Dermatological Manifestations Associated with Solid Tumours: Patterns, Prevalence and Clinical Implications
Abstract
Dermatological manifestations are common adverse effects observed in patients undergoing cancer treatment, particularly in those with solid tumours receiving chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Solid tumours represent a major group of malignancies, and their management often involves systemic therapies that can affect rapidly dividing cells, including those of the skin, hair, and nails. These treatment-related dermatological changes can vary in pattern and severity, and their high prevalence can significantly impact patients’ quality of life and treatment adherence. Understanding the patterns, prevalence, and clinical implications of these manifestations is important for early recognition and effective management, thereby improving overall patient care.The study aimed to determine the prevalence and describe the patterns of dermatological manifestations in patients with solid tumours receiving chemotherapy and targeted therapy. It also aimed to assess the severity of these manifestations using CTCAE grading and to evaluate their association with treatment modality and number of chemotherapy cycles.A prospective observational study was conducted on 100 patients with histologically confirmed solid tumours receiving chemotherapy and targeted therapy. Data were collected on demographic characteristics, cancer type, stage, treatment modalities, and dermatological manifestations. Severity was assessed using CTCAE grading. Statistical analysis was performed using descriptive statistics, and Chi-square test was applied to determine associations between variables. Adjuvant chemotherapy was the most commonly used treatment modality. The majority of patients received 3–5 cycles of chemotherapy. Paclitaxel and carboplatin were the most frequently used chemotherapeutic agents. Dermatological manifestations were observed in 87% of patients. Alopecia was the most common manifestation, followed by xerosis, hyperpigmentation, and melanonychia. The mean number of dermatological manifestations per patient was 1.91 ± 1.28. Most dermatological toxicities were of mild to moderate severity (Grade 1 and Grade 2). Only a small proportion of patients required dermatology referral (24%) and treatment modification (7%). No statistically significant association was observed between treatment modality (p = 0.652) or number of chemotherapy cycles (p = 0.618) and dermatological toxicity. Conclusion- Dermatological manifestations are highly prevalent among patients receiving chemotherapy and targeted therapy, with most experiencing multiple manifestations. The majority are mild to moderate and manageable with supportive care. Early recognition and management improve patient comfort and treatment adherence.
Keywords:
Dermatological manifestations, chemotherapy, targeted therapy, CTCAE grading, solid tumours, prevalence, skin toxicityDOI
https://doi.org/10.37022/wjcmpr.v8i2.408References
1. Yao JC, Hassan M, Phan A, Dagohoy C, Leary C, Mares JE, et al. One hundred years after "carcinoid": epidemiology of and prognostic factors for neuroendocrine tumors in 35,825 cases in the United States. J Clin Oncol. 2008;26(18):3063-72.
2. Stupp R, Mason WP, van den Bent MJ, Weller M, Fisher B, Taphoorn MJ, et al. Radiotherapy plus concomitant and adjuvant temozolomide for glioblastoma. N Engl J Med. 2005;352(10):987-96.
3. Lookingbill DP, Spangler N, Sexton FM. Skin involvement as the presenting sign of internal carcinoma. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1990;22(1):19-26.
4. Krathen RA, Orengo IF, Rosen T. Cutaneous metastasis: A meta-analysis of data. South Med J. 2003;96(2):164-7.
5. Lacouture ME, Anadkat MJ, Bensadoun RJ, Bryce J, Chan A, Epstein JB, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the prevention and treatment of EGFR inhibitor-associated dermatologic toxicities. Support Care Cancer. 2011;19(8):1079-95.
6. Blum JL, Jones SE, Buzdar AU, LoRusso PM, Kuter I, Vogel C, et al. Multicenter phase II study of capecitabine in paclitaxel-refractory metastatic breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 1999;17(2):485-93.
7. Conroy T, Desseigne F, Ychou M, Bouché O, Guimbaud R, Bécouarn Y, et al. FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med. 2011;364(19):1817-25.
8. Nast A, Dréno B, Bettoli V, Bukvic Mokos Z, Degitz K, Dressler C, et al. European evidence-based guideline for the treatment of acne. J EurAcad Dermatol Venereol. 2016;30(8):1261-8.
9. Sung H, Ferlay J, Siegel RL, Laversanne M, Soerjomataram I, Jemal A, et al. Global cancer statistics 2020. CA Cancer J Clin. 2021;71(3):209-49.
10. Siegel RL, Miller KD, Fuchs HE, Jemal A. Cancer statistics, 2023. CA Cancer J Clin. 2023;73(1):17-48.
11. Mathur P, Sathishkumar K, Chaturvedi M, Das P, Sudarshan KL, Santhappan S, et al. Cancer statistics, 2020: Report from National Cancer Registry Programme, India. JCO Glob Oncol. 2020;6:1063-75.
12. R. Prasad P. L., S. Govindaraj, P, Jahnavi, P. Popatrao Taru, T. Tummala, P. Vidiyala, N. Vidiyala, P. Balaji .Metal Oxide Functionalized Nanoparticles for the Treatment of Bacterial Infection: Synthesis,Characterization, and Therapeutic Applications. J. Appl. Organomet. Chem., 2025, 5(3), 232-257.
13. Pulusu VS, Chilamula S, Holkunde A, Gunturi R, Vidiyala P, Anekalla TR. Microplastics in the Environment: Sources, Detection Techniques, and Analytical Challenges. Open Access Libr. J. 2025;12:1-33.
14. White MC, Holman DM, Boehm JE, Peipins LA, Grossman M, Henley SJ. Age and cancer risk. Am J Prev Med. 2014;46(3 Suppl 1):S7-S15.
15. Miller KD, Nogueira L, Mariotto AB, Rowland JH, Yabroff KR, Alfano CM, et al. Cancer treatment and survivorship statistics, 2019. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(5):363-85.
16. Hanahan D, Weinberg RA. Hallmarks of cancer: The next generation. Cell. 2011;144(5):646-74.
17. Pulusu VS, Chilamula S, Holkunde A, Gunturi R, Vidiyala P, Bashetty SR. Microplastics and nanoplastics: Environmental pathways, ecological impacts, and regulatory perspectives. Open Access Library Journal. 2025;12(12):1-31
18. Arnold M, Pandeya N, Byrnes G, Renehan PAG, Stevens GA, Ezzati M, et al. Global burden of cancer attributable to high body mass index. Lancet Oncol. 2015;16(1):36-46.
19. Plummer M, de Martel C, Vignat J, Ferlay J, Bray F, Franceschi S. Global burden of cancers attributable to infections. Lancet Glob Health. 2016;4(9):e609-e616.
20. Velmurugan R, Ravikumar L, Teriveedhi VK, Vidiyala P, Jahnavi P, Vodeti R, Elumalai S. Optimized Idronoxil-Loaded Polycaprolactone Nanoparticles for Targeted Liver Cancer Therapy: A Novel Approach in Drug Delivery Systems.
21. López-Otín C, Blasco MA, Partridge L, Serrano M, Kroemer G. The hallmarks of aging. Cell. 2013;153(6):1194-217.
22. Grivennikov SI, Greten FR, Karin M. Immunity, inflammation, and cancer. Cell. 2010;140(6):883-99.
Published
Abstract Display: 17
PDF Downloads: 8 How to Cite
Issue
Section

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
