Cutaneous adverse events associated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 4.8 2区 医学 Q1 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY Frontiers in Pharmacology Pub Date : 2024-12-24 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.3389/fphar.2024.1457226
Junhui Qian, Jinlong Wan, Qin Yao, Yin Chen, Tao Ling, Yuejuan Zhang, Zhihua Tang
{"title":"Cutaneous adverse events associated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors: a systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Junhui Qian, Jinlong Wan, Qin Yao, Yin Chen, Tao Ling, Yuejuan Zhang, Zhihua Tang","doi":"10.3389/fphar.2024.1457226","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>Cutaneous adverse events (CAEs) after treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors in patients with melanoma remain incompletely characterized. To determine the association of BRAF and MEK inhibitor treatment with CAEs in patients with melanoma compared with BRAF inhibitor alone.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>PubMed, Cochrane, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for BRAF and MEK inhibitors from database inception through 10 May 2024. Randomized clinical trials reporting on CAEs in patients with melanoma being treated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors compared with patients with melanoma being treated with BRAF inhibitor monotherapy were selected. Pooled Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were determined using random-effects analyses. The selected end points were alopecia, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, hyperkeratosis, keratoacanthoma, palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome, palmoplantar keratoderma, rash, photosensitivity reaction, and skin papilloma. All-grade and high-grade (≥3) CAEs were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Comparing with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, treatment with BRAF inhibitors alone was associated with an increased risk of rash (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.99; <i>p</i> = 0.039; I<sup>2</sup> = 88%), alopecia (RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.20-0.41; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 76%), hyperkeratosis (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.22-0.41; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 56%), palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.47; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 81%), palmoplantar keratoderma (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.26-0.57; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 29%), Skin papilloma (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.52; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 77%), cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.42; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 50%), and keratoacanthoma (RR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.40; P < 0.001; I<sup>2</sup> = 0%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors was associated with a lower risk of CAEs, especially rash, alopecia, hyperkeratosis, palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome, palmoplantar keratoderma, skin papilloma, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, and keratoacanthoma, compared with BRAF inhibitor alone. The risks of photosensitivity reaction was similar between the assessed groups. The findings may help to balance between beneficial melanoma treatment and cutaneous morbidity and mortality.</p>","PeriodicalId":12491,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","volume":"15 ","pages":"1457226"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11703664/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/fphar.2024.1457226","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aim: Cutaneous adverse events (CAEs) after treatment with BRAF and MEK inhibitors in patients with melanoma remain incompletely characterized. To determine the association of BRAF and MEK inhibitor treatment with CAEs in patients with melanoma compared with BRAF inhibitor alone.

Method: PubMed, Cochrane, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched for BRAF and MEK inhibitors from database inception through 10 May 2024. Randomized clinical trials reporting on CAEs in patients with melanoma being treated with BRAF and MEK inhibitors compared with patients with melanoma being treated with BRAF inhibitor monotherapy were selected. Pooled Risk ratios (RRs) and 95% CIs were determined using random-effects analyses. The selected end points were alopecia, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, hyperkeratosis, keratoacanthoma, palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome, palmoplantar keratoderma, rash, photosensitivity reaction, and skin papilloma. All-grade and high-grade (≥3) CAEs were recorded.

Results: Comparing with BRAF and MEK inhibitors, treatment with BRAF inhibitors alone was associated with an increased risk of rash (RR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.54-0.99; p = 0.039; I2 = 88%), alopecia (RR, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.20-0.41; P < 0.001; I2 = 76%), hyperkeratosis (RR, 0.30; 95% CI, 0.22-0.41; P < 0.001; I2 = 56%), palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.10-0.47; P < 0.001; I2 = 81%), palmoplantar keratoderma (RR, 0.39; 95% CI, 0.26-0.57; P < 0.001; I2 = 29%), Skin papilloma (RR, 0.25; 95% CI, 0.12-0.52; P < 0.001; I2 = 77%), cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma (RR, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.11-0.42; P < 0.001; I2 = 50%), and keratoacanthoma (RR, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.12-0.40; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%).

