Risk factors contributing to the development of carboplatin-related delayed hypersensitivity reactions in Japanese patients with gynecologic cancers

A survey of carboplatin desensitization therapy in Japan: A multicenter retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy are serious adverse events associated with cancer drug therapy and can occur with any antitumor drug. This study investigated the safety and efficacy of carboplatin desensitization therapy in Japan and established a method for treating carboplatin HSRs.

METHODS

Patients diagnosed with gynecological (ovarian, endometrial, or cervical) cancers who underwent carboplatin desensitization therapy between 2016 and 2020 at the Gynecologic Cancer Study Group of Japan Clinical Oncology Group were included. The carboplatin desensitization therapy at each institution and the implementation cases were registered in an online case report form.

RESULTS

This retrospective study enrolled 136 patients (ovarian, 108; endometrial, 17; and cervical cancer, 11). Pre-existing allergies were present in 37 (27.2%) patients, and 32 (23.5%) patients exhibited prodromal symptoms during treatment before HSR onset. Erythema was the most common symptom at HSR onset, affecting 93 (68.4%) patients, followed by itching in 72 (52.9%) patients and decreased oxygen saturation in 43 (31.6%) patients. Loss of consciousness occurred in three (2.2%) patients. The most common timing of HSR onset was during the first recurrence treatment (47%). The mean total carboplatin dose until HSR onset was 7331 (2620-18,282) mg, and the mean number of doses was 14 (4-63). Desensitization treatment was completed in 75% of cases, and breakthrough HSRs occurred in 25% (34/136). No deaths occurred in the study cohort. The risk factors for HSRs were not identified.

CONCLUSION

Although carboplatin desensitization therapy has high success rates in Japan, erythema and pruritus are important HSRs to consider.

A Modified Basophil Activation Test for the Clinical Management of Immediate Hypersensitivity Reactions to Paclitaxel: A Proof-of-Concept Study

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions (iHSRs) to taxanes are observed in 6% and 4% of gynecologic and breast cancer patients, respectively. Drug desensitization is the only option, as no comparable alternative therapy is available. Surfactants in the taxane formulation have been implicated in the immunopathogenesis of iHSRs, although sporadic skin test (ST) positivity and iHSRs to nab-paclitaxel have suggested the involvement of the taxane moiety and/or IgE-mediated pathomechanisms. In vitro diagnostic tests might offer insights into mechanisms underlying iHSRs to taxanes. The aim of the present study was to address this unmet need by developing a novel basophil activation test (BAT). The study included patients (n = 31) undergoing paclitaxel/carboplatin therapy. Seventeen patients presented with iHSRs to paclitaxel (iHSR-Taxpos), and eleven were tolerant (iHSR-Taxneg). Fourteen patients presented with iHSRs to carboplatin (iHSR-Plpos), and fourteen were tolerant (iHSR-Plneg). The BAT median stimulation index (SI) values were 1.563 (range, 0.02-4.11; n = 11) and -0.28 (range -4.88-0.07, n = 11) in iHSR-Taxpos and iHSR-Taxneg, respectively. The BAT median SI values were 4.45 (range, 0.1-26.7; n = 14) and 0 (range, -0.51-1.65; n = 12) in iHSR-Plpos and iHSR-Plneg, respectively. SI levels were not associated with iHSR severity grading. Comparing BAT results in iHSR-Taxpos and iHSR-Taxneg showed the area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve to be 0.9752 (p = 0.0002). The cutoff calculated by the maximized likelihood ratio identified 90.91% of iHSR-Taxpos patients and 90.91% of iHSR-Taxneg patients. Comparing BAT results for iHSR-Plpos and iHSR-Plneg showed the area under the ROC curve to be 0.9286 (p = 0.0002). The cutoff calculated by the maximized likelihood ratio identified 78.57% of iHSR-Plpos patients and 91.67% of iHSR-Plneg patients. Most iHSR-Taxpos patients for which ST was available (10/11) scored ST-negative and BAT-positive, whereas most iHSR-Plpos patients for which ST was available (14/14) scored both BAT- and ST-positive. This suggested the intervention of non-IgE-mediated mechanisms in iHSR-Taxpos patients. Consistent with this view, an in silico molecular docking analysis predicted the high affinity of paclitaxel to the degranulation-competent MRGPRX2 receptor. This hypothesis warrants further in vitro investigations. In conclusion, the present study provides preliminary proof-of-concept evidence that this novel BAT has potential utility in understanding mechanisms underlying iHSRs to taxanes.

