TOPLINE:
Patients with dermatologic conditions showed a 74% lower risk for malignancy with mycophenolate mofetil (MMF) than transplant patients, a study found.
METHODOLOGY:
- Researchers conducted a single-center retrospective chart of patients who had taken MMF for ≥ 5 years between 2012 and 2025 at Atrium Health Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center.
- The analysis included 126 patients (mean age, 64.2 years; 35.7% men) who received MMF for dermatologic conditions, 226 organ transplant recipients (mean age, 59.6 years; 61.5% men) who received MMF plus other immunosuppressive agents, and 296 patients (mean age, 64.1 year; 34.5% men) with dermatologic conditions who had no exposure to systemic immunosuppression. About two thirds of patients were White individuals and one fourth were Black individuals.
- Dermatologic patients received a mean daily MMF dose of 1390 mg over an average of 7.5 years, while transplant recipients received a lower mean daily dose of 807 mg for a mean duration of 9.9 years.
- Concomitant immunosuppressive therapy was administered to 40% of the patients with dermatologic conditions (MMF plus prednisone) and to 100% of transplant recipients (tacrolimus, prednisone, or cyclosporine).
- Researchers compared malignancy rates between the groups.
TAKEAWAY:
- Overall, 9.5% of the dermatologic patients who received MMF developed malignancies compared with 36% of the transplant recipients (P < .0001); the risk for malignancy was 74% lower in dermatologic patients treated with MMF (95% CI, 0.1487-0.4518).
- No difference was found between dermatologic patients who received MMF vs those without exposure to systemic immunosuppression (8.4%).
- Cutaneous malignancies were significantly more common in transplant patients than in dermatologic patients who received MMF (26.5% vs 5.6%; P < .0001).
- The prevalence of urological/reproductive cancers was higher in transplant patients than dermatologic patients treated with MMF (9.3% vs 2.4%; P = .0143).
IN PRACTICE:
“The use of MMF for dermatologic conditions does not appear to expose patients to the same malignancy risk as those treated with MMF and other chronic immunosuppressive treatments in the transplant setting and did not confer an elevated malignancy risk compared to dermatologic patients without systemic immunosuppression,” the authors of the study wrote.
SOURCE:
The study was led by Robin Yi, Department of Dermatology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina, and was published online on July 17 in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology.
LIMITATIONS:
Limitations included the MMF dosing variability and small sample size.
DISCLOSURES:
The study did not receive any funding. One author reported receiving research, speaking and consulting support from numerous pharmaceutical companies including Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline/Stiefel, AbbVie, and Janssen and disclosed being founder and part owner of Causa Research and holding stock in Sensal Health.
This article was created using several editorial tools, including AI, as part of the process. Human editors reviewed this content before publication.