulopustular eruptions, including SJS/TEN, DRESS, and AGEP. 26 , 27 From the literature search, five SJS, two SJS/TEN, and five TEN cases induced by EGFR inhibitors were reported in total. In spite of being rare, SJS/TEN should be distinguished from EGFR inhibitor-related mucositis if mucosal lesions are accompanied by fever, constitutional symptoms, and severe painful erythema or blisters noted over mucosa and skin as well. Skin eruptions with SJS/TEN usually present as erythematous spots progressing into painful targetoid erythema with truncal distribution, which is different from the papulopustular eruption induced by EGFR inhibitors. 25 , 28 Three patients have been found to have cross-reactivity to alternative EGFR inhibitors, although one report showed successful treatment with gefitinib in an afatinib SJS patient with adenocarcinoma of the lung. 29 The pathomechanism underlying EGFR inhibitor-induced SJS/TEN could be due to interference of epidermal differentiation and re-epithelialization by the irreversible inhibition of EGFR, ultimately resulting in extensive erosions. This is different from typical SJS/TEN, which is a delay-type hypersensitivity reaction where cytotoxic T cells generate and release granulysin, a cytotoxic protein responsible for disseminated keratinocyte death. 30 , 31 In one reported case of afatinib SJS, the patient had no sign of fever, no ocular and genital mucosae affected, and no obvious epidermal necrosis detected histopathologically, which is inconsistent with typical SJS. 30 As such, the diagnosis and pathophysiology of EGFR inhibitor-induced SJS/TEN need further elucidation.

KIT and BCR-ABL inhibitors

KIT and BCR-ABL inhibitors, such as imatinib, nilotinib, and dasatinib, are tyrosine kinase inhibitors used for the treatment of Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myeloid leukemia and gastrointestinal stromal tumors. 32 – 34 Their utilization has extended to different tumors and accomplished a first-line position in cancers like Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia, advanced dermatofibrosarcoma protuberans, hypereosinophilic syndrome, and systemic mastocytosis. 35 Among these agents, imatinib is the major targeted anticancer drug to induce SCARs, including twelve SJS/TEN, four DRESS, and four AGEP. Cutaneous adverse effects of imatinib are common and have been well described. Of these, maculopapular rashes and facial edema occur most commonly, with incidence of 66.7% and 65.0%, respectively. 36 Maculopapular rashes usually develop on average about 9 weeks after initiation. The incidence of cutaneous reactions with imatinib has been reported to increase with escalating doses of the drug, indicating that these conditions may be related to the pharmacologic effects of the drug, rather than to hypersensitivity. 37 Besides, in one multivariate analysis, female sex and daily dose of imatinib were independent risk factors for the development of rashes. 36 These cutaneous events with dose-dependent manifestations may need temporary discontinuation or dose reduction. 1 Moreover, the pathomechanism of SJS and DRESS is immunorelated, and further rechallenge with a dose reduction is not usually suggested. 38 , 39 However, several cases have been tolerated well under slow titration with or without prednisolone use. 40 – 44

Multikinase inhibitors

Multikinase inhibitors are small-molecule inhibitors of VEGF tyrosine kinase and also inhibit other tyrosine kinases (PDGFR, EGFR, KIT, Ret, FLT3, CSF1R, and Raf). 45 This class of agents, including sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, regorafenib, and vandetanib, has been approved for the treatment of patients with renal cell cancer, gastrointestinal stromal tumors, hepatocellular cancer, and colorectal cancer. 46 These drugs often cause notorious hand–foot skin reactions and other skin eruptions, such as maculopapular eruptions, stomatitis, and genital erosions. 47 – 49 Among these medications, higher frequency of cutaneous toxicity has been found in patients using sorafenib. 1 Hand–foot skin reactions are severe, painful edematous erythema lesions on the palms and soles, and even progression with blistering or hyperkeratotic plaques. 49 Skin eruptions with variable morphology have been reported, particularly morbilliform eruptions in the early weeks after initiation. 1 The infrequent genital or perineal involvement with erosion is also characteristic of multikinase inhibitor-related ADRs, and this manifestation should be distinguished from SJS or fixed drug eruptions. 1 , 48 , 50 Based on the literature search, three sorafenib SJS/TEN and three sorafenib AGEP cases have been reported. One patient who restarted sorafenib treatment for 2 weeks after administration of sorafenib for 1.5 years and then a temporal discontinuation for 1 month suffered from TEN. 51 Considering that SJS/TEN is a delayed-type hypersensitivity, sensitization of 1.5 years could be too long. Further, the authors proposed that the concomitant oral tosufloxacin may have contributed to the development of the skin manifestation by inhibiting sorafenib metabolism, since both drugs are metabolized by cytochrome P450 family enzymes in the liver. 51 The pathogenesis involved in the cutaneous toxicity due to multikinase inhibitors is believed to be related to direct VEGF inhibition, vessel regression, and negative effects on vascular repair capacities. 52 Furthermore, our previous study has revealed that keratinocyte death in sunitinib-induced hand–foot skin reaction was mediated via Fas/FasL. 53 Recently, Zimmerman et al demonstrated a pathway by which sorafenib enters keratinocytes through OAT6 (an uptake carrier of sorafenib) and then causes keratinocyte cytotoxicity driven by inhibition of MAP3K7 (Tak1). 54 These predisposing factors can promote skin toxicity once severe epidermal necrolysis occurs in patients who used this class of medications and delay wound healing. Moreover, the incidence of sorafenib-induced erythema multiforme is much higher in Japanese patients than in white populations. 55 It could be reasonable to speculate that genetic background in different ethnicities may play a role in the pathogenesis of this ADR.

