An Analysis of Risk Factors for the Development of Acneiform Eruptions in Patients on Monoclonal Antibody Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Inhibitors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Acneiform eruptions occur frequently and early in patients on epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors (EGFRi). Identification of baseline patient risk factors would prompt earlier referral to dermatology to optimize prevention and management. The primary objective of this retrospective study is to determine the association between clinical and demographic characteristics and the development of acneiform eruptions. A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients diagnosed with colon and head and neck cancers who started EGFRi between January 2017 and December 2021. Patients were followed until death or September 2022. Baseline demographic and clinical parameters were documented and patients were followed from the time of diagnosis to most recent visit for the development and management of an acneiform eruption. Regression analyses were performed to determine the association between baseline characteristics and the development of acneiform eruptions. A total of 66 patients were treated with cetuximab or panitumumab between 2017-2021 were included in the analysis. Forty-seven of the sixty-six patients developed an acneiform eruption while on EGFRi therapy (71.2%). Combination cancer therapy with another chemotherapeutic agent was associated with a lower risk of acneiform eruption (OR 0.03, P = .027). No other baseline features were statistically associated with a lower risk of acneiform eruption. Acneiform eruptions are a common cutaneous adverse event of EGFRi therapy. Ongoing research is required to elucidate risk factors for the development of acneiform eruptions, to improve the quality of life of oncology patients.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".