e230 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions Journal section: Oral Medicine and Pathology Publication Types: Review Medication related to pigmentation of oral mucosa María del Carmen Mallagray-Montero, Luis Alberto Moreno-López, Rocío Cerero-Lapiedra, María Castro- Janeiro, Cristina Madrigal-Martínez-Pereda Departamento de Especialidades Clínicas Odontológicas. Facultad de Odontología, Universidad Complutense de Madrid Correspondence: Pza Ramón y Cajal s/n, 28043 Madrid lamoreno@ucm.es Received: 13/09/2021 Accepted: 02/03/2022 Abstract Background: The diagnosis of oral melanotic lesions is, more often than not, challenging in the clinical practice due to the fact that there are several reasons which may cause an increase in pigmentation on localized or gener- alized areas. Among these, medication stands out. Material and Methods: In this work, we have carried out a review in the reference pharma database: Micromedex® followed by a review of the scientific published literature to analyse coincidences and possible discrepancies. Results: Our findings show that there are several prescription drugs that can cause pigmented lesions in the oral mucosa. This must be known by clinicians in order to properly diagnose pigmented lesions. We have identified a set of 21 medicaments which cause these lesions, some of which are used frequently in the clinic, such as Metro- nidazole, Amitriptyline, conjugated oestrogens and Chlorhexidine gluconate. We also found discrepancies with the data published in specialized literature, some of which wasn’t reflected in the Summary of Product Charac- teristics. Conclusions: Our work highlights the importance of the proper communication of adverse drug reactions (ADR) by health professionals in order to provide thorough and accurate information and diagnosis. Key words: Adverse drug reactions, oral pigmentation, micromedex. doi:10.4317/medoral.25110 Mallagray-Montero MC, Moreno-López LA, Cerero-Lapiedra R, Cas- tro-Janeiro M, Madrigal-Martínez-Pereda C. Medication related to pig- mentation of oral mucosa Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Article Number:25110 http://www.medicinaoral.com/ © Medicina Oral S. L. C.I.F. B 96689336 - pISSN 1698-4447 - eISSN: 1698-6946 eMail: medicina@medicinaoral.com Indexed in: Science Citation Index Expanded Journal Citation Reports Index Medicus, MEDLINE, PubMed Scopus, Embase and Emcare Indice Médico Español Introduction The term Adverse Drug Reactions (ADR) was defined in 1972 by the World Health Organization (WHO) but has since undergone two modifications, first in 1995 and then in 2007 after which it was concluded that the term ADR should also include the involuntary and harmful effects derived from medication errors as well as uses beyond commercialization (1-3). ADR constitute the most frequent complications related to the use of medication and are a major cause of mor- bidity and mortality (4). In fact in 2007 the WHO in- cluded ADR in the list of the ten leading causes of death worldwide (5). Pigmented lesions of the oral mucosa are areas that have undergone changes in their physiological coloration due to the deposit of endogenous or exogenous pigments. e231 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions Pigmented lesions constitute approximately 2% of the diagnoses made through biopsy in the oral cavity. In most cases, the clinician is dependent on the information on the patient’s medical records to make an accurate di- agnosis and find the underlying cause of pigmentation, since neither the appearance nor the histopathological analysis are normally sufficient to make an accurate di- agnosis (6,7). Oral pigmentation induced by prescription drugs can be either melanocytic or non-melanocytic in origin, Fig. 1. Regardless of the origin, hyperpigmentation induced by medication usually causes a widespread change of colour which is in contrast with the physiologic pigmen- tation (8). This has been widely documented in publi- cations that highlight the cause-and-effect relationship between the administration of a specific drug and the appearance of pigmented lesions in the oral cavity (9). These lesions may appear immediately after the admin- istration of a medicine or after a longer period such as days or even years (10). In order to make a proper diagnosis, it is important to know if these mucosal areas with a change in colouring have arisen as an ADR to a certain medication. Patients presenting these lesions must be monitored