Conclusion: Therapy with BRAF and MEK inhibitors was associated with a lower risk of CAEs, especially rash, alopecia, hyperkeratosis, palmoplantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome, palmoplantar keratoderma, skin papilloma, cutaneous squamous-cell carcinoma, and keratoacanthoma, compared with BRAF inhibitor alone. The risks of photosensitivity reaction was similar between the assessed groups. The findings may help to balance between beneficial melanoma treatment and cutaneous morbidity and mortality.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与BRAF和MEK抑制剂相关的皮肤不良事件:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
目的:黑色素瘤患者接受BRAF和MEK抑制剂治疗后的皮肤不良事件(CAEs)仍未完全确定。与单独使用BRAF抑制剂相比,确定BRAF和MEK抑制剂治疗与黑色素瘤患者CAEs的关系。方法:系统检索PubMed、Cochrane、Embase和Web of Science从数据库建立到2024年5月10日的BRAF和MEK抑制剂。选择报告BRAF和MEK抑制剂治疗的黑色素瘤患者与BRAF抑制剂单药治疗的黑色素瘤患者cae的随机临床试验。采用随机效应分析确定合并风险比(rr)和95% ci。选择的终点是脱发、皮肤鳞状细胞癌、角化过度、角棘瘤、掌跖红肿综合征、掌跖角化病、皮疹、光敏反应和皮肤乳头状瘤。记录所有级别和高级(≥3)cae。结果:与BRAF和MEK抑制剂相比,单独使用BRAF抑制剂治疗与皮疹风险增加相关(RR, 0.73;95% ci, 0.54-0.99;P = 0.039;I2 = 88%)、脱发(RR, 0.28;95% ci, 0.20-0.41;P < 0.001;I2 = 76%)、角化过度(RR, 0.30;95% ci, 0.22-0.41;P < 0.001;I2 = 56%)、掌跖红觉异常综合征(RR, 0.21;95% ci, 0.10-0.47;P < 0.001;I2 = 81%),掌跖角化病(RR, 0.39;95% ci, 0.26-0.57;P < 0.001;I2 = 29%),皮肤乳头状瘤(RR, 0.25;95% ci, 0.12-0.52;P < 0.001;I2 = 77%)、皮肤鳞状细胞癌(RR, 0.21;95% ci, 0.11-0.42;P < 0.001;I2 = 50%)和角棘瘤(RR, 0.22;95% ci, 0.12-0.40;P < 0.001;I2 = 0%)。结论:与单独使用BRAF抑制剂相比,使用BRAF和MEK抑制剂治疗可降低cae的发生风险,尤其是皮疹、脱发、角化过度、掌跖红觉异常综合征、掌跖角化病、皮肤乳头状瘤、皮肤鳞状细胞癌和角棘瘤。光敏反应的风险在评估组之间相似。这些发现可能有助于在有益的黑色素瘤治疗和皮肤发病率和死亡率之间取得平衡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Frontiers in Pharmacology
Frontiers in Pharmacology PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY-
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
8.90%
发文量
5163
审稿时长
14 weeks
期刊介绍: Frontiers in Pharmacology is a leading journal in its field, publishing rigorously peer-reviewed research across disciplines, including basic and clinical pharmacology, medicinal chemistry, pharmacy and toxicology. Field Chief Editor Heike Wulff at UC Davis is supported by an outstanding Editorial Board of international researchers. This multidisciplinary open-access journal is at the forefront of disseminating and communicating scientific knowledge and impactful discoveries to researchers, academics, clinicians and the public worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Cyclovirobuxine D suppresses cancer stemness in osteosarcoma with implication of the noncanonical NF-kappaB pathway. Effectiveness and safety of cemiplimab in locally advanced and metastatic cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma. Analysis of the clinical characteristics of direct oral anticoagulants-associated atraumatic splenic rupture. A network pharmacology-guided multi-omics and spatial single-cell framework nominates WT1 as a spironolactone-linked immune biomarker in prostate cancer. Predictive value of ALBI score and age for developing resistance to trastuzumab in HER-2-positive breast cancer patients: prediction based on a real-world case series from a single center in China.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1