Menon, Smitha

Background: Although 50% to 90% of patients who receive epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitors develop a rash, options for rash prevention or palliation remain limited. This issue is particularly important from a palliative care standpoint because these agents are prescribed only to patients with incurable cancer. Here, we report (1) gene expression profiling of skin biopsies from patients with an EGFR inhibitor–induced rash and (2) a randomized, placebo-controlled feasibility trial with the antiandrogen, spironolactone. Both investigations were undertaken to begin to explore the hypothesis that androgens mediate EGFR inhibitor–induced rash and that antiandrogens palliate it. Methods/Results: First, 4 skin biopsies from patients with EGFR inhibitor–induced rash (3 men and 1 woman) were subject to gene expression microarray profiling. A public data set of normal skin gene expression (Gene Expression Omnibus, GSE22998) served as a reference. Sixty percent of commonly interrogated androgen receptor genes (207 of 308 between the 2 data sets) were differentially expressed ( P < .05) in the rash samples. Second, in a 17-patient double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial with topical spironolactone applied to the face, although the primary feasibility end point was not achieved, patients in the spironolactone arm received more doses of EGFR inhibitor, and anecdotal photographic evidence suggested salutatory effects of spironolactone on rash. Conclusions: Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor–induced rash appears to be androgen-mediated; antiandrogen therapy merits further study for rash prevention/palliation.

Abstract Introduction. For patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) to benefit from ALK inhibitors, sensitive and specific detection of ALK genomic rearrangements is needed. ALK break-apart fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) is the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved and standard-of-care diagnostic assay, but identification of ALK rearrangements by other methods reported in NSCLC cases that tested negative for ALK rearrangements by FISH suggests a significant false-negative rate. We report here a large series of NSCLC cases assayed by hybrid-capture-based comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) in the course of clinical care. Materials and Methods. Hybrid-capture-based CGP using next-generation sequencing was performed in the course of clinical care of 1,070 patients with advanced lung cancer. Each tumor sample was evaluated for all classes of genomic alterations, including base-pair substitutions, insertions/deletions, copy number alterations and rearrangements, as well as fusions/rearrangements. Results. A total of 47 patients (4.4%) were found to harbor ALK rearrangements, of whom 41 had an EML4-ALK fusion, and 6 had other fusion partners, including 3 previously unreported rearrangement events: EIF2AK-ALK, PPM1B-ALK, and PRKAR1A-ALK. Of 41 patients harboring ALK rearrangements, 31 had prior FISH testing results available. Of these, 20 were ALK FISH positive, and 11 (35%) were ALK FISH negative. Of the latter 11 patients, 9 received crizotinib based on the CGP results, and 7 achieved a response with median duration of 17 months. Conclusion. Comprehensive genomic profiling detected canonical ALK rearrangements and ALK rearrangements with noncanonical fusion partners in a subset of patients with NSCLC with previously negative ALK FISH results. In this series, such patients had durable responses to ALK inhibitors, comparable to historical response rates for ALK FISH-positive cases.

Purpose Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) is a dose-limiting toxicity of capecitabine for which no effective preventative treatment has been definitively demonstrated. This trial was conducted on the basis of preliminary data that a urea/lactic acid–based topical keratolytic agent (ULABTKA) may prevent HFS. Patients and Methods A randomized, double-blind phase III trial evaluated 137 patients receiving their first ever cycle of capecitabine at a dose of either 2,000 or 2,500 mg/m2 per day for 14 days. Patients were randomly assigned to a ULABTKA versus a placebo cream, which was applied to the hands and feet twice per day for 21 days after the start of capecitabine. Patients completed an HFS diary (HFSD) daily. HFS toxicity grade (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [CTCAE] v3.0) was also collected at baseline and at the end of each cycle. The primary end point was the incidence of moderate/severe HFS symptoms in the first treatment cycle, based on the patient-reported HFSD. Results The percentage of patients with moderate/severe HFS symptoms was not different between groups, being 13.6% in the ULABTKA arm and 10.2% in the placebo arm (P = .768 by Fisher's exact test). The odds ratio was 1.37 (95% CI, 0.37 to 5.76). Cycle 1 CTCAE skin toxicity was higher in the ULABTKA arm but not significantly so (33% v 27%; P = .82). No significant differences were observed in other toxicities between groups. Conclusion These data do not support the efficacy of a ULABTKA cream for preventing HFS symptoms in patients receiving capecitabine.