and a proper follow-up of the lesions needs to be done in order to avoid misdiagnosis. In addition, a correct record of the The aetiology of these lesions is diverse and undeter- mined in some cases as they may arise by a physiologi- cal, reactive, or neoplastic mechanism, as well as be part of a systemic disorder or even be idiopathic (4). The pigment accumulated in these lesions can have an intrinsic, as is the case of melanin, or extrinsic origin, which on the other hand are formed by the accumula- tion of exogenous substances. Melanocytic lesions ap- pear due to an increase in melanin production and, less frequently, due to an increase in the number of melano- cytes themselves. Additionally, the cause of this accu- mulation can have an endogenous or exogenous origin (6,7). Thus, pigmented lesions can be either endogenous or exogenous in origin and the pigment itself can be in- trinsic (melanic) or extrinsic (non melanic), as shown in Fig. 1 (8). The aforementioned lesions are generally flat or macu- lar. They can either be localized or diffuse and the pig- mentation can vary from brown to grey, blue, and even black. Due to the similarities between these lesions it is of the utmost importance to avoid diagnosis based solely on clinical characteristics as this could lead to an erroneous diagnosis (8). Moreover, a histopathologi- cal analysis to confirm the diagnosis may be necessary in some patients, since some melanotic lesions can be malignant (6). Fig. 1: Classification of the most frequent melanocytic lesions according to their aetiology (modified from Tavares et al.). e232 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions together with the ADR itself. This clause was thus coupled with the terms “Hyperpigmentation”, “Discol- oration”,” Staining”, “Spots”, “Melanosis” “Tanning” and “Colour change”. The results were analysed and curated, selecting only those which applied to the oral mucosa, excluding other extraoral localizations as well as the hard tissues of the oral cavity. To this end, a list including the prescriptions related to the search terms used was obtained. Then, after a thorough review of the ADR described in each of them, the ones which de- scribed hyperpigmentation or any of its synonyms in the hard tissues of the oral cavity (teeth) or not within the oral cavity were discarded. Lastly, duplicated medi- cines were excluded. The most important characteristics related to the ADR caused by each drug were described considering the fol- lowing parameters: 1) Frequency of appearance 2) Localization 3) Colour 4) Size 5) Duration 6) Drug administration route A search was then carried out in Pubmed and WOS fo- cusing on each of the prescription drugs identified, to confirm the data compiled using Micromedex®. Results Results obtained according to the search strategy are shown in Fig. 2. The number of hits per term used in the search was as follows: Hyperpigmentation 46, Dis- coloration 10, Pigmentation 4, Staining 14, Spots 125, Melanosis 5, Tanning 1, and Colour change 26. Only those relevant to the mucosa were selected, excluding other extraoral localizations as well as the hard tissues of the oral cavity. This led to a selection of a total of 29 drugs which were further reduced to 21 after excluding duplicates (Fig. 1). These prescription drugs were then classified according to therapeutic families as shown in Table 1. The characteristics of the ADR themselves are described in Table 2. We have found scientific reports supporting Microme- dex® results for every medicament. The results show that for 16 out of the 21 medica- ments selected the report was of generalized lesions, for 4 localized lesions were reported and there was 1 in which the lesion reported evolved from focal to generalized. Regarding localization the most frequent is the tongue (11 drugs) with the dorsum being the most prevalent area, whereas the lateral borders of the tongue are only related to hydroxyurea. The buccal mucosa is the second most frequent localization fol- lowed by the gum, hard palate and lips. The floor of the mouth is the least frequent location, damaged only by conjugated oestrogens. ADR in the oral cavity in response to the prescription needs to be made (9,10). The information about ADR is registered in the Sum- mary of Product Characteristics (SPC), and can be consulted in different sources. For instance in Spain, through the Spanish Medicine and Medical products Agency (Agencia Española de Medicamentos y Produc- tos