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents - A practical guide for the oncologist

Immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHRs) to antineoplastic agents occur frequently, and every oncologist will encounter these reactions in their clinical practice at some point. The clinical signature of IHRs can range from mild to life-threatening, and their occurrence can substantially impede the treatment course of patients with cancer. Yet, clear guidelines regarding the diagnosis and management are scarce, especially from an oncologic point of view. Therefore, herein, we review the definition, pathophysiology, epidemiology, diagnosis and management of IHRs to chemotherapeutic agents and monoclonal antibodies. First, we focus on defining the specific entities that comprise IHRs and discuss their underlying mechanisms. Then, we summarize the epidemiology for the antineoplastic agents that represent the most common causes of IHRs, i.e., platinum compounds, taxanes and monoclonal antibodies (mAbs). Next, we describe the possible clinical pictures and the comprehensive diagnostic work-up that should be executed to identify the culprit and safe alternatives for the future. Finally, we finish with reviewing the treatment options in both the acute phase and after recovery, with the aim to improve the oncologic care of patients with cancer.

Successful desensitization after hypersensitivity reaction to cisplatin in a patient with nasopharyngeal carcinoma

Hypersensitivity reaction to cisplatin can result in discontinuation of chemoradiotherapy in patients with head and neck squamous cell carcinoma. We describe a patient with nasopharyngeal carcinoma who developed cisplatin hypersensitivity and was successfully treated with cisplatin desensitization. Furthermore, it had little impact on the therapeutic performance of cisplatin-combined chemoradiotherapy.

A cohort study of hypersensitivity reaction in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer treated with carboplatin

Background

The prevalence and risk factors of hypersensitivity reaction of in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer treated with platinum are controversial.

Objective

To summarize the clinical characteristics and management of hypersensitivity reaction of carboplatin in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and to determine its effects on prognoses.

Methods

Patients with epithelial ovarian cancer between January 2013 and January 2016 were identified. Data were retrospectively collected by reviewing the medical records of a single tertiary teaching hospital. Patients’ demographic characteristics, symptoms, and treatment were described and compared between the hypersensitivity reaction and non-hypersensitivity reaction groups. The effects of hypersensitivity reaction on survival outcomes were analyzed in univariate and multivariate models.

Results

A total of 860 patients were identified, including 76 (8.8%) patients with 86 incidents of hypersensitivity reaction in 5807 courses of chemotherapy. Of all patients with a first attack of hypersensitivity reaction, 79% were classified as grade 1–2. The most common symptoms were shortness of breath and tightness in the chest (70/76 cases, 92.1%). Subsequent management included chemotherapy suspension, switching to a non-platinum regimen, desensitization therapy, separated infusion of drugs, adherence to the original therapy, and switching to cisplatin. However, there was no significant difference in the proportion of patients with recurring hypersensitivity reaction among patients treated with different management methods (p=0.915). Disease relapse and chemotherapy courses ≥6 for primary epithelial ovarian cancer or ≥7 for recurrent disease were risk factors for platinum-based hypersensitivity reaction. There were no significant differences in median progression-free survival between the hypersensitivity reaction group and the non-hypersensitivity reaction group (p=0.144).

Conclusions

Most patients with epithelial ovarian cancer with a carboplatin-induced hypersensitivity reaction had mild symptoms and favorable outcomes, and their progression-free survival was not influenced. Disease relapse and the number of courses of chemotherapy were risk factors for a hypersensitivity reaction.

Trial registration number

NCT03291262.

Successful resuscitation after cardiac arrest secondary to carboplatin infusion: A case report

•

Sudden cardiac arrest can be a form of carboplatin hypersensitivity reaction.

•

Platinum retreatment and cumulative cycles of ≥ 8 are risk factors.

•

Awareness of the reaction related to carboplatin infusion is necessary.

•

Successful resuscitation with high quality CPR is achievable with trained staffs.

Outpatient desensitization in selected patients with platinum hypersensitivity reactions

Platinum-based chemotherapies are a standard treatment for both initial and recurrent gynecologic cancers. Given this widespread use, it is important to be aware of the features of platinum hypersensitivity reactions and the subsequent treatment of these reactions. There is also increasing interest in the development of desensitization protocols to allow patients with a history of platinum hypersensitivity to receive further platinum based therapy. In this review, we describe the management of platinum hypersensitivity reactions and the desensitization protocols utilized at our institution. We also describe the clinical categorizations utilized to triage patients to appropriate desensitization protocols.