Monoclonal antibodies to CD20

Rituximab is a chimeric (mouse–human) monoclonal antibody to target CD20 + blood cells for treating non-Hodgkin lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and some autoimmune diseases, such as pemphigus, bullous pemphigoid, and rheumatoid arthritis. 56 – 58 There were two SJS, two SJS-TEN, and one TEN caused by rituximab in several case reports. The diagnosis of SJS from one previously published case report might have been erroneously associated with rituximab, since the clinical presentation, histopathology, and nature course in the case report were mimicking paraneoplastic pemphigus (PNP). 59 PNP is a fatal mucocutaneous blistering disorder associated with hematologic malignancies. 60 PNP shares overlapping clinical features with SJS, including severe mucositis, flaccid sloughing bullae, keratinocyte necrosis histopathologically, and possible pulmonary involvement with features of bronchiolitis obliterans. 61 Nevertheless, refractory chronic mucositis with polymorphous PNP skin lesions is different from an acute, rapidly progressing course with targetoid lesions of SJS/TEN. Typical histopathological features with suprabasal acantholysis, lichenoid interface dermatitis, positive DIF/IIF, and immunoblotting recognition of envoplakin and/or periplakin can support a diagnosis of PNP. 61 , 62 In cases of suspicious rituximab SJS/TEN, DIF or IIF has been suggested to exclude PNP. 59 Moreover, rituximab is usually prescribed with concomitant bendamustine or allopurinol, which adds a difficulty to assessing causality. In five rituximab SJS/TEN, three cases were independent from the use of bendamustine or allopurinol. Also, seven rituximab TEN cases have been reported without concomitant allopurinol, bendamustine, or nonbendamustine chemotherapy based on the US Food and Drug Administration adverse event reporting system. 63

BRAF inhibitors

BRAF inhibitors, including vemurafenib and dabrafenib, have emerged as a remarkable anticancer therapy and improved the survival of melanoma patients carrying BRAF V600E/K . 64 Cutaneous adverse events induced by BRAF inhibitors vary from skin eruptions with photosensitivity, folliculocentric morbilliform eruptions, hyperkeratotic hand–foot skin reactions, and panniculitis to secondary epidermal neoplasms (verrucal keratoses, squamous-cell carcinoma, and keratoacanthoma). 65 – 67 In our survey, vemurafenib was the most notorious drug to cause TEN among the anticancer-targeted drugs. Of note, one case with vemurafenib-induced TEN was reported after nivolumab failure and another with vemurafenib SJS after initiation of ipilimumab. 13 , 68 Development of grade 3 rash was found to be significantly higher with vemurafenib treatment after administration of ipilimumab. 69 The reduction in immunocheckpoint inhibition may predispose patients to skin hypersensitivity reactions caused by vemurafenib. 69 This phenomenon might be explained by immunocheckpoint inhibitor strongly provoking activation of CD8 + cytotoxic T cells, which are also the key cellular mediators in SJS/TEN. In addition, biopsy of skin metastases during nivolumab treatment has also shown evidence of CD8 + T-cell infiltrations. 68 A successful switch from vemurafenib to dabrafenib has been reported in one vemurafenib TEN patient. 70 Dabrafenib may thus be considered a relatively newer and safer alternative treatment option for vemurafenib. However, another vemurafenib TEN patient who underwent an LTT assay confirmed the causality of vemurafenib and positive cross-reactivity for dabrafenib. 14 Besides, cross-reactivity has also been found between vemurafenib and the sulfonamide antibiotic sulfamethoxazole, but not seen in trametinib. 14 Based on the cross-reactivity reaction due to structural similarity between the drug with sulfonamide compounds, such as sulfamethoxazole and vemurafenib or dabrafenib, the use of sulfonamide compounds in patients with vemurafenib S CAR was not suggested.

Immunooncology therapies

Immunotherapies are developing innovative therapeutics with significant advances in treatment for melanoma, non-small-cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma, etc. 71 – 73 Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies targeting the coinhibitory immunocheckpoint have been associated with vitiligo, pruritus, morbilliform eruptions, lichenoid dermatitis, delayed type hypersensitivity, and autoimmune bullous disease. 74 Although uncommon, SJS/TEN related to anti-PD1 (nivolumab and pembrolizumab) and anti-CTLA4 (ipilimumab) has also been reported. In total, three SJS/TEN cases associated with conventional immunotherapies (recombinant IL2) – aldesleukin (n=2) and denileukin (n=1) – were described. 75 – 77 For newly developed immunotherapies, there have been nivolumab TEN, four pembrolizumab SJS, one ipilimumab SJS, and one ipilimumab TEN case. 78 – 84 These patients were diagnosed with advanced metastatic melanoma, metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma, and metastatic sarcomatoid renal cell carcinoma. The drug latency to induce SJS/TEN varied from 7 days to 140 days. Two melanoma patients suffered from morbilliform eruption and progressed to TEN over 39 days to 3 months after receiving nivolumab treatment. 16 , 78 Initial biopsy of these two nivolumab TEN cases showed interface dermatitis that further progressed into full-thickness epidermal necrosis. 16 By immunohistochemistry staining, increased expression of PDL1 was evident on skin-infiltrating T cells and keratinocytes at foci of lymphocytic epidermal infiltration in the epidermis. 16 , 79 PDL1 is not usually detectable in skin, but the use of anti-PD1 therapy could increase the expression of PDL1 in keratinocytes and permit the activated CD8 + cytotoxic T cells to target keratinocytes, leading to keratinocyte apoptosis. 79 Notably, the gene expression profile of anti-PD1-induced adverse cutaneous eruption was similar to that of SJS/TEN, but different from that of acute cutaneous graft-versus-host disease or maculopapular rashes. 79 Anti-PD1-treated patients and SJS/TEN patients shared similar gene expression profiles, with upregulation of major inflammatory chemokines, including CXCL9, CXCL10, and CXCL11, cytotoxic mediators, such as PRF1 and GZMB, and the proapoptotic molecule FASLG. 79 Bullous pemphigoid, an autoimmune bullous mucocutaneous disease, induced after initiation of immunotherapy has also been reported. 85 To clarify further, a diagnosis of SJS/TEN, DIF or IIF can help eliminate the possibility of autoimmune bullous diseases.

Drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms/drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome

Although relatively rare, nine cases of DRESS/DIHS caused by imatinib (n=4), vemurafenib (n=3), bortezomib (n=1), and ipilimumab (n=1) have been reported. Many targeted anticancer drugs, including KIT, BCR-ABL inhibitors, multikinase inhibitors, BRAF inhibitors, MEK inhibitors, CTLA4 inhibitors, and PL1 inhibitors, can result in aspecific maculopapular eruptions. 1 , 86 Distinguishing maculopapular rashes from DRESS is important, mainly because there are prognostic differences. Concomitant generalized maculopapular rashes with facial edema could overlap characteristics of DRESS, but the lack of systemic involvement with fever, eosinophilia, atypical lymphocytosis, and hepatic or renal function impairment can help distinguish from DRESS. 9 , 87 Typically, the cutaneous manifestation of DRESS progresses from maculopapular exanthema into infiltrative erythema and purpuric changes beyond lower extremities.

Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis

In our search, 11 cases of AGEP caused by imatinib (n=4), sorafenib (n=3), gefitinib (n=2), vemurafenib (n=1), and ipilimumab (n=1) were identified. 88 – 91 AGEP usually presents as pinhead-sized “nonfollicular” pustules on an erythematous base, starting mainly on the fold area (axillary, inguinal, and submammary) and spreading quickly to the trunk and limbs with further characteristic large-sheet collaret desquamation. 92 AGEP should be differentiated from the common acneiform papulopustular eruptions caused by EGFR inhibitors. It is characteristic of a “folliculocentric” erythematous papule or pustule with dominant distribution in sebaceous gland-rich areas, such as the scalp, face, upper trunk. 93 Although the acneiform eruption caused by EGFR inhibitors may involve the lower trunk, buttocks, and extremities, histopathology can help to distinguish between these two entities. The major histopathologic findings of acneiform eruption are superficial suppurative folliculitis with neutrophilic infiltrate with ectatic follicular infundibula and rupture of the epithelial lining. 94 In contrast, AGEP typically shows subcorneal and/or intraepithelial pustules, an edematous papillary dermis with exocytosis, and perivascular infiltrates of neutrophils and eosinophils. 95 , 96 Occasionally, dyskeratosis or necrosis of keratinocytes can be seen in AGEP. 97 In addition, systemic manifestation with fever and neutrophilia require attention to be paid to AGEP, and further short-term topical and corticosteroid treatment may be considered. 98

Simultaneous predisposing factors

About one-third of reported cases have been exposed to multiple medications during the same period o of anticancer-targeted therapies ( Table 4 ). Among these medications, there were some notorious drugs to cause SCARs, including allopurinol, phenytoin, and sulfamethoxazole. Multiple concomitant medications increase complexities and difficulties in identifying the offending medication. The Naranjo score and algorithm of drug causality in epidermal necrolysis are considered the standard assessment tools to evaluate the causality of ADRs and SJS/TEN, respectively. 99 , 100 Few cases reported in the literature were evaluated by these scoring algorithms. In addition, the use of multiple medications increased the risk of ADRs and also for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic drug interactions. 101 , 102 Moreover, several predisposing factors were discussed in this review. One patient developed erlotinib SJS after herpes zoster superinfection. 26 Exposure to radiation was a common factor seen in cancer patients with SJS/TEN. 2 There was one cetuximab SJS/TEN overlapping with radiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the hypopharynx and larynx and two pembrolizumab SJS patients received radiotherapy before skin eruption (one with whole-brain radiotherapy and concomitant phenytoin use and the other with radiotherapy for bone metastases). 80 , 84 , 103 Moreover, the initiation of immunocheckpoint inhibitors may also predispose patients to skin hypersensitivity reactions and SJS/TEN. 13 , 68 , 69 , 104

Causative drug validation

To confirm a potential offending drug, drug provocation is a gold standard. However, rechallenge is generally avoided, because of the potentially fatal consequences. Clinically, the drug notoriety scoring systems, including Naranjo score and algorithm of drug causality in epidermal necrolysis (for SJS/TEN only), have been implemented to assess the causality of ADRs. 99 , 100 In vitro, a positive LTT is helpful for identifying causality and cross-reactivity. 105 The LTT is a reproducible test that measures enhanced proliferative response of peripheral blood mononuclear cells after sensitization of T cells to a drug. 105 Its relevance in DRESS/DIHS and AGEP is relatively higher than in SJS/TEN. 106 To avoid cross-reactivity in patients with a history of severe hypersensitivity reactions to medications with similar structures, an LTT may be considered before prescription. It is worth mentioning that sensitivity varies with diverse drugs and different timing among studies, and a negative result does not rule out the possibility of reactivity or cross-reactivity. 106 , 107 After an LTT, no evidence for a drug-specific immunoresponse to concomitant medication was revealed in one pembrolizumab SJS case. 79 Moreover, in vivo patch tests may also provide a low-risk method to validate delayed hypersensitivity with suspected offending drugs or alternative drugs. 108

Conclusion

SCARs are potentially life-threatening cutaneous adverse events in patients treated with targeted anticancer drugs and immunotherapies. Patients with malignancies usually have additional comorbidities, multisystemic involvement, and multiple concomitant medications and treatment modalities, all of which may increase the complexities and difficulties in managing SCARs in cancer patients. It is important to recognize SCAR reactions earlier, distinguish SCARs from other nonfatal dermatologic toxicities, and discontinue causative agents rapidly. Further studies are needed to investigate specific pathomechanisms and develop proper management for this lethal disease in particular in these high-risk cancer patients.

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by research grants from the Ministry of Science and Technology, Taiwan (MOST 104-2314-B-182A-151-MY2) to SCS and Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Keelung, Taiwan (CMRPG2H0081) to CBC.

Author contributions

All authors contributed toward data analysis, drafting and critically revising the paper, gave final approval of the version to be published, and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Disclosure

The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work.

References

1 Macdonald JB Macdonald B Golitz LE LoRusso P Sekulic A Cutaneous adverse effects of targeted therapies – part I: inhibitors of the cellular membrane J Am Acad Dermatol 2015 72 2 203 220 25592338 10.1016/j.jaad.2014.07.032

2 Rosen AC Balagula Y Raisch DW Life-threatening dermatologic adverse events in oncology Anticancer Drugs 2014 25 2 225 234 24108082 10.1097/CAD.0000000000000032 PMC3890653

3 Phillips EJ Chung WH Mockenhaupt M Roujeau JC Mallal SA Drug hypersensitivity: pharmacogenetics and clinical syndromes J Allergy Clin Immunol 2011 127 3 Suppl S60 S66 21354501 10.1016/j.jaci.2010.11.046 PMC3061439

4 Roujeau JC Stern RS Severe adverse cutaneous reactions to drugs N Engl J Med 1994 331 19 1272 1285 7794310 10.1056/NEJM199411103311906

5 Roujeau JC Guillaume JC Fabre JP Penso D Fléchet ML Girre JP Toxic epidermal necrolysis (Lyell syndrome): incidence and drug etiology in France, 1981–1985 Arch Dermatol 1990 126 1 37 42 2134982 10.1001/archderm.126.1.37

6 Lin WL Lin WC Yang JY Fatal toxic epidermal necrolysis associated with cetuximab in a patient with colon cancer J Clin Oncol 2008 26 16 2779 2780 18509187 10.1200/JCO.2007.15.7883

