A systematic review of oral retinoids for treatment of acneiform eruptions induced by epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi) are now standard of care in patients with EGFR mutations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and are increasingly being used in other EGFR mutated cancers, including gastrointestinal, and head and neck. However, EGFRi are well known to cause acneiform eruptions, which are shown to positively correlate with tumor response to treatment, but may be severe enough to cause interruption of their treatment. Although most guidelines call for the use of tetracyclines to treat these acneiform eruptions, there is mounting evidence for the use of systemic retinoids instead. The objective of this review is to summarize available data on the use of systemic retinoids for management of acneiform eruptions on EGFRi. This study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE and EMBASE were searched from database inception until December 10th, 2021. All articles were screened and relevant data extracted independently in duplicate by two reviewers. In total, 16 case reports, case series and retrospective reviews were included. Forty-three patients were treated with retinoids for their acneiform eruption due to EGFRi. The majority (77%) noted moderate to significant improvement after treatment initiation with minimal adverse events (16%). The findings of this systematic review suggest that systemic retinoids are a safe and effective therapy for the management of acneiform eruptions induced by EGFRi.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it