Comparison of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Carboplatin Retreatment in Gynecologic Cancer Patients between One and Two Hour Infusions: a Randomized Trial Study

Objective: To compare the incidence rate of carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) in gynecologic cancer patients receiving one-hour or two-hour carboplatin retreatment infusions. Setting: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial. Methods: Recurrent gynecologic cancer patients 25 to 80-years of age who were scheduled to receive carboplatin retreatment after previously receiving at least six cycles of carboplatin without a history of platinum allergy were invited to enroll. They were randomized to receive either a one-hour or two-hour carboplatin infusion in each cycle. The nurses recorded any occurrence of HSR. Patients who developed carboplatin HSR were discontinued from the study. Results: Forty-five patients were enrolled and randomized to receive either a one-hour carboplatin infusion arm in 69 cycles or a two-hour infusion arm in 67 cycles. Both groups were well balanced regarding median age, body mass index, type of cancer, history of drug allergy, median platinum free interval time, median total number of previous carboplatin cycles, premedication type, regimen and median total dose of carboplatin. Five (3.67%) of the 136 cycles resulted in carboplatin HSR, all of which were Grade 1. Of these, four cycles developed HSR during the one-hour infusion and only one cycle with a two-hour infusion (P=0.37). The onset of carboplatin HSR occurred within 30-105 minutes after infusion start. Conclusion: Extending the carboplatin infusion time to two hours from one hour did not significantly decrease carboplatin HSR.

Incidence of and risk factors associated with nedaplatin-related hypersensitivity reactions

BACKGROUND

Nedaplatin (NDP)-related hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) trigger adverse clinical events. Prediction and prevention of NDP-HSRs are thus essential to minimize the risk and maximize the benefit of NDP therapy. However, the incidence of NDP-HSRs and the associated risk factors remain unclear.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined patients who received NDP monotherapy between April 2011 and July 2015 in Nagoya University Hospital. HSRs severity was defined according to the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4 (CTCAE ver.4). Risk factors for NDP-HSRs were determined using multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of 111 patients who received NDP monotherapy, 90 (81%) were female; median age was 59 years (range, 29-78 years). Eighty-eight patients had gynecological cancer and 20 suffered from head and neck cancer. Eight of 111 patients (7.2%) experienced NDP-HSRs, six of which developed in the second NDP cycle. However, all patients with NDP-HSRs were treated with carboplatin (CBDCA) for more than three cycles. Grade 3 and 4 HSRs developed in 2 patients. NDP-HSRs were significantly associated with a history of CBDCA-HSRs (odds ratio 37.5, 95% confidence interval 5.38-262, p < 0.001) and with the interval between NDP administration and the previous platinum treatment (odds ratio 13.9, 95% confidence interval 1.23-158, p = 0.034).

CONCLUSION

The risk of NDP-HSRs increases in patients with a history of CBDCA-HSRs and in those administered NDP for more than 6 months after previous platinum treatment. Such individuals must be closely monitored if given NDP, even if they are expected to benefit from the treatment.

Prevention of carboplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions in women with ovarian cancer

Background

Carboplatin-based chemotherapy offers high response rates and improved overall survival for women with epithelial ovarian cancer, but its use is limited by the occurrence of hypersensitivity reactions. To evaluate the efficacy of prophylactic diphenhydramine for hypersensitivity reaction prevention, we reviewed the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions and identified patients at high risk of hypersensitivity reactions.

Methods

Women receiving ≥6 cycles of carboplatin-based chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer were identified from our institutional database at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre. Institutional policy was changed in 2009 to introduce diphenhydramine prophylaxis for patients receiving ≥6 cycles of carboplatin. Additional clinical data were abstracted from the patient record.

Results

Between 2006 and 2012, 450 women received ≥6 cycles of carboplatin-based chemotherapy for epithelial ovarian cancer. Two hundred and ninety-one women received prophylaxis with diphenhydramine. Carboplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions occurred in 41 of 449 patients (9%). Univariable predictors of carboplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions included administration of 8 to 10 cycles of carboplatin, history of other drug allergies and a platinum-free interval >12 months. BRCA mutational status was not predictive. In a multivariable analysis, the number of cycles of carboplatin and a platinum-free interval >12 months were independent predictors of hypersensitivity reactions. There was a trend towards diphenhydramine prophylaxis reducing the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions in women with a platinum-free interval compared to continuous delivery; this was most marked when the platinum-free interval was >12 months (n = 64) (OR: 0.2 (95% CI: 0.046–0.83), p = 0.03).

Conclusions

The administration of diphenhydramine to women who have a platinum-free interval may reduce the risk of hypersensitivity reaction, but prospective evaluation is required.