7 Schwartz RA McDonough PH Lee BW Toxic epidermal necrolysis – part II: prognosis, sequelae, diagnosis, differential diagnosis, prevention, and treatment J Am Acad Dermatol 2013 69 2 187 e1 e16 203 204 23866879 10.1016/j.jaad.2013.05.002

8 Kardaun SH Sidoroff A Valeyrie-Allanore L Variability in the clinical pattern of cutaneous side-effects of drugs with systemic symptoms: does a DRESS syndrome really exist? Br J Dermatol 2007 156 3 609 611 17300272 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07704.x

9 Cacoub P Musette P Descamps V The DRESS syndrome: a literature review Am J Med 2011 124 7 588 597 21592453 10.1016/j.amjmed.2011.01.017

10 Kardaun SH Sekula P Valeyrie-Allanore L Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS): an original multisystem adverse drug reaction: results from the prospective RegiSCAR study Br J Dermatol 2013 169 5 1071 1080 23855313 10.1111/bjd.12501

11 Sidoroff A Dunant A Viboud C Risk factors for acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP): results of a multinational case-control study (EuroSCAR) Br J Dermatol 2007 157 5 989 996 17854366 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2007.08156.x

12 Gey A Milpied B Dutriaux C Severe cutaneous adverse reaction associated with vemurafenib: DRESS, AGEP or overlap reaction? J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2016 30 1 178 179 25175726 10.1111/jdv.12685

13 Minor DR Rodvien R Kashani-Sabet M Successful desensitization in a case of Stevens-Johnson syndrome due to vemurafenib Melanoma Res 2012 22 5 410 411 22828249 10.1097/CMR.0b013e3283573437

14 Bellon T Lerma V Gonzalez-Valle O Herrada CG de Abajo FJ Vemurafenib-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis: possible cross-reactivity with other sulfonamide compounds Br J Dermatol 2016 174 3 621 624 26412570 10.1111/bjd.14201

15 Didona D Paolino G Garcovich S Caro RD Didona B Successful use of etanercept in a case of toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by rituximab J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2016 30 10 e83 e84 26428058 10.1111/jdv.13330

16 Vivar KL Deschaine M Messina J Epidermal programmed cell death-ligand 1 expression in TEN associated with nivolumab therapy J Cutan Pathol 2017 44 4 381 384 28000240 10.1111/cup.12876

17 Bastuji-Garin S Fouchard N Bertocchi M Roujeau JC Revuz J Wolkenstein P SCORTEN: a severity-of-illness score for toxic epidermal necrolysis J Invest Dermatol 2000 115 2 149 153 10951229 10.1046/j.1523-1747.2000.00061.x

18 Guegan S Bastuji-Garin S Poszepczynska-Guigne E Roujeau JC Revuz J Performance of the SCORTEN during the first five days of hospitalization to predict the prognosis of epidermal necrolysis J Invest Dermatol 2006 126 2 272 276 16374461 10.1038/sj.jid.5700068

19 Wu J Lee YY Su SC Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis in patients with malignancies Br J Dermatol 2015 173 5 1224 1231 26218033 10.1111/bjd.14052

20 Liu HB Wu Y Lv TF Skin rash could predict the response to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor and the prognosis for patients with non-small cell lung cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis PLoS One 2013 8 1 e55128 23383079 10.1371/journal.pone.0055128 PMC3559430

21 Sanlorenzo M Vujic I Daud A Pembrolizumab cutaneous adverse events and their association with disease progression JAMA Dermatol 2015 151 11 1206 1212 26222619 10.1001/jamadermatol.2015.1916 PMC5061067

22 Freeman-Keller M Kim Y Cronin H Richards A Gibney G Weber JS Nivolumab in resected and unresectable metastatic melanoma: characteristics of immune-related adverse events and association with outcomes Clin Cancer Res 2016 22 4 886 894 26446948 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-1136 PMC4755809

23 Seshacharyulu P Ponnusamy MP Haridas D Jain M Ganti AK Batra SK Targeting the EGFR signaling pathway in cancer therapy Expert Opin Ther Targets 2012 16 1 15 31 22239438 10.1517/14728222.2011.648617 PMC3291787

24 Yewale C Baradia D Vhora I Patil S Misra A Epidermal growth factor receptor targeting in cancer: a review of trends and strategies Biomaterials 2013 34 34 8690 8707 23953842 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2013.07.100

25 Lacouture ME Anadkat MJ Bensadoun RJ Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of EGFR inhibitor-associated dermatologic toxicities Support Care Cancer 2011 19 8 1079 1095 21630130 10.1007/s00520-011-1197-6 PMC3128700

26 Wnorowski AM de Souza A Chachoua A Cohen DE The management of EGFR inhibitor adverse events: a case series and treatment paradigm Int J Dermatol 2012 51 2 223 232 22250636 10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.05082.x

27 Liquete E Ali S Kammo R Acute Generalized exanthematous pustulosis induced by erlotinib (Tarceva) with superimposed Staphylococcus aureus skin infection in a pancreatic cancer patient: a case report Case Rep Oncol 2012 5 2 253 259 22712013 10.1159/000338806 PMC3376341

28 Bastuji-Garin S Rzany B Stern RS Shear NH Naldi L Roujeau JC Clinical classification of cases of toxic epidermal necrolysis, Stevens-Johnson syndrome, and erythema multiforme Arch Dermatol 1993 129 1 92 96 8420497

29 Otsuka T Tanaka A Azukizawa H Successful treatment with gefitinib after Stevens–Johnson syndrome associated with afatinib therapy in a patient with adenocarcinoma of the lung Int Cancer Conf J 2017 6 1 38 41 10.1007/s13691-016-0269-3 PMC6498331 31149467

30 Honda Y Hattori Y Katsura S Stevens-Johnson syndrome-like erosive dermatitis possibly related to afatinib Eur J Dermatol 2016 26 4 413 414 27212422 10.1684/ejd.2016.2807

31 Chung WH Hung SI Yang JY Granulysin is a key mediator for disseminated keratinocyte death in Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis Nat Med 2008 14 12 1343 1350 19029983 10.1038/nm.1884

32 Druker BJ Guilhot F O’Brien SG Five-year follow-up of patients receiving imatinib for chronic myeloid leukemia N Engl J Med 2006 355 23 2408 2417 17151364 10.1056/NEJMoa062867

33 Casali PG Le Cesne A Velasco AP Imatinib failure-free survival (IFS) in patients with localized gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST) treated with adjuvant imatinib (IM): the EORTC/AGITG/FSG/GEIS/ISG randomized controlled phase III trial J Clin Oncol 2013 31 15 Suppl 10500