Sanitarios, AEMPS) on its website under the Online Center of Information about Medicines (Centro de In- formacion del Medicamento de la AEMPS, CIMA) or through the system of Pharmaceutical Surveillance on Adverse Reactions Suspicion (Farmacovigilancia Espa- ñola de Datos o de las sospechas de Reacciones Adver- sas, FEDRA). Another non-national source would be through public access drugs databases or scientific databases. Among the first one can find Micromedex® (IBM MICRO- MEDEX IBM Watson Health products Corporation 2020), a tool widely used for the medical management of prescription drugs. Micromedex® consists of a set of medical, pharmacological and toxicological infor- mation databases. In this publication this database was used because it allows to identify contraindications, ADR reactions and incompatibilities between different drugs and pathologies in a clear and prompt manner. The latter category of databases includes Pubmed and WOS (Web of Science), scientific databases which are not specific to drug management. - Rationale and objectives Health professionals have a legal obligation to notify every suspicion of ADR. However, these reactions are usually mild and it is possible some go unnoticed or unreported. Therefore, their study is often through the publication of clinical cases or series thereof. There is no review which provides a specific and systematic re- search of ADR compared with the published cases, to the authors’ knowledge. This paper aims to identify those drugs in whose SPC there is evidence of a relationship with melanotic le- sions in the oral mucosa. Additionally, we aim to verify that the data registered in the SPC match the information available in the sci- entific literature. Material and Methods The Micromedex® database was selected for this study based on the criteria established by Rodriguez-Terol in 2008 (11), namely that it is an international database, publicly available, known by health professionals and which has been referenced in several papers (12-14). The search strategy was defined following the User’s Guide instructions (IBM Micromedex® User Guide). The instructions specified that in order to enable the identification of drugs that cause a specific ADR, the search should include the clause: ”Drugs that cause…”, e233 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions Family Drugs Anti-retrovirals Abacavir sulphate / Lamivudine / Zidovudine Zidovudine Antibiotics Minicycline Ethylsuccinate of erythromycin/ Sulfisoxazol acetyl Linezolid Antimalarial Pyrimethamine Chloroquine Hydroxychloroquine Dermatological agents Afamelanotide Silver nitrate Prussian blue Chlorhexidine gluconate Agents to CNS Bremelanotide Antineoplastics Hidroxyurea Imatinib Peginterferon alfa- 2b Contraceptives Conjugate of estrogens Antiulcerous drugs Subcitrate of bismuth potassium/ Metronidazole/ Tetracycline Antidepressants Amitriptyline Antiparkinsonian drugs Levodopa/ Benserazide Mucosa protectors Palifermin Fig. 2: Search strategy for medication related to oral pigmentation for Micromedex® database. Table 1: Classification of prescription drugs according to their pharmacological family. e234 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions Drug Spread Location Colouring Duration Reported incidence Route of administration Afamelanotide Generalised Lips - - 4% Subcutaneous Abacavir sulphate / Lamivudine / Zid- ovudine Generalised Oral mucosa - - - Oral Amitriptyline Generalised Lingual dorsum Black - - Oral Subcitrate of bismuth potassium, metronidazole and tetracycline Generalised Lingual dorsum Darkening Temporary <1% Oral Bremelanotide Localised Gum Hyperpigmen- tation Temporary /permanente dose dependant 1% Subcutaneous Chlorhexidine gluconate Generalised Lingual dorsum Yellow / brown Individual factors Concentration Duration of treatment >56% Topical use Chloroquine Generalised Lingual dorsum Mucosa oral Hard palate Blue / grey Duration of treatment Interruption of treatment ------ Oral Estrogens conjugate Generalised Lips Gum Floor of the mouth Brown Long duration ----- Intravenous Oral Vaginal Ethylsuccinate of erythromycin / Sulfisoxazol acetyl Generalised Lingual dorsum Brown / black Few days ------ Oral Hydroxychloroquine Generalised Gum Blue / greyish After 6 days of treatment ----- Oral Hidroxyurea Localised focal bilateral Lateral borders of the tongue Brown After one year of treatment ----- Oral Imatinib Generalised Hard palate Blue / dark blue/ grey After 10-13 years ----- Oral