Severe anaphylactic reactions in patients receiving oxaliplatin therapy: a rare but potentially fatal complication

Oxaliplatin-associated shock in stage III colorectal cancer patients: real-world evidence in Taiwan

Background

Oxaliplatin-associated shock (referred to as shock) is a rare but life-threatening adverse event.

Objectives

This pioneering cohort study aimed to quantitatively investigate the association between oxaliplatin use and shock in patients with stage III colorectal cancer (CRC), identify potential independent risk factors for shock, and assess the cycle-to-shock during oxaliplatin treatment.

Design

The study utilized a nested case-control (NCC) design to assess the association between oxaliplatin and shock and employed a case-crossover approach to address unmeasured confounders.

Methods

All newly diagnosed stage III CRC patients were identified from the CRC Health Database (2012-2016). Conditional logistic regression was used to calculate odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for oxaliplatin's link to shock incidence.

Results

Among 6932 oxaliplatin recipients, 331 suffered shock. In all, 3309 controls were selected via risk-set sampling for the shock cases. Oxaliplatin use is associated with a doubled risk of shock (adjusted OR: 2.08, 95% CI: 1.23-3.52). Two independent risk factors were male sex (adjusted OR: 1.33, 95% CI: 1.05-1.69) and heart diseases (adjusted OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.17-2.32). The case-crossover analysis revealed a more than fourfold risk (OR: 4.4, 95% CI: 1.67-11.62). In total, 22 of 331 shock cases were exposed to oxaliplatin within 2 days of shock onset, with a median cycle-to-shock time at the seventh cycle.

Conclusion

Oxaliplatin use significantly increased shock risk in stage III CRC patients. Male sex and heart disease are two independent risk factors.

High-dose oxaliplatin induces severe hypersensitivity reactions and high recurrence rates during rechallenge in patients treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy

AIM

To analyze the risk factors for oxaliplatin (OXA)-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions and identify the recurrence rate of the reactions after an OXA rechallenge in patients treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC).

METHODS

Among the 2251 patients treated with HAIC (OXA), 84 patients with gastrointestinal cancer who displayed hypersensitivity reactions between May 2013 and May 2022 were included in this study. Among the 84 patients, 23 (27.4%) developed severe anaphylactic reactions (grade III/IV), and 61 (72.6%) developed grade I/II reactions. We explored the risk factors for severe OXA-induced hypersensitivity reactions. Twenty-seven patients with grade I/II reactions underwent retreatment (HAIC with OXA), and the recurrence rate of the hypersensitivity reactions was determined. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the risk factors for OXA-induced hypersensitivity reaction.

RESULTS

In the study, multivariate analysis indicated that the dose of OXA (odds ratio [OR] 3.077, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.106-8.558, p = 0.031) was an independent risk factor for OXA-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions. Twenty-seven patients with non-severe hypersensitivity reactions underwent retreatment HAIC with OXA and 14 (51.9 %) experienced HSR recurrence, including 2 (7.4 %) who experienced hypersensitivity shock.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of OXA doses is a risk factor for OXA-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions in patients treated with HAIC (OXA). Rechallenging HAIC with OXA appears to be associated with a higher recurrence rate of the HSR.

Allergy in Cancer Care: Antineoplastic Therapy-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions

As the backbone of oncological treatments, systemic chemotherapy is still one of the main pawns in cancer care, alone or in combination with newer targeted agents. All chemotherapy agents can be associated with a type of adverse event called an infusion reaction, which can be characterized as unpredictable, non-dose related, and unexplained by the cytotoxic profile of the drug. For some of these events, a certain immunological mechanism can be identified by blood or skin testing. In this case, we can speak of true hypersensitivity reactions that occur as a response to an antigen/allergen. The current work summarizes the main antineoplastic therapy agents and their susceptibility to induce hypersensitivity reactions and also includes a review of clinical presentation, diagnostic methods in hypersensitivity reactions, and perspectives to overcome these negative events in the treatment of patients suffering from various types of cancer.

Is Adrenaline Always the First Choice Therapy of Anaphylaxis? An Allergist-cardiologist Interdisciplinary Point of View

Worldwide, adrenaline is considered the first choice therapy in the international guidelines for the management of anaphylaxis. However, the heart and cardiovascular apparatus are strongly involved in anaphylaxis; for that reason, there are some cardiac conditions and certain anaphylaxis patterns that make epinephrine use problematic without adequate heart monitoring. The onset of Kounis syndrome, takotsubo cardiopathy, or the paradoxical anaphylaxis require great attention in the management of anaphylaxis and adrenaline administration by clinicians, who should be aware of the undervalued evolution of anaphylaxis and the potential cardiologic complications of epinephrine administration. Numerous case reports and studies describe the unexpected onset of cardiac diseases following epinephrine treatment, despite the latter being the recommended therapy for anaphylaxis. Our review suggests that future anaphylaxis guidelines should incorporate cardiovascular specialists since the treatment of Kounis syndrome or takotsubo cardiopathy requires cardiologist skills.