34 Leonetti F Stefanachi A Nicolotti O BCR-ABL inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukemia: process chemistry and biochemical profile Curr Med Chem 2011 18 19 2943 2959 21651486 10.2174/092986711796150414

35 Iqbal N Iqbal N Imatinib: a breakthrough of targeted therapy in cancer Chemother Res Pract 2014 2014 357027 24963404 10.1155/2014/357027 PMC4055302

36 Valeyrie L Bastuji-Garin S Revuz J Adverse cutaneous reactions to imatinib (STI571) in Philadelphia chromosome-positive leukemias: a prospective study of 54 patients J Am Acad Dermatol 2003 48 2 201 206 12582389 10.1067/mjd.2003.44

37 Brouard M Saurat JH Cutaneous reactions to STI571 N Engl J Med 2001 345 8 618 619 11529225 10.1056/NEJM200108233450814

38 White KD Chung WH Hung SI Mallal S Phillips EJ Evolving models of the immunopathogenesis of T cell-mediated drug allergy: the role of host, pathogens, and drug response J Allergy Clin Immunol 2015 136 2 219 234 26254049 10.1016/j.jaci.2015.05.050 PMC4577472

39 Duong TA Valeyrie-Allanore L Wolkenstein P Chosidow O Severe cutaneous adverse reactions to drugs Lancet 2017 390 10106 1996 2011 28476287 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)30378-6

40 Mahapatra M Mishra P Kumar R Imatinib-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome: recurrence after re-challenge with a lower dose Ann Hematol 2007 86 7 537 538 17287945 10.1007/s00277-007-0265-y

41 Pavithran K Thomas M Imatinib induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome: lack of recurrence following re-challenge with a lower dose Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2005 71 4 288 289 16394445 10.4103/0378-6323.16628

42 Sanchez-Gonzalez B Pascual-Ramirez JC Fernandez-Abellan P Belinchon-Romero I Rivas C Vegara-Aguilera G Severe skin reaction to imatinib in a case of Philadelphia-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia Blood 2003 101 6 2446 10.1182/blood-2002-12-3696 12609964

43 Rule SA O’Brien SG Crossman LC Managing cutaneous reactions to imatinib therapy Blood 2002 100 9 3434 3435 12412577 10.1182/blood-2002-08-2431

44 Kumar M Mandal PK Dolai TK Bhattacharrya M Imatinib causing drug rash with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms: a rare cutaneous reaction Indian Dermatol Online J 2014 5 Suppl 2 S120 S122 25593801 10.4103/2229-5178.146189 PMC4290174

45 Gotink KJ Verheul HM Anti-angiogenic tyrosine kinase inhibitors: what is their mechanism of action? Angiogenesis 2010 13 1 1 14 20012482 10.1007/s10456-009-9160-6 PMC2845892

46 Jeong W Doroshow JH Kummar S United States Food and Drug Administration approved oral kinase inhibitors for the treatment of malignancies Curr Probl Cancer 2013 37 3 110 144 23972982 10.1016/j.currproblcancer.2013.06.001 PMC3761410

47 Ishak RS Aad SA Kyei A Farhat FS Cutaneous manifestations of anti-angiogenic therapy in oncology: review with focus on VEGF inhibitors Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2014 90 2 152 164 24355408 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2013.11.007

48 Billemont B Barete S Rixe O Scrotal cutaneous side effects of sunitinib N Engl J Med 2008 359 9 975 976 18753659 10.1056/NEJMc0802736

49 Chanprapaph K Rutnin S Vachiramon V Multikinase inhibitor-induced hand-foot skin reaction: a review of clinical presentation, pathogenesis, and management Am J Clin Dermatol 2016 17 4 387 402 27221667 10.1007/s40257-016-0197-1

50 Gupta V Rao A Gupta S Scrotal cutaneous toxicity: an uncommon but important side-effect of sunitinib J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2016 30 1 132 133 25060046 10.1111/jdv.12615

51 Choi MK Woo HY Heo J Toxic epidermal necrolysis associated with sorafenib and tosufloxacin in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma Ann Dermatol 2011 23 Suppl 3 S404 S407 22346290 10.5021/ad.2011.23.S3.S404 PMC3276809

52 Blanchet B Billemont B Barete S Toxicity of sorafenib: clinical and molecular aspects Expert Opin Drug Saf 2010 9 2 275 287 20078249 10.1517/14740330903510608

53 Yeh CN Chung WH Su SC Fas/Fas ligand mediates keratinocyte death in sunitinib-induced hand-foot skin reaction J Invest Dermatol 2014 134 11 2768 2775 24802849 10.1038/jid.2014.218

54 Zimmerman EI Gibson AA Hu S Multikinase inhibitors induce cutaneous toxicity through OAT6-mediated uptake and MAP3K7-driven cell death Cancer Res 2016 76 1 117 126 26677977 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-15-0694 PMC4713045

55 Ikeda M Fujita T Amoh Y Mii S Matsumoto K Iwamura M Stevens-Johnson syndrome induced by sorafenib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma Urol Int 2013 91 4 482 483 23969404 10.1159/000351918

56 Reff ME Carner K Chambers KS Depletion of B cells in vivo by a chimeric mouse human monoclonal antibody to CD20 Blood 1994 83 2 435 445 7506951

57 Edwards JC Cambridge G B-cell targeting in rheumatoid arthritis and other autoimmune diseases Nat Rev Immunol 2006 6 5 394 403 16622478 10.1038/nri1838

58 McLaughlin P Grillo-Lopez AJ Link BK Rituximab chimeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody therapy for relapsed indolent lymphoma: half of patients respond to a four-dose treatment program J Clin Oncol 1998 16 8 2825 2833 9704735 10.1200/JCO.1998.16.8.2825

59 Henning JS Firoz BF Rituxan is not associated with Stevens Johnson Syndrome Ann Oncol 2011 22 6 1463 1464 21525404 10.1093/annonc/mdr254

60 Anhalt GJ Kim SC Stanley JR Paraneoplastic pemphigus: an autoimmune mucocutaneous disease associated with neoplasia N Engl J Med 1990 323 25 1729 1735 2247105 10.1056/NEJM199012203232503

61 Joly P Richard C Gilbert D Sensitivity and specificity of clinical, histologic, and immunologic features in the diagnosis of paraneoplastic pemphigus J Am Acad Dermatol 2000 43 4 619 626 11004616 10.1067/mjd.2000.107488