Basophil Reactivity as Biomarker in Immediate Drug Hypersensitivity Reactions-Potential and Limitations

Immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) resemble typical immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated symptoms. Clinical manifestations range from local skin reactions, gastrointestinal and/or respiratory symptoms to severe systemic involvement with potential fatal outcome. Depending on the substance group of the eliciting drug the correct diagnosis is a major challenge. Skin testing and in vitro diagnostics are often unreliable and not reproducible. The involvement of drug-specific IgE is questionable in many cases. The culprit substance (parent drug or metabolite) and potential cross-reacting compounds are difficult to identify, patient history and drug provocation testing often remain the only means for diagnosis. Hence, several groups proposed basophil activation test (BAT) for the diagnosis of immediate DHRs as basophils are well-known effector cells in allergic reactions. However, the usefulness of BAT in immediate DHRs is highly variable and dependent on the drug itself plus its capacity to spontaneously conjugate to serum proteins. Stimulation with pure solutions of the parent drug or metabolites thereof vs. drug-protein conjugates may influence sensitivity and specificity of the test. We thus, reviewed the available literature about the use of BAT for diagnosing immediate DHRs against drug classes such as antibiotics, radio contrast media, neuromuscular blocking agents, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, and biologicals. Influencing factors like the selection of stimulants or of the identification and activation markers, the stimulation protocol, gating strategies, and cut-off definition are addressed in this overview on BAT performance. The overall aim is to evaluate the suitability of BAT as biomarker for the diagnosis of immediate drug-induced hypersensitivity reactions.

Clinical Utility of Basophil CD203c as a Biomarker for Predicting the Timing of Hypersensitivity Reaction in Carboplatin Rechallenge: Three Case Reports

PURPOSE

Drug desensitization has been found to be an effective option for carboplatin rechallenge in patients at risk for severe hypersensitivity reaction. However, identifying such patients requires precise clinical tests. This study was performed to evaluate the clinical utility of basophil CD203c to predict the timing of carboplatin-induced severe hypersensitivity reaction.

METHODS

Here we report on 3 patients undergoing a carboplatin-desensitization protocol at Mie University Hospital. For all patients, ex vivo exposure to carboplatin resulted in increased levels of activated basophils in a previous occurrence of carboplatin-induced severe hypersensitivity reaction.

FINDINGS

Basophil activation test using carboplatin was returned to negative just before the first course of carboplatin-desensitization protocol in all patients, and they successfully received their first course of the protocol with no signs of anaphylaxis. However, for all of the patients, increased basophil activation was once again detected after subsequent readministration of carboplatin and grade 3 or 4 anaphylaxis developed. Basophil activation test coincided precisely with the timing of carboplatin-induced anaphylaxis in all patients.

IMPLICATIONS

CD203c basophil activation testing might prove to be a reliable tool for risk stratification and clinical decision making for carboplatin desensitization in which severe hypersensitivity reaction is likely to occur.

Carboplatin-induced severe hypersensitivity reaction: role of IgE-dependent basophil activation and FcεRI

Basophil activation was observed in patients with a history of carboplatin-induced severe hypersensitivity reaction (HR). However, the precise mechanism by which carboplatin induces basophil activation and the associated surrogate markers remains to be elucidated. To investigate whether IgE-dependent mechanisms, including the overexpression of FcεRI, participate in carboplatin-induced basophil activation, 13 ovarian cancer patients were enrolled: 5 with a history of carboplatin-induced severe hypersensitivity reaction within the past 2 years, and 8 with no such history. The expression levels of FcεRI, IgE, and CD203c on basophils were measured using a flow cytometer. Immunoglobulin E-dependent basophil activation was evaluated by testing for IgE passive sensitization using lactic acid, and by testing for phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibition, using wortmannin. In three patients positive for carboplatin hypersensitivity, pretreatment with wortmannin almost completely inhibited carboplatin-induced basophil activation (P < 0.05). In a healthy control subject, whose own IgE showed no response to carboplatin, acquired reactivity to carboplatin when exposed to plasma from patients positive for carboplatin hypersensitivity. This did not occur when the same experiment was carried out using plasma from the patients negative for carboplatin hypersensitivity. Moreover, pretreatment with omalizumab, a monoclonal anti-IgE antibody, almost completely blocked carboplatin-induced basophil activation in the plasma of patients positive for carboplatin hypersensitivity. On further investigation, the HR-positive group had significantly higher levels of FcεRI compared with the negative group (P < 0.05). In conclusion, an IgE-dependent mechanism incorporating FcεRI overexpression participates in carboplatin-induced severe HR. These results establish the relevance of monitoring the pharmacodynamic changes of basophils to prevent carboplatin-induced severe HR.

