Latest News

Keratoacanthoma, SCC Relatively Rare With PD-1/PD-L1 Inhibitors, Study Suggests


 

TOPLINE:

Signals for keratoacanthoma and cutaneous squamous cell carcinoma (cSCC) with programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitors were detected in an analysis of adverse events (AEs) reported to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

METHODOLOGY:

  • The risk for dermatologic immune-related side effects may be increased with immunologic-modifying drugs.
  • To determine if there are significant signals between keratoacanthomas and cSCCs and PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors, researchers analyzed AEs associated with these agents reported to the FDA’s Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS) between January 2004 and May 2023.
  • Pharmacovigilance signals were identified, and a significant signal was defined as the lower 95% CI of a reporting odds ratio (ROR) greater than one or the lower 95% CI of an information component (IC) greater than 0.

TAKEAWAY:

  • Of the 158,000 reports of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor use, 43 were in patients who developed a keratoacanthoma (mean age, 77 years; 39% women) and 83 were in patients who developed cSCC (mean age, 71 years; 41% women). Patients aged 60-79 years were most likely to develop keratoacanthomas and cSCC on these treatments.
  • A PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor was listed as the suspect drug in all 43 keratoacanthoma reports and in 70 of 83 cSCC reports (the remaining 13 listed them as the concomitant drug).
  • Significant signals were reported for both keratoacanthoma (ROR, 9.7; IC, 1.9) and cSCC (ROR, 3.0; IC, 0.9) with PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor use.
  • Of the reports where this information was available, all 10 cases of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor–linked keratoacanthoma and 10 of 17 cases (59%) of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor–linked cSCC, resolution was noted following discontinuation or dose reduction of the inhibitor.

IN PRACTICE:

“Given the large number of patients receiving immunotherapy, FAERS recording only 43 patients developing keratoacanthoma and 83 patients developing cSCC highlights that these conditions are relatively rare adverse events,” the authors wrote but added that more studies are needed to confirm these results.

SOURCE:

The study, led by Pushkar Aggarwal, MD, MBA, of the Department of Dermatology, University of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio, was published online in JAMA Dermatology.

LIMITATIONS:

The data obtained from FAERS did not contain information on all AEs from drugs. In addition, a causal association could not be determined.

DISCLOSURES:

The funding source was not reported. The authors did not report any conflicts of interest.

A version of this article appeared on Medscape.com.

Recommended Reading

A Banned Chemical That Is Still Causing Cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Should Opioids Be Used for Chronic Cancer Pain?
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Virtual Reality Brings Relief to Hospitalized Patients With Cancer
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Less Than 50% of Accelerated Approvals Show Clinical Benefit
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Repeat MCED Testing May ID Early-Stage and Unscreened Cancers
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Circulating Tumor DNA Predicts Early Treatment Response in Patients With HER2-Positive Cancers
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Consider Skin Cancer, Infection Risks in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Oncologists Voice Ethical Concerns Over AI in Cancer Care
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
No Routine Cancer Screening Option? New MCED Tests May Help
MDedge Hematology and Oncology
Most Targeted Cancer Drugs Lack Substantial Clinical Benefit
MDedge Hematology and Oncology