62 Horn TD Anhalt GJ Histologic features of paraneoplastic pemphigus Arch Dermatol 1992 128 8 1091 1095 1497365

63 Fallon MJ Heck JN Fatal Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by allopurinol-rituximab-bendamustine therapy J Oncol Pharm Pract 2015 21 5 388 392 25005569 10.1177/1078155214533368

64 Karoulia Z Gavathiotis E Poulikakos PI New perspectives for targeting RAF kinase in human cancer Nat Rev Cancer 2017 17 11 676 691 28984291 10.1038/nrc.2017.79 PMC6000833

65 Lacouture ME Duvic M Hauschild A Analysis of dermatologic events in vemurafenib-treated patients with melanoma Oncologist 2013 18 3 314 322 23457002 10.1634/theoncologist.2012-0333 PMC3607529

66 Sinha R Larkin J Gore M Fearfield L Cutaneous toxicities associated with vemurafenib therapy in 107 patients with BRAF V600E mutation-positive metastatic melanoma, including recognition and management of rare presentations Br J Dermatol 2015 173 4 1024 1031 26109403 10.1111/bjd.13958

67 de Golian E Kwong BY Swetter SM Pugliese SB Cutaneous complications of targeted melanoma therapy Curr Treat Options Oncol 2016 17 11 57 27645330 10.1007/s11864-016-0434-0

68 Arenbergerova M Mrazova I Horazdovsky J Sticova E Fialova A Arenberger P Toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by vemurafenib after nivolumab failure J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2017 31 5 e253 e254 27739125 10.1111/jdv.14010

69 Harding JJ Pulitzer M Chapman PB Vemurafenib sensitivity skin reaction after ipilimumab N Engl J Med 2012 366 9 866 868 22375995 10.1056/NEJMc1114329

70 Jeudy G Dalac-Rat S Bonniaud B Successful switch to dabrafenib after vemurafenib-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis Br J Dermatol 2015 172 5 1454 1455 25384395 10.1111/bjd.13522

71 Wolchok JD Chiarion-Sileni V Gonzalez R Overall survival with combined nivolumab and ipilimumab in advanced melanoma N Engl J Med 2017 377 14 1345 1356 28889792 10.1056/NEJMoa1709684 PMC5706778

72 Motzer RJ Escudier B McDermott DF Nivolumab versus everolimus in advanced renal-cell carcinoma N Engl J Med 2015 373 19 1803 1813 26406148 10.1056/NEJMoa1510665 PMC5719487

73 Borghaei H Paz-Ares L Horn L Nivolumab versus docetaxel in advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer N Engl J Med 2015 373 17 1627 1639 26412456 10.1056/NEJMoa1507643 PMC5705936

74 Curry JL Tetzlaff MT Nagarajan P Diverse types of dermatologic toxicities from immune checkpoint blockade therapy J Cutan Pathol 2017 44 2 158 176 27859479 10.1111/cup.12858

75 Polder K Wang C Duvic M Toxic epidermal necrolysis associated with denileukin diftitox (DAB389IL-2) administration in a patient with follicular large cell lymphoma Leuk Lymphoma 2005 46 12 1807 1811 16263585 10.1080/10428190500233764

76 Wiener JS Tucker JA Jr Walther PJ Interleukin-2-induced dermatotoxicity resembling toxic epidermal necrolysis South Med J 1992 85 6 656 659 1534937 10.1097/00007611-199206000-00020

77 Huerta AA Tordera P Cercos AC Yuste AL Lopez-Tendero P Reynes G Toxic epidermal necrolysis associated with interleukin-2 Ann Pharmacother 2002 36 7–8 1171 1174 12086549 10.1345/aph.1A200

78 Nayar N Briscoe K Fernandez-Penas P Toxic epidermal necrolysis-like reaction with severe satellite cell necrosis associated with nivolumab in a patient with ipilimumab refractory metastatic melanoma J Immunother 2016 39 3 149 152 26938948 10.1097/CJI.0000000000000112

79 Goldinger SM Stieger P Meier B Cytotoxic cutaneous adverse drug reactions during anti-PD-1 therapy Clin Cancer Res 2016 22 16 4023 4029 26957557 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-2872

80 Liniker E Menzies AM Kong BY Activity and safety of radiotherapy with anti-PD-1 drug therapy in patients with metastatic melanoma Oncoimmunology 2016 5 9 e1214788 27757312 10.1080/2162402X.2016.1214788 PMC5048757

81 Dika E Ravaioli GM Fanti PA Cutaneous adverse effects during ipilimumab treatment for metastatic melanoma: a prospective study Eur J Dermatol 2017 27 3 266 270 28524050 10.1684/ejd.2017.3023

82 Hwang SJ Carlos G Wakade D Sharma R Fernandez-Penas P Ipilimumab-induced acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis in a patient with metastatic melanoma Melanoma Res 2016 26 4 417 420 27031538 10.1097/CMR.0000000000000261

83 Voskens CJ Goldinger SM Loquai C The price of tumor control: an analysis of rare side effects of anti-CTLA-4 therapy in metastatic melanoma from the ipilimumab network PLoS One 2013 8 1 e53745 23341990 10.1371/journal.pone.0053745 PMC3544906

84 Saw S Lee HY Ng QS Pembrolizumab-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome in non-melanoma patients Eur J Cancer 2017 81 237 239 28438440 10.1016/j.ejca.2017.03.026

85 Le Naour S Peuvrel L Saint-Jean M Dreno B Quereux G Three new cases of bullous pemphigoid during anti-PD-1 antibody therapy J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2018 32 3 e104 e106 28865162 10.1111/jdv.14579

86 Macdonald JB Macdonald B Golitz LE LoRusso P Sekulic A Cutaneous adverse effects of targeted therapies – part II: inhibitors of intracellular molecular signaling pathways J Am Acad Dermatol 2015 72 2 221 238 25592339 10.1016/j.jaad.2014.07.033

87 Saidi W Lahouel I Laarif M Aounallah A A new case of imatinib-induced drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms Indian J Dermatol Venereol Leprol 2017 83 2 224 226 28164890 10.4103/0378-6323.198452

88 Hsiao LT Chung HM Lin JT Stevens-Johnson syndrome after treatment with STI571: a case report Br J Haematol 2002 117 3 620 622 12028031 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2002.03499.x

89 Brouard MC Prins C Mach-Pascual S Saurat JH Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis associated with STI571 in a patient with chronic myeloid leukemia Dermatology 2001 203 1 57 59 11549802 10.1159/000051705