Levodopa/ Bensera- zide Generalised Lingual dorsum - - ----- Oral Linezolid Generalised Lingual dorsum - Disappearance after a month of treatment ---- Intravenous oral Minocycline Generalised/ Localised Lips Oral mucosa, Hard palate Gum Blue / black / grey Dose dependant Length of treatment Age Autoimmune disease 22.5% Intravenous Oral Subgingival Topical Palifermine Localised (painful maculas) Lingual dorsum Oral mucosa - Two months after interruption Non-recurrent 17% Intravenous Peginterferon α2b Generalised Localised in evolution Lingual dorsum Dark brown Improvement after 6 months of interruption of treatment ---- Oral Prussian blue Generalised Oral mucosa Greyish- blue / black - ----- Oral Perimetamina Generalised Hard palate Hyperpigmen- tation After 6 months of interruption ---- Oral Silver nitrate Generalised Lingual dorsum Oral mucosa Greyish- blue / black Permanent ----- Topical Zidovudine Localised (macula) Oral mucosa - Appeared after 8 months of treatment Dissapeared after 2 months ----- Intravenous Oral Table 2: Description of the clinical variables related to melanotic lesions produced by prescription drugs. e235 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions On the other hand, colouring is not specifically notified in some of the reports, whereas for others it is described as blue, brown, grey, black, just darkening, hyperpig- mentation or even yellow. The duration of the lesions depends on each prescription and its mechanism of action. For most of the prescrip- tions it is dose-dependent. Evidence of disappearance of the lesions after the withdrawal of the medication caus- ing them has not been found. Discussion There are many medication databases in different for- mats, open access as well as behind a paywall. Never- theless, in the clinical practice they are seldom used, which is not further aided by the fact that they are some- times complicated to navigate. This is not only due to the fact that there is a great number of databases and information sources available but also to the discrepan- cies between the information they provide and the qual- ity of the databases themselves (12,13). CIMA was chosen as a good candidate for the search, as it is the official source of information on medicaments in Spain, however we found a limitation, namely that the search is limited to the prescriptions whose SPC has been fractioned by the laboratory in the format required by the CIMA website. This information is not available for many medications. Thus, before we could start our search we needed to find a database which not only allowed to identify me- dicaments which cause a specific ADR, but which also classified the ADR according to its severity and amount of evidence supporting it and furthermore allowed to contribute bibliographic references and a description of the clinical handling (11). These guidelines were introduced by Rodriguez-Terol et al. in 2008 when they conducted a research work aiming to identify available databases which deal with pharmacological interactions and assess their quality. We selected Micromedex® since it enabled us to carry out this screening according to the ADR of our choice, pigmented lesions (11). These pigmented lesions can appear, as mentioned ear- lier, immediately after the administration of a specific medication, after just one dose or after having taken it for several days or years (8). Currently, the mecha- nism that causes the pigmentation is unclear, but it is believed that it could be due to an increase in the num- ber of melanocytes in the tissue, an increase in mela- nin synthesis or deposit of metabolites derived from the prescription drugs in the tissue (9). Some medications may also generate a change in the colouring of the hard tissues such as the alveolar bone or the tooth and it has been observed that the appearance of each type of le- sion depends on the type of prescription drug that has caused it, suggesting different action mechanisms. The published literature records antineoplastic drugs as the most frequent pharmacological family related to the ap- pearance of melanocytic pigmentation, followed by an- timalarial medicines (15). These lesions may appear in the mucous membranes in a focal or multiple way, localised or diffuse. After ana- lysing the corresponding published literature, we con- firmed that the locations where these pigmentations ap- pear most frequently are the hard palate, gums and buccal mucosa. This is in agreement with our findings (16,17). Most prescription drugs identified present a dose-re- lated relationship with the intensity and extension of pigmentation. Lesions usually disappear when the ad- ministration of the medication is interrupted. In the lit- erature we found cases of lesions that did not disappear after the interruption of the pharmacological therapy in patients treated with minocycline, imatinib and hy- droxychloroquine (18-20) Concerning the extension of the pigmented lesions, we can conclude that the pigmentation of the mucosa is more often generalised than focal. The descriptions of the colour of the lesions are subjective and do not enable us to draw clear conclusions about the prevalence of one colour or another. In the systematic review based on case reports and se- ries thereof published in 2020 by Binmadi et al. (10) they reported that the medication that was more fre- quently associated with these pigmentations is imatinib. The hyperpigmentation caused by this prescription has been described in several studies, such as the ones pub- lished by Mcpherson et al. 2009 (21), Dai et al. 2017 (22), Steele et al. 2012 (23), all of which concluded that the duration of the treatment was the main risk factor for the formation of bigger and darker hyperpigmented lesions. Imatinib causes a well-defined blueish to greyish pig- mentation on the hard palate. Its action mechanism is based on the inhibition of the channel c-KIT, involved in the development of melanocytes and their regulation. This also explains why histologically, the oral mucosa in these patients presents a deposit of melanocytes on the lamina propria (24). As mentioned before the literature mentions larger and darker lesions in correlation with the duration of the ad- ministration (21-23). Another antineoplastic drug identified is hydroxyurea. There are published reports confirming the relationship between the oral pigmentation and the administration of this drug. The most usual location is the tongue (25). Regarding antimalarial drugs, the pigmented lesions re- lated to chloroquine and hydrochloroquine correspond to diffuse blue to grey areas located in the hard palate and the buccal mucosa. In some cases this pigmentation has been reported to spread to the lingual side and gin- gival margin. The biopsies performed on these patients reveal deposits of dark brown granulated pigments in e236 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions the lamina propria, with infiltration of fibroblasts and macrophages in the subepithelial and perivascular ar- eas. This hyperpigmentation of the mucosa is reverted when the therapy with the antimalarial drug is reduced or interrupted. A long-lasting administration (up to 15 years) of antimalarial drugs was associated to serious diffuse blueish to grey or black lesions on the hard pal- ate with cutaneous alterations (26-28). It is worth not- ing that the use of these medications in the treatment of Sars-CoV-2 will shed more light on this matter in the future, after a follow- up of the affected population (29). Other medications identified by the search which coin- cided with those mentioned in the literature are minocy- cline and zidovudine. Minocycline is an antibiotic that produces hyperpigmentation in the hard palate, buccal mucosa, sublingual area and gum. Greyish patches in the dorsum of the tongue also appear. In the clinical studies we have analysed, patients who presented pig- mentation associated to minocycline had undergone a long-term therapy and the pigmentation disappeared af- ter having interrupted the treatment for six months (15). Zidovudine is an anti-retroviral treatment which pro- duces pigmentation six to eight months after treatment onset. The associated lesions consist of a brownish patch or stain in the buccal mucosa and lips (30). These lesions disappeared roughly two months after the inter- ruption of the treatment. It is thought that its mechanism of action could be due to an increase in the production of melanin as there is an increase in the secretion of the melanocyte-stimulating hormone (31). Another antimi- crobial drug identified in our search is pyrimethamine, an anti-protozoan used to prevent malaria, for which some cases associated to hyperpigmentation in areas of the palate have been published (32). In our search in Micromedex® we also found the combined treatment of abacavir sulphate/lamivudine/zidovudine as a cause of oral pigmentation. Among the dermatological treatments, there is evidence that