Trial reportCancer medicine2019
Evaluation of EGFR inhibitor-mediated acneiform skin toxicity within the double-blind randomized EVITA trial: A thorough gender-specific analysis using the WoMo score.
Trial report in Cancer medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evaluation of EGFR inhibitor-mediated acneiform skin toxicity within the double-blind randomized EVITA trial: A thorough gender-specific analysis using the WoMo score.Cancer medicine · 2019Trial
- Jiedu Xiaozhen Granules for Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor-Mediated Skin Toxicity: Protocol for a Randomized Controlled Trial.JMIR research protocols · 2026Article
- Menahydroquinone-4 may play a key role in regulating CCL5 expression induced by epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitors.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Effects of Sex and Seasonal Climatic Changes on the Risk of Incidence of Anti-EGFR Therapy-Induced Rash in Cancer Patients: A Retrospective Study.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 12 institutions in 4 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Acne-like skin reactions frequently occur in patients undergoing treatment with drugs inhibiting the epidermal growth factor receptor. Recently, the effects of vitamin K1 containing cream (Reconval K1) as prophylactic skin treatment in addition to doxycycline were explored in a double-blind randomized phase II trial (EVITA) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer receiving cetuximab. EVITA demonstrated a trend towards less severe skin rash in Reconval K1-treated patients using the tripartite WoMo skin reaction grading score as a thorough tool for quantification of drug related skin reactions. This gender-specific analysis of the EVITA trial evaluated the application of the WoMo score for assessment of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-related skin toxicities according to treatment arm and gender. To show the robustness of results parametric and non-parametric statistical analyses were conducted. All three parts of the WoMo score independently demonstrated the superiority of the treatment arm (Reconval K1) regarding a significant reduction in acneiform skin reactions in women. Men did not benefit from Reconval K1 cream at any time point in none of the WoMo score analyses. The treatment effect in women was confirmed by the use of skin rash categories based on the final WoMo overall score and mixed effect longitudinal multiple linear regression analysis. The WoMo score represents a sensitive tool for studies exploiting treatments against EGFR mediated acne-like skin rash. Part C of the WoMo score seems to be sufficient for quantification of drug related skin toxicities in further studies. Standard WoMo skin reaction score values for future studies are provided.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.