Hypertensive Anaphylaxis After Moderna COVID-19 Vaccination: A Case Report

Hypotension after exposure to an allergen is a well-known indicator of an anaphylactic reaction. However, hypertensive anaphylaxis often goes unrecognized. Increased blood pressure can present as an anaphylactic reaction, which is called hypertensive anaphylaxis. A 48-year-old woman complained of a tickle sensation in the throat and dyspnea 30 minutes after being administered the first dose of the Moderna coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) vaccine. The patient had no history of hypertension, anxiety, or panic disorder. Forty-five minutes after the vaccination, stridor was noted, and the patient developed severe hypertension with a blood pressure of 197/153 mmHg. The patient also had tachycardia, cervical angioedema, and nausea, which occurred in a short period of time, indicating type I hypersensitivity reaction, that is, an anaphylactic reaction. The patient was diagnosed with Brighton classification Level 1 anaphylaxis caused by COVID-19 vaccination. For managing the patient, two intramuscular adrenaline injections, famotidine, chlorpheniramine, metoclopramide, and methylprednisolone were administered via intravenous infusion. After the administration of medications, all symptoms resolved, and the blood pressure was reduced. Other differential diagnoses for increased blood pressure after vaccination were excluded; therefore, we concluded that this phenomenon of increased blood pressure was hypertensive anaphylaxis. Not only hypotension but also the acute onset of increased blood pressure after vaccination may occur as a premonitory symptom of anaphylaxis. In hypertensive anaphylaxis, both anaphylaxis and increased blood pressure can be treated with intramuscular adrenaline injection. Clinicians should be aware of the occurrence of hypertensive anaphylaxis.

Utility of rotational thromboelastometry for the diagnosis of asymptomatic hyperfibrinolysis secondary to anaphylaxis

We present a case of hyperfibrinolysis induced by oxaliplatin-derived anaphylactic shock, which was diagnosed with rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM). A 57-year-old male patient underwent a second course of oxaliplatin (126 mg/m/course)-based chemotherapy for stage IV metastatic rectal cancer. Two minutes after the infusion of oxaliplatin, the patient lost consciousness and developed generalized urticarial lesions, followed by hemodynamic instability and respiratory insufficiency. He was diagnosed anaphylactic shock and transported to emergency department (ED) after intramuscular injection of 0.2 mg of adrenaline, an intravenous injection of 100 mg of hydrocortisone, and 500 mg of methylprednisolone. After arriving in the ED, the patient remained in shock and early resuscitation with administration of 5 mg of D-chlorpheniramine maleate and 20 mg of famotidine was performed. He recovered from his state of shock 30 min after the resuscitation. ROTEM findings showed fulminant hyperfibrinolysis with minimal changes in standard coagulation tests (SCTs) and no remarkable coagulopathy. Seven hours after the attack, he became asymptomatic and follow-up ROTEM revealed values within normal limits with the exception of sustained slight abnormalities of SCTs. He was discharged the next day without any signs of spontaneous bleeding and has continued his outpatient chemotherapy uneventfully. A review of the literature on anaphylaxis-induced hyperfibrinolysis and a discussion of the mechanism between anaphylactic shock and hyperfibrinolysis were performed. Although administration of tissue-type plasminogen activator can play a vital role in anaphylactic shock-induced hyperfibrinolysis, early effective resuscitation is imperative to prevent severe hemorrhagic complications. Therefore, ROTEM is a useful tool that can detect these dynamic changes faster and more accurately than SCTs.

Anaphylactic reactions presenting with hypertension

Background

Although a few case reports about hypertensive anaphylaxis (HA) are available in the present literature, there is no study about the prevalence of HA. In this study, we review our cases with anaphylaxis presenting with hypertension and ascertain its prevalence. The documents of the patients who had anaphylactic reactions after the procedures performed for the diagnosis and treatment of allergic diseases in GATA Haydarpasa Clinic of Allergy and Immunology between January 2010 and December 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. Within the study period, 324 patients had undergone 4332 procedures in which 62 of them had developed anaphylaxis.

Results

During the procedures, the rate of anaphylaxis was found to be 1.43 %. The rate of HA among the anaphylaxis patients was 12.9 % (8 of 62 patients). During treatments, 2 patients received adrenaline injections without any adverse reaction.

Conclusions

HA may be seen at a considerable rate during an anaphylactic reaction. Anaphylaxis and hypertension can be recovered by adrenaline injection when required. According to the best of our knowledge, this study is the first original study about the prevalence of HA in English-language medical literature.

Faster FOLFOX: Oxaliplatin Can Be Safely Infused at a Rate of 1 mg/m2/min

PURPOSE

Oxaliplatin at a dose of 85 mg/m(2) traditionally has been administered over 120 min in the standard FOLFOX (infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) regimen. CapeOx (capecitabine plus oxaliplatin), in which the dose of oxaliplatin is 130 mg/m(2), has also been infused over 120 min. Maintenance of a prolonged infusion time has been largely based on the concern for a potential hypersensitivity reaction (HSR) if administered too quickly.

