Search

Importance: Extramammary Paget disease (EMPD) is a rare, highly recurrent cutaneous malignant neoplasm of unclear origin. EMPD arises most commonly on the vulvar and penoscrotal skin. It is not presently known how anatomic subtype of EMPD affects disease presentation and management., Objective: To compare demographic and tumor characteristics and treatment approaches for different EMPD subtypes. Recommendations for diagnosis and treatment are presented., Data Sources: MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane Reviews CENTRAL from December 1, 1990, to October 24, 2022., Study Selection: Articles were excluded if they were not in English, reported fewer than 3 patients, did not specify information by anatomic subtype, or contained no case-level data. Metastatic cases on presentation were also excluded., Data Extraction and Synthesis: Abstracts of 1295 eligible articles were independently reviewed by 5 coauthors, and 135 articles retained. Reporting was in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. The analysis was cunducted in August 2019 and updated in November 2022., Findings: Most vulvar EMPD cases were asymptomatic, and diagnosis was relatively delayed (mean, 25.1 months). Although most vulvar EMPD cases were intraepidermal (1247/1773 [70.3%]), radical surgeries were still performed in almost one-third of cases. Despite this aggressive surgical approach, 481 of 1423 (34%) recurred, commonly confined to the skin and mucosa (177/198 [89.4%]). By contrast, 152 of 1101 penoscrotal EMPD cases (14%) recurred, but more than one-third of these recurrences were regional or associated with distant metastases (54 of 152 [35.5%]). Perianal EMPD cases recurred in one-third of cases (74/218 [33.9%]), with one-third of these recurrences being regional or associated with distant metastasis (20 of 74 [27.0%]). Perianal EMPD also had the highest rate of invasive disease (50% of cases)., Conclusions and Relevance: The diagnosis and treatment of EMPD should differ based on anatomic subtypes. Considerations for updated practice may include less morbid treatments for vulvar EMPD, which is primarily epidermal, and close surveillance for local recurrence in vulvar EMPD and metastatic recurrence in perianal EMPD. Recurrences in penoscrotal subtype were less common, and selective surveillance in this subtype may be considered. Limitations of this study include the lack of replication cohorts and the exclusion of studies that did not stratify outcomes by anatomic subtype.

Importance: Antagonist antibodies to programmed cell death 1 (PD-1) and programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) have shown remarkable activity in multiple tumor types. Recent US Food and Drug Administration approval of such agents for advanced melanoma, non-small cell lung cancer, and renal cell carcinoma has hastened the need to better characterize their unique toxicity profiles., Objective: To provide a clinical and pathologic description of the lichenoid mucocutaneous adverse effects seen in patients receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 treatment., Design, Setting, and Participants: Patients with advanced cancer who were referred to dermatology at Yale-New Haven Hospital, a tertiary care hospital, after developing cutaneous adverse effects while receiving an anti-PD-1 or PD-L1 antibody therapy either as monotherapy or in combination with another agent were identified. Medical records from 2010 to 2015 and available skin biopsy specimens were retrospectively reviewed., Main Outcomes and Measures: Patient demographic characteristics, concurrent medications, therapeutic regimen, type of disease, previous oncologic therapies, clinical morphology of cutaneous lesions, treatment of rash, peripheral blood eosinophil count, tumor response, and skin histologic characteristics if biopsies were available., Results: Patients were 13 men and 7 women, with a mean (range) age of 64 (46-86) years. The majority of cases (16 [80%]) had a clinical morphology consisting of erythematous papules with scale in a variety of distributions. Biopsies were available from 17 patients; 16 (94%) showed features of lichenoid interface dermatitis. Eighteen patients were treated with topical corticosteroids, and only 1 patient required discontinuation of anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. Only 4 of 20 patients (20%) developed peripheral eosinophilia. Sixteen patients (80%) were concurrently taking medications that have been previously reported to cause lichenoid drug eruptions., Conclusions and Relevance: Papular and nodular eruptions with scale, as well as mucosal erosions, with lichenoid features on histologic analysis were a distinct finding seen with anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies and were generally manageable with topical steroids. Concurrent medications may play a role in the development of this cutaneous adverse effect.

Importance: Several chemotherapeutic agents have been reported to induce subacute cutaneous lupus erythematosus (SCLE). To our knowledge, this is the first report to date of SCLE induced by monotherapeutic gemcitabine hydrochloride and includes a comprehensive review of all published cases of chemotherapeutic drug-induced SCLE., Observations: We describe a patient who developed a SCLE-like eruption after being administered gemcitabine and discuss 16 other published cases of chemotherapeutic drug-induced SCLE., Conclusions and Relevance: This case and a review of the literature call attention to gemcitabine and other chemotherapeutic agents that have been reported to cause drug-induced SCLE. We also discuss the clinical features of the disease.

Importance: Azathioprine hypersensitivity syndrome can present clinically and histopathologically like Sweet syndrome. Shared clinical features include fever, constitutional symptoms, prompt response to systemic corticosteroid therapy, neutrophilia, and abrupt onset of erythematous cutaneous lesions. Histologically, both azathioprine hypersensitivity syndrome and Sweet syndrome are rich in neutrophils., Observations: An 81-year-old woman with Crohn disease presented with fever and an acute eruption of plaques on her extremities within 2 weeks of starting treatment with azathioprine. Laboratory evaluation was notable for leukocytosis and neutrophilia. Skin biopsy of an erythematous plaque on the thigh demonstrated a suppurative folliculitis. Azathioprine treatment was discontinued resulting in resolution of the clinical lesions within 5 days. Our case was compared with 18 cases with similar clinical features., Conclusions and Relevance: We report a case of azathioprine hypersensitivity syndrome and review the literature on azathioprine-induced eruptions with features of Sweet syndrome. Our patient's distribution of lesions on the extremities and the finding of suppurative folliculitis on histopathology were not classical for Sweet syndrome. Azathioprine hypersensitivity syndrome seems to be a neutrophil-driven dermatosis; therefore, many overlapping features with Sweet syndrome are not surprising. Due to the potential for anaphylaxis with azathioprine rechallenge, a better term for a Sweetlike presentation in the setting of azathioprine administration is azathioprine hypersensitivity syndrome.