Deleterious BRCA1/2 mutation is an independent risk factor for carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions

Background:

We tested the hypothesis that BRCA1/2 mutation carriers with ovarian cancer are at higher risk of carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs).

Methods:

Medical records of women enrolled in two carboplatin+olaparib clinical trials (NCT01237067/NCT01445418) were reviewed. A maximum of eight cycles containing carboplatin were administered.

Results:

All women (N=87) had good performance status and end-organ function. Incidences of carboplatin HSR before enrolment and on study were 17% and 21%, respectively. Most patients who developed carboplatin HSR had a deleterious BRCA1/2 mutation (93%) vs 50% in patients without HSR (P<0.0001). Multivariable analysis accounting for potential confounding variables including age, history of allergies, and cumulative prior carboplatin cycles confirmed deleterious BRCA1/2 mutation as an independent risk factor for carboplatin HSR (odds ratio 13.1 (95% confidence interval 2.6–65.4), P=0.0017). Mutation carriers had onset of carboplatin HSR at lower cumulative exposure (P=0.003). No significant difference in outcome was observed on our study between patients with and without a history of HSR.

Conclusion:

Deleterious BRCA1/2 mutation increased susceptibility and shortened time to carboplatin HSR, independently of other reported factors. These data suggest that at-risk women should be counselled regarding likelihood, symptoms, and potential earlier onset of carboplatin HSRs.

Hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin and cisplatin in non-small cell lung cancer

Non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) treatment has changed in the past ten years due to the acceptance of platinum-based adjuvant chemotherapy. In the event of relapse, patients are often retreated with platinum agents. Hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin are well documented among gynecologic oncology patients. Now that adjuvant chemotherapy is a component of NSCLC treatment, platinum hypersensitivity is also a concern in the lung cancer population. A 74-year-old male developed relapsed NSCLC two years after a lobectomy and adjuvant chemotherapy including carboplatin. He was treated with a carboplatin containing regimen, and experienced hypersensitivity during his 2(nd) cycle (post-relapse). We briefly report four additional cases of platinum sensitivity in NSCLC patients, to highlight the increasing likelihood of platinum hypersensitivity in this "at risk" group. Hypersensitivity reactions to platinum chemotherapeutics occur in NSCLC patients, and patients and treating medical staff should be aware of this serious, treatment-related complication.

Review of hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents

OBJECTIVE

To review the characteristics and management of hypersensitivity reactions caused by antineoplastic agents.

METHOD

We conducted a search in the Pubmed and EMBASE databases for the last 10 years.

RESULTS

Almost all chemotherapeutic agents have the potential to cause hypersensitivity reactions, but some groups have been associated with increased risk, such as platinum compounds, taxanes, asparaginase, monoclonal antibodies and epipodophyllotoxins. The clinical manifestations of these reactions are variable and unpredictable, including symptoms affecting the skin and the pulmonary, cardiac and gastrointestinal systems. The mechanism associated with their development is not yet fully understood. Diagnosis is based on patients' signs and symptoms and skin testing. The management of patients who suffer a hypersensitivity reaction to a chemotherapeutic agent varies with the severity of the reaction, the need to continue treatment, and the availability of alternative therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to a progressive increase in the use of chemotherapeutic agents an increased incidence of hypersensitivity reactions is to be expected. Desensitisation protocols are a noteworthy alternative that make it possible to re-initiate patients' therapy with the causative agent of the hypersensitivity reaction. Their use should be assessed individually, weighing risks and benefits.

Hypersensitivity reactions associated with platinum antineoplastic agents: a systematic review

Platinum-containing chemotherapy agents (cisplatin, carboplatin, oxaliplatin) have been approved in the first-line setting of numerous malignancies, such as ovarian, bladder, head and neck, colorectal, and lung cancer. Their extensive use over the last decade has led to a significant increase in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions, which are defined as unforeseen reactions whose signs and symptoms cannot be explained by the known toxicity of these drugs. Skin rash, flushing, abdominal cramping, itchy palms, and back pain are common symptoms. Cardiovascular and respiratory complications can prove fatal. Multiple pathogenetic mechanisms have been suggested. Hypersensitivity usually appears after multiple infusions, suggesting type I allergic reactions; however, other types of hypersensitivity also seem to be implicated. Several management options are available to treating physicians: discontinuation of chemotherapy, premedication, prolonging of infusion duration, desensitization protocols, and replacement with a different platinum compound after performing skin tests that rule out cross-reactions among platinum agents.