90 Scott AD Lee M Kubba F Chu A Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) secondary to imatinib in a patient with chronic myeloid leukaemia Clin Exp Dermatol 2015 40 8 926 927 25266712 10.1111/ced.12479

91 Shih HC Hsiao YP Wu MF Yang JH Gefitinib-induced acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis in two patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer Br J Dermatol 2006 155 5 1101 1102 17034565 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2006.07511.x

92 Sidoroff A Halevy S Bavinck JN Vaillant L Roujeau JC Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP): a clinical reaction pattern J Cutan Pathol 2001 28 3 113 119 11168761 10.1034/j.1600-0560.2001.028003113.x

93 Roe E Muret MP Marcuello E Capdevila J Pallares C Alomar A Description and management of cutaneous side effects during cetuximab or erlotinib treatments: a prospective study of 30 patients J Am Acad Dermatol 2006 55 3 429 437 16908348 10.1016/j.jaad.2006.04.062

94 Brodell LA Hepper D Lind A Gru AA Anadkat MJ Histopathology of acneiform eruptions in patients treated with epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors J Cutan Pathol 2013 40 10 865 870 23941617 10.1111/cup.12202

95 Kardaun SH Kuiper H Fidler V Jonkman MF The histopathological spectrum of acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) and its differentiation from generalized pustular psoriasis J Cutan Pathol 2010 37 12 1220 1229 20738458 10.1111/j.1600-0560.2010.01612.x

96 Halevy S Kardaun SH Davidovici B Wechsler J The spectrum of histopathological features in acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis: a study of 102 cases Br J Dermatol 2010 163 6 1245 1252 20698849 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2010.09967.x

97 Lee YY Chung WH Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis: a retrospective study of 51 cases in Taiwan Dermatol Sin 2014 32 3 137 140

98 Hotz C Valeyrie-Allanore L Haddad C Systemic involvement of acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis: a retrospective study on 58 patients Br J Dermatol 2013 169 6 1223 1232 23855377 10.1111/bjd.12502

99 Naranjo CA Busto U Sellers EM A method for estimating the probability of adverse drug reactions Clin Pharmacol Ther 1981 30 2 239 245 7249508 10.1038/clpt.1981.154

100 Sassolas B Haddad C Mockenhaupt M ALDEN, an algorithm for assessment of drug causality in Stevens-Johnson Syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis: comparison with case-control analysis Clin Pharmacol Ther 2010 88 1 60 68 20375998 10.1038/clpt.2009.252

101 Guthrie B Makubate B Hernandez-Santiago V Dreischulte T The rising tide of polypharmacy and drug-drug interactions: population database analysis 1995–2010 BMC Med 2015 13 74 25889849 10.1186/s12916-015-0322-7 PMC4417329

102 Heng YK Lim YL Cutaneous adverse drug reactions in the elderly Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2015 15 4 300 307 26110679 10.1097/ACI.0000000000000181

103 Urosevic-Maiwald M Harr T French LE Dummer R Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis overlap in a patient receiving cetuximab and radiotherapy for head and neck cancer Int J Dermatol 2012 51 7 864 867 22715836 10.1111/j.1365-4632.2011.05356.x

104 Imafuku K Yoshino K Ishiwata K Severe rash associated with vemurafenib administration following nivolumab therapy J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2016 30 10 e84 e86 26372833 10.1111/jdv.13331

105 Pichler WJ Tilch J The lymphocyte transformation test in the diagnosis of drug hypersensitivity Allergy 2004 59 8 809 820 15230812 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2004.00547.x

106 Kano Y Hirahara K Mitsuyama Y Takahashi R Shiohara T Utility of the lymphocyte transformation test in the diagnosis of drug sensitivity: dependence on its timing and the type of drug eruption Allergy 2007 62 12 1439 1444 17983378 10.1111/j.1398-9995.2007.01553.x

107 Nagao-Dias AT Teixeira FM Coelho HL Diagnosing immune-mediated reactions to drugs Allergol Immunopathol (Madr) 2009 37 2 98 104 19445867 10.1016/s0301-0546(09)71112-7

108 Barbaud A Collet E Milpied B A multicentre study to determine the value and safety of drug patch tests for the three main classes of severe cutaneous adverse drug reactions Br J Dermatol 2013 168 3 555 562 23136927 10.1111/bjd.12125

109 Doesch J Debus D Meyer C Afatinib-associated Stevens-Johnson syndrome in an EGFR-mutated lung cancer patient Lung Cancer 2016 95 35 38 27040849 10.1016/j.lungcan.2016.02.015

110 Lee SS Chu PY Toxic epidermal necrolysis caused by cetuximab plus minocycline in head and neck cancer Am J Otolaryngol 2010 31 4 288 290 20015761 10.1016/j.amjoto.2009.02.021

111 Pantano F Silletta M Iovieno A Stevens-Johnson syndrome associated with reduced tear production complicating the use of cetuximab and panitunumab [sic] Int J Colorectal Dis 2009 24 10 1247 1248 19225787 10.1007/s00384-009-0676-4

112 Jackman DM Cioffredi LA Jacobs L A phase I trial of high dose gefitinib for patients with leptomeningeal metastases from non-small cell lung cancer Oncotarget 2015 6 6 4527 4536 25784657 10.18632/oncotarget.2886 PMC4414209

113 Huang JJ Ma SX Hou X Toxic epidermal necrolysis related to AP (pemetrexed plus cisplatin) and gefitinib combination therapy in a patient with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer Chin J Cancer 2015 34 2 94 98 25418188 10.5732/cjc.014.10151 PMC4360078

114 Yoon J Oh CW Kim CY Stevens-Johnson syndrome induced by vandetanib Ann Dermatol 2011 23 Suppl 3 S343 S345 22346274 10.5021/ad.2011.23.S3.S343 PMC3276793

115 Ladizinski B Sankey C A topical matter: toxic epidermal necrolysis Am J Med 2014 127 10 931 932 24950488 10.1016/j.amjmed.2014.06.013

116 Bois E Holle LM Farooq U Late onset imatinib-induced Stevens-Johnson syndrome J Oncol Pharm Pract 2014 20 6 476 478 24399835 10.1177/1078155213518226

117 Jha P Himanshu D Jain N Singh AK Imatinib-induced Stevens-Johnsons syndrome BMJ Case Rep 2013 2013 10.1136/bcr-2012-007926 PMC3604560 23349042

