Sorafenib-related generalized eruptive keratoacanthomas (Grzybowski syndrome): a case report.

BACKGROUND: Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that targets Raf serine/threonine receptor tyrosine kinases and inhibits tumor cell growth and angiogenesis. Cutaneous toxicities of sorafenib are common, including cutaneous eruptions (such as truncal erythema and seborrheic-dermatitis-like changes) and hand-foot syndrome. Keratoacanthomas and squamous cell carcinomas have been reported previously; however, we report a case of multiple eruptive keratoacanthomas in the form of Grzybowski syndrome after initiation of sorafenib. CASE PRESENTATION: We report a 63-year-old Caucasian male who developed multiple cutaneous eruptive keratoacanthomas after starting sorafenib 400 mg twice daily. He had a known history of hepatitis-C-related cirrhosis and hepatocellular carcinoma, and previously had actinic keratosis and skin squamous cell carcinoma excision. Approximately two and a half months after starting sorafenib, the patient initially developed two lesions, one on each forearm, and after excision, these lesions demonstrated histological features of squamous cell carcinoma. One month later, the patient presented with approximately 48 new skin lesions of varying size on the back, bilateral upper limbs, and face requiring excisional biopsy of a large number of these lesions. Histopathology showed eruptive invasive keratoacanthomas (Grzybowski syndrome). Sorafenib was temporarily stopped and subsequently restarted at a lower dose. Acitretin 25 mg daily was commenced after few weeks, and no further keratoacanthomas developed during his treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We report a unique case of sorafenib-associated Grzybowski syndrome. Temporary interruption and dose reduction of sorafenib and use of acitretin appeared to prevent further development of keratoacanthomas.

What contributes to resilience in cancer patients? A principal component analysis of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale.

PURPOSE: Research suggests resilience is a complex multifactorial construct, which may improve health outcomes in cancer, but significant controversy exists regarding its definition and measurement. This study aimed to determine the components of resilience and their relative weight, as measured by the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale in cancer patients. METHODS: As part of a larger study, a questionnaire including the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale was distributed to 228 cancer patients. Principal component analysis was performed to identify the components of resilience measured by the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale. RESULTS: Principal component analysis yielded six factors: (1) personal strength and problem-based coping, (2) spirituality/fate, (3) social support, (4) adaptability and flexibility, (5) giving best efforts and (6) self-determination, explaining 64.27% of the variance. CONCLUSION: The Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale accounts for approximately two-thirds of variance in resilience in cancer patients, but 36% of the total variance remains unexplained, suggesting there are still unexplored determinants of resilience in cancer. Identification of these determinants may improve measurement of resilience in cancer through refinement of existing resilience measures or development of cancer-specific measures. Given the associations found within this study, interventions targeted towards improving coping strategies in at-risk individuals, and ensuring they have adequate social and spiritual support may improve resilience, although additional research is required to verify this.

Do cancer patients use the term resilience? A systematic review of qualitative studies.

PURPOSE: Resilience is a dynamic process of positive adaptation to adversity, including cancer. While the term is used frequently by researchers, controversy exists over its conceptualisation and little is known if and how cancer patients use the term resilience. We examined qualitative studies exploring cancer patient experiences/perceptions of resilience to understand: (a) definitions of resilience as identified by patients and researchers and (b) the themes relating to attributes of resilience as identified by patients. METHODS: Four electronic databases (MEDLINE, PsycINFO, SCOPUS, and CINAHL) were searched from database inception to November 2017, identifying qualitative studies of adult cancer patients/survivors which included resilience and cancer in the title, abstract, or medical subject headings. Articles were excluded if resilience was not a theme or outcome or was discussed primarily in the context of non-individuals. Thematic analysis was used to code studies and generate analytical themes, and a single author identified definitions of resilience within the studies. RESULTS: Five hundred and seventy-three non-duplicate citations were screened, resulting in 65 citations screened for full-text review. Of these, 33 were excluded, leaving 32 studies. Four thematic categories emerged; coping strategies, social support, spirituality, and growth, within which 79 individual themes were identified. Eight researcher definitions and no patient definitions of resilience were identified. CONCLUSION: This review found no cancer patient definitions of resilience and that cancer patients are seldom quoted using the term resilience directly, instead identifying coping strategies, social support, growth, and spirituality as attributes associated with resilience.