Thalidomide Analogue Drug Eruption Along the Lines of Blaschko
Practice Points
- Dermatologists should be aware of the variety of cutaneous adverse events that can arise from the use of immunotherapeutic agents for hematologic malignancies.
- Some cutaneous reactions to immunotherapeutic medications, such as pityriasiform eruption and blaschkitis, generally are benign and may not necessitate halting an important therapy.
The rash due to lenalidomide has been described as morbilliform, urticarial, dermatitic, acneform, and undefined.7 Lenalidomide-induced rash typically develops during the first month of therapy, similar to our patient’s presentation. It has even been observed in the first week of therapy.8 Severe reactions such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome and toxic epidermal necrolysis have been reported.5,6 Risk factors associated with rash secondary to lenalidomide include advanced age (≥70 years), presence of Bence-Jones protein-type MM in urine, and no prior chemotherapy.8 Our patient had 2 of these risk factors: advanced age and no prior chemotherapy for MM. The exact pathogenesis by which lenalidomide leads to a pityriasiform eruption, as in our patient, or to a rash in general is unclear. Studies have hypothesized that a lenalidomide-induced rash could be attributable to a delayed hypersensitivity type IV reaction or to a reaction related to the molecular mechanism of action of the drug.9
At the molecular level, the antimyeloma effects of lenalidomide include promoting degradation of transcription factors IKZF1 and IKZF3, which subsequently increases production of IL-2.1,2,9 Recombinant IL-2 has been associated with an increased incidence of rash in other cancers.9 Overexpression of programmed death 1(PD-1) and its ligand (PD-L1) has been demonstrated in MM; lenalidomide has been shown to downregulate both PD-1 and PD-L1. Patients receiving PD-1 and PD-L1 inhibitors commonly have developed rash.9 However, the association between lenalidomide and its downregulation of PD-1 and PD-L1 leading to rash has not been fully elucidated. Given the multiple malignancies in our patient—MM, prostate cancer, malignant carcinoid tumor—an underlying paraneoplastic phenomenon may be possible. Additionally, because our patient initially received dexamethasone along with lenalidomide, the manifestation of the initial pityriasiform rash may have been less severe due to the steroid use. Although our patient underwent a 2-month drug holiday following the initial pityriasiform eruption, most lenalidomide-induced rashes do not necessitate discontinuation of the drug.5,7
Our patient’s secondary drug eruption was clinically suggestive of lenalidomide-induced blaschkitis. A report of a German patient with plasmacytoma described a unilateral papular exanthem that developed 4 months after lenalidomide was initiated.10 The papular exanthem following the lines of Blaschko lines extended from that patient’s posterior left foot to the calf and on to the thigh and flank,10 which was more extensive than our patient’s eruption. Blaschkitis in this patient resolved with a corticosteroid cream and UV light therapy10; lenalidomide was not discontinued, similar to our patient.
The pathogenesis of our patient’s secondary eruption that preferentially involved the lines of Blaschko is unclear. After the initial pityriasiform eruption, the secondary eruption was blaschkitis. Distinguishing dermatomes from the lines of Blaschko, which are thought to represent pathways of epidermal cell migration and proliferation during embryologic development, is important. Genodermatoses such as incontinentia pigmenti and hypomelanosis of Ito involve the lines of Blaschko11; other disorders in the differential diagnosis of linear configurations include linear lichen planus, linear cutaneous lupus erythematosus, linear morphea, and lichen striatus.11 Notably, drug-induced blaschkitis is rare.
Cutaneous adverse reactions from thalidomide analogues are relatively common. Our case of lenalidomide-associated blaschkitis that developed following an initial pityriasiform drug eruption in a patient with MM highlights that dermatologists need to collaborate with the oncologist regarding the severity of drug eruptions to determine if the patient should continue treatment through the cutaneous eruptions or discontinue a vital medication.