afamelanotide (used in the prevention of phototox- icity in patients with erythropoietic porphyria) produc- es pigmentation in the mucosa as a side effect, which is registered as an ADR. Its mechanism of action is caused by an increase in the number of melanocytes in the tis- sue, resulting in brownish melanocytic lesions (33). Conversely, other medications such as chlorhexidine, prussian blue or silver nitrate cause hyperpigmenta- tion due to the breakdown of the pigmented metabolites which constitute them. These changes in colouring of the mucosa are reversible. In our search we found that the only pigmentations whose course includes painful symptoms are the ones caused by palifermin. The hyperpigmentation this pre- scription drug produces appears as round-shaped le- sions restricted to the tongue and buccal mucosa, and the pain associated to it usually disappears two days after its onset. The pigmented lesions disappear 20 days later. There are drugs identified in systematic reviews as in- ductors of oral pigmentation, but they do not have this ADR registered in their SCP and that is the reason why we could not find them in our search. Among them we can highlight: golimumab, whose SCP does not men- tion hyperpigmentation neither in the oral cavity nor in the skin (15); ketoconazole, not described in any SPC (10); amlodipine, whose SPC only describes change of pigmentation on the skin (34); retigabine, an antiepilep- tic drug which has not been commercialised in Europe since 2018; clofazimine, an antileprotic whose SPC is only associated with skin lesions. All of the above indicates that there is a certain lack of registering pigmented lesions as an ADR through the official channels, perhaps due to their limited clinical significance. This could interfere with the proper up- date of the SPCs and reduce the available information regarding ADR. Conclusions It is important to consider that patients with hyperpig- mented lesions as ADR to a drug must be monitored for an accurate diagnosis and evaluation of possible chang- es in the lesion; despite the fact that so far none of these lesions have become malignant. Micromedex® is a useful tool for identifying drugs ac- cording to their ADR, even though the search algorithm presents limitations since it does not allow a combined search of different terms, thus impeding the identifi- cation of the SPCs of certain medications. It would be highly desirable for the CIMA to have a comprehensive ADR search application. With the aim of performing an accurate diagnosis of the pigmented lesions of the mucosa in mind, it is crucial to know which drugs may cause them and therefore all cli- nicians should accurately report the ADR to any given medication. References 1. Venulet J, Bankowski Z. Harmonising adverse drug reaction ter- minology: the role of the Council for International Organizations of Medical Sciences. Drug Saf. 1998;19:165-72. 2. Edwards IR, Aronson JK. Adverse drug reactions: definitions, di- agnosis, and management. Lancet. 2000;356:1255-9. 3. Goedecke T, Ord K, Newbould V, Brosch S, Arlett P. Medication Errors: New EU Good Practice Guide on Risk Minimisation and Er- ror Prevention. Drug Saf. 2016;39:491-500. 4. Pirmohamed M, James S, Meakin S, Green C, Scott AK, Walley TJ, et al. Adverse drug reactions as cause of admission to hospital: prospective analysis of 18 820 patients. BMJ. 2004;329:15-9. 5. Donaldson LJ, Kelley ET, Dhingra-Kumar N, Kieny MP, Sheikh A. Medication Without Harm: WHO's Third Global Patient Safety Challenge. Lancet. 2017;389:1680-1. 6. Rosebush MS, Briody AN, Cordell KG. Black and Brown: Non- neoplastic Pigmentation of the Oral Mucosa. Head Neck Pathol. 2019;13:47-55. 7. Tavares TS, Meirelles DP, de Aguiar MCF, Caldeira PC. Pigment- e237 Med Oral Patol Oral Cir Bucal. 2022 May 1;27 (3):e230-7. Medication and oral pigmented lesions ed lesions of the oral mucosa: A cross-sectional study of 458 histo- pathological specimens. Oral Dis. 2018;24:1484-91. 8. Abdollahi M, Radfar M. A review of drug-induced oral reactions.J Contemp Dent Pract. 2003;4:10-31. 9. Eisen D. Disorders of pigmentation in the oral cavity. Clin Derma- tol. 2000;18:579-87. 10. Binmadi NO, Bawazir M, Alhindi N, Mawardi H, Mansour G, Alhamed S, et al. Medication-Induced Oral Hyperpigmentation: A Systematic Review. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2020;14:1961-68. 11. Rodríguez-Terol A, Caraballo MO, Palma D, Santos-Ramos B, Molina T, Desongles T, et al. Quality of interaction database man- agement systems. Farm Hosp. 2009;33:134-46. 