118 Nakamoto K Nagahara H Noda E Three cases of giant rectal gastrointestinal stromal tumor Gan To Kagaku Ryoho 2011 38 12 1984 1986 Japanese 22202260

119 Vidal D Puig L Sureda A Alomar A Sti571-induced Stevens-Johnson Syndrome Br J Haematol 2002 119 1 274 275 12358937 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2002.37133.x

120 Schaich M Schäkel K Illmer T Ehninger G Bornhauser M Severe epidermal necrolysis after treatment with imatinib and consecutive allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation Ann Hematol 2003 82 5 303 304 12707720 10.1007/s00277-003-0643-z

121 Hsieh HJ Chan AL Lin SJ Stevens-Johnson syndrome induced by combination of imatinib and allopurinol Chemotherapy 2009 55 4 197 199 19439939 10.1159/000218097

122 Severino G Chillotti C de Lisa R del Zompo M Ardau R Adverse reactions during imatinib and lansoprazole treatment in gastrointestinal stromal tumors Ann Pharmacother 2005 39 1 162 164 15546944 10.1345/aph.1E127

123 Goldman J Duval-Modeste AB Lambert A Imatinib-induced DRESS Ann Dermatol Venereol 2008 135 5 393 396 French 18457727 10.1016/j.annder.2007.10.007

124 Le Nouail P Viseux V Chaby G Billet A Denoeux JP Lok C Drug reaction with eosinophilia and systemic symptoms (DRESS) following imatinib therapy Ann Dermatol Venereol 2006 133 8–9 Pt 1 686 688 French 17053739 10.1016/s0151-9638(06)70992-9

125 Schwarz M Kreuzer KA Baskaynak G Dorken B le Coutre P Imatinib-induced acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis (AGEP) in two patients with chronic myeloid leukemia Eur J Haematol 2002 69 4 254 256 12431246 10.1034/j.1600-0609.2002.02830.x

126 Sohn KH Oh SY Lim KW Kim MY Lee SY Kang HR Sorafenib induces delayed-onset cutaneous hypersensitivity: a case series Allergy Asthma Immunol Res 2015 7 3 304 307 25749785 10.4168/aair.2015.7.3.304 PMC4397373

127 Alegre-Sanchez A de Perosanz-Lobo D Pinilla-Pagnon I Munoz-Zato E Sorafenib-induced acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis: an increasing association? Actas Dermosifiliogr 2017 108 6 599 601 28262110 10.1016/j.ad.2016.11.018

128 Liang CP Yang CS Shen JL Chen YJ Sorafenib-induced acute localized exanthematous pustulosis in a patient with hepatocellular carcinoma Br J Dermatol 2011 165 2 443 445 21495998 10.1111/j.1365-2133.2011.10377.x

129 Pretel M Inarrairaegui M Lera JM Aguado L Idoate MA Acute generalized exanthematous pustulosis induced by sorafenib JAMA Dermatol 2014 150 6 664 666 24671701 10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.6924

130 Fang B Song Y Ma J Zhao RC Severe epidermal necrolysis after bortezomib treatment for multiple myeloma Acta Haematol 2007 118 2 65 67 17505132 10.1159/000102604

131 Castaneda CP Brandenburg NA Bwire R Burton GH Zeldis JB Erythema multiforme/Stevens-Johnson syndrome/toxic epidermal necrolysis in lenalidomide-treated patients J Clin Oncol 2009 27 1 156 157 19047275 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.3737

132 Hattori N Adachi D Nakashima H Saito B Nakamaki T Tomoyasu S Drug-induced hypersensitivity syndrome after bortezomib treatment for refractory multiple myeloma Leuk Res 2009 33 4 574 577 18838167 10.1016/j.leukres.2008.08.023

133 Lowndes S Darby A Mead G Lister A Stevens-Johnson syndrome after treatment with rituximab Ann Oncol 2002 13 12 1948 1950 12453865 10.1093/annonc/mdf350

134 Parise L Kahle J Schlaak M Mauch C Kurschat P Reply to Rituxan is not associated with Stevens-Johnson syndrome Ann Oncol 2012 23 3 807 10.1093/annonc/mdr629 22267185

135 Foran JM Gupta RK Cunningham D A UK multicentre phase II study of rituximab (chimaeric anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody) in patients with follicular lymphoma, with PCR monitoring of molecular response Br J Haematol 2000 109 1 81 88 10848785 10.1046/j.1365-2141.2000.01965.x

136 Newland AM Li JX Wasco LE Aziz MT Lowe DK Brentuximab vedotin: a CD30-directed antibody-cytotoxic drug conjugate Pharmacotherapy 2013 33 1 93 104 23307550 10.1002/phar.1170

137 del Principe MI Sconocchia G Buccisano F Extensive toxic epidermal necrolysis following brentuximab vedotin administration Ann Hematol 2015 94 2 355 356 24981690 10.1007/s00277-014-2148-3

138 Kiliç S Ozkaya E Baykal C Vatansever S Vemurafenib-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis: is it an emerging side effect of the drug? J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol 2017 31 8 e354 e355 28150343 10.1111/jdv.14150

139 Lapresta A Dotor A Gonzalez-Herrada C Toxic epidermal necrolysis induced by vemurafenib Actas Dermosifiliogr 2015 106 8 682 683 26051238 10.1016/j.ad.2015.03.008

140 Wantz M Spanoudi-KITrimi I Lasek A Lebas D Quinchon JF Modiano P Vemurafenib-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis Ann Dermatol Venereol 2014 141 3 215 218 French 24635957 10.1016/j.annder.2013.10.054

141 Sinha R Lecamwasam K Purshouse K Reed J Middleton MR Fearfield L Toxic epidermal necrolysis in a patient receiving vemurafenib for treatment of metastatic malignant melanoma Br J Dermatol 2014 170 4 997 999 24359127 10.1111/bjd.12796

142 Munch M Peuvrel L Brocard A Early-onset vemurafenib-induced DRESS syndrome Dermatology 2016 232 1 126 128 26418832 10.1159/000439272

143 Wenk KS Pichard DC Nasabzadeh T Jang S Venna SS Vemurafenib-induced DRESS JAMA Dermatol 2013 149 10 1242 1243 23986488 10.1001/jamadermatol.2013.5278

144 Pathria M Mundi J Trufant J A case of Stevens-Johnson syndrome in a patient on ipilimumab Int J Case Rep Imag 2016 7 5 300 302