Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Insights on afatinib and toxic epidermal necrolysis/Stevens–Johnson syndrome
  1. Eleonora Castellana,
  2. Maria Rachele Chiappetta
  1. Hospital Pharmacy, University Hospital Città della Salute e della Scienza of Turin, Turin, Italy
  1. Correspondence to Dr Eleonora Castellana; ecastellana{at}cittadellasalute.to.it

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

We have reviewed with great interest the case report published by Belančić et al entitled ‘Afatinib-induced toxic epidermal necrolysis: A case report with a literature review’.1 This study presents an interesting and significant case in the fields of oncology and pharmacovigilance, focusing on a rare but severe adverse event in an oncological patient treated with afatinib. The research focuses on the detailed documentation of toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN)/Stevens–Johnson syndrome (SJS), a potentially life-threatening condition that manifested 8 days after the initiation of drug therapy. The authors conducted a systematic literature review, identifying only five previous cases. This highlights the rarity of the event and the importance of accurately documenting it to expand knowledge of the drug’s side effects. The study provides valuable insights into the immunological mechanisms underlying TEN/SJS, …

View Full Text

Footnotes

  • Contributors The work was conceived by EC, who was also responsible for data processing. MRC drafted the manuscript, and both authors reviewed and validated the work. Artificial intelligence (AI) was used to support translation.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.