Regional and practice setting differences in the management of EGFR rash among mCRC patients treated with panitumumab: Results of a national survey in the United States.

Authors

null

Kristina Hool

Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA

Kristina Hool , Kimberly Lowe , Tamer Garawin , Rachel Bergstresser , George Kafatos , Michelle McNamara , Seth Collins , Bruce A. Bach

Organizations

Amgen, Thousand Oaks, CA, Amgen, Seattle, WA, Amgen Inc., Thousand Oaks, CA, Adelphi Research, Boston, MA, Amgen, Ltd., Uxbridge, United Kingdom

Research Funding

Pharmaceutical/Biotech Company

Background: Skin toxicity can be a limiting factor for the use of anti-EGFR therapies, such as panitumumab, and there are currently no standard practice guidelines for rash management in the United States (U.S.). This study aimed to evaluate if there were regional or practice setting differences in strategies used among oncologists to manage EGFR rash, including utilization of dermatologic and nursing support. Methods: 250 practicing oncologists who had treated at least three mCRC patients with panitumumab in the last year completed an online survey to report their opinions and perceptions regarding skin toxicity management strategies. Participants reported if they were affiliated with an academic/university or a community-based practice. Participants were stratified into years of practice post-fellowship ( < 10 and > 10 years) and geographic region of primary practice (West, Midwest, Northeast, Southern U.S.). Results: Oncologists surveyed did not consistently utilize dermatology support. 40% (n = 99) of practicing oncologists surveyed reported consulting a dermatologist “occasionally.” Less than 5% reported “always” consulting dermatology and 6% reported “never” utilizing dermatology support. Utilization of dermatology support varied significantly by region. In the Southern US more oncologists reported “never” consulting dermatology while in the Midwest more oncologists reported “always” utilizing dermatology support (p = 0.05). While dermatology was inconsistently utilized, oncologists frequently utilized nursing support to minimize and manage anti-EGFR skin toxicity. 73% (n = 182) of oncologists engaged nursing support to “monitor skin toxicity during treatment” and 70% (n = 175) of oncologists had nursing support to “educate on skin toxicity prior to starting treatment.”Conclusions: While nursing support is consistently utilized by oncologists in the management of EGFR rash in mCRC patients treated with panitumumab, use of dermatology support was inconsistent and varied significantly by region. This lack of consistency in toxicity management strategies highlights the need for increased physician education.

Disclaimer

This material on this page is ©2024 American Society of Clinical Oncology, all rights reserved. Licensing available upon request. For more information, please contact licensing@asco.org

Abstract Details

Meeting

2017 ASCO Annual Meeting

Session Type

Publication Only

Session Title

Publication Only: Gastrointestinal (Colorectal) Cancer

Track

Gastrointestinal Cancer—Colorectal and Anal

Sub Track

Other Colorectal and Anal Cancer

Citation

J Clin Oncol 35, 2017 (suppl; abstr e15170)

DOI

10.1200/JCO.2017.35.15_suppl.e15170

Abstract #

e15170

Abstract Disclosures