Targeted therapy-and chemotherapy-associated skin toxicities: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Jingyi Francess, Magdoleen H. Farah, Tarek Nayfeh, Konstantinos Malandris, Apostolos Manolopoulos, Pamela K. Ginex, Bashar Hasan, Hayley Dunnack, Rami Abd-Rabu, Moutie Rami Rajjoub, Larry James Prokop, Rebecca L. Morgan, M. Hassan Murad

Research output: Contribution to journalReview articlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations


PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION: Preventing and managing skin toxicities can minimize treatment disruptions and improve well-being. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and management of cancer treatment-related skin toxicities. LITERATURE SEARCH: The authors systematically searched for comparative studies published before April 1, 2019. Study selection and appraisal were conducted by pairs of independent reviewers. DATA EVALUATION: The random-effects model was used to conduct meta-analysis when appropriate. SYNTHESIS: 39 studies (6,006 patients) were included; 16 of those provided data for meta-analysis. Prophylactic minocycline reduced the development of all-grade and grade 1 acneform rash in patients who received erlotinib. Prophylaxis with pyridoxine 400 mg in capecitabine-treated patients lowered the risk of grade 2 or 3 hand-foot syndrome. Several treatments for hand-foot skin reaction suggested benefit in heterogeneous studies. Scalp cooling significantly reduced the risk for severe hair loss or total alopecia associated with chemotherapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Certainty in the available evidence was limited for several interventions, suggesting the need for future research.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)E149-E160
JournalOncology nursing forum
Issue number5
StatePublished - 2020


  • Cancer
  • Chemotherapy
  • Meta-analysis
  • Skin toxicity
  • Systematic review

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology(nursing)


Dive into the research topics of 'Targeted therapy-and chemotherapy-associated skin toxicities: Systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this