12. Abarca J, Malone DC, Armstrong EP, Grizzle AJ, Hansten PD, van Bergen RC, et al. Concordance of severity ratings provided in four drug interaction compendia. J Am Pharm Assoc. 2004;44:136-41. 13. Kontsioti E, Maskell S, Bensalem A, Dutta B, Pirmohamed M. Similarity and Consistency Assessment of Three Major Online Drug-Drug Interaction Resources. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2022. 14. Vitry AI. Comparative assessment of four drug interaction com- pendia. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;63:709-14. 15. Tosios KI, Kalogirou EM, Sklavounou A. Drug-associated hy- perpigmentation of the oral mucosa: report of four cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2018;125:e54-66. 16. Sreeja C, Ramakrishnan K, Vijayalakshmi D, Devi M, Aesha I, Vijayabanu B. Oral pigmentation: a review. J Pharm Bioallied Sci. 2015;7:403-8. 17. Gaeta GM, Satriano RA, Baroni A. Oral pigmented lesions. Clin Dermatol. 2002;20:286-8. 18. Siller GM, Tod MA, Savage NW. Minocycline-induced oral pig- mentation. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1994;30:350-4. 19. Tosios KI, Kalogirou EM, Sklavounou A. Drug-associated hy- perpig- mentation of the oral mucosa: report of four cases. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol. 2018;125:e54-66. 20. Bahloul E, Jallouli M, Garbaa S, Marzouk S, Masmoudi A, Turki H, et al. Hydroxychloroquine-induced hyperpigmentation in sys- temic diseases: prevalence, clinical features and risk factors: a cross- sectional study of 41 cases. Lupus. 2017;26:1304-8. 21. Khoo TL, Catalano A, Supple S, Chong L, Yeoh SC, Yeung S, et al. Hyperpigmentation of the hard palate associated with imatinib therapy for chronic myeloid leukemia with a genetic variation in the proto-oncogene c-KIT. Leuk Lymphoma. 2013;54:186-8. 22. Mcpherson T, Sherman V, Turner R. Imatinib-associated hyper- pigmentation, a side effect that should be recognized. J Eur Acad Dermatol Venereol. 2009;23:82-3. 23. Dai J, Belum VR, Wu S, Sibaud V, Lacouture ME. Pigmentary changes in patients treated with targeted anticancer agents:a systemat- ic review and meta-analysis. J Am Acad Dermatol. 2017;77:902-10.e2. 24. Steele JC, Triantafyllou A, Rajlawat BPFE, Field EA. Oral muco- sal hyperpigmentation and horizontal melanonychia caused by ima- tinib.Clin Exp Dermatol. 2012;37:432-3. 25. Oliveira SR, de Azevedo Branco LG, Rocha AL, Travassos DV, Magalhães GHR, Fonseca FP, et al. Association of oral mucosa hyper- pigmentation with imatinib mesylate use: a cross-sectional study and a systematic literature review. Clin Oral Investig. 2019;23:4371-82. 26. Veillet-Lemay G, Haber RM. Hydroxyurea-Induced Oral Hyper- pigmentation: A Case Report and Review of the Literature. J Cutan Med Surg. 2019;23:111-3. 27. de Filho MRM, da Silva CAD, da Dourado MR, de Pires MBO, Pêgo SPB, de Freitas EM. Palate hyperpigmentation caused by prolonged use of the anti-malarial chloroquine. Head Neck Pathol. 2012;6:48-50. 28. Birek C, Main JH. Two cases of oral pigmentation associated with quinidine therapy. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1988;66:59-61. 29. Watson IB, MacDonald DG. Amodioquine induced oral pigmen- tation - a light and electron microscopic study. J Oral Pathol Med. 1974;3:16-21. 30. Eljaaly K, Alireza KH, Alshehri S, Al-Tawfiq JA. Hydroxychlo- roquine safety: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Travel Med Infect Dis. 2020;36:101812. 31. Ficarra G, Shillitoe EJ, Adler-Storthz K, Gaglioti D, Di Pietro M, Riccardi R, et al. Oral melanotic macules in patients infected with human immunodeficiency virus. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol. 1990;70:748-55. 32. Ozturk R, Engin A, Ozaras R, Mert A, Tabak F, Aktuglu Y. Hy- perpigmentation due to pyrimethamine use. The Journal of Derma- tology. 2002;29:443. 33. de Baat C, Phoa KH, Zweers PGMA, Bolling MC, Rozema FR, Vissink A. Serie: Medicamenten en mondzorg. Hyperpigmentatie van de orale slijmvliezen door afamelanotide (Medicaments and oral healthcare. Hyperpigmentation of oral soft tissues due to afamela- notide). Ned Tijdschr Tandheelkd. 2020;127:237-43. 34. Erbagci Z. Amlodipine associated hyperpigmentation. Saudi Med J.2004;25:103-5. Funding None declared. Conflict of interest None declared. Authors contributions RCL and MCMMP conceived the ideas; MCMM, LAML and MCJ collected the data; MCMM, LAML, MCJ and RCL analysed the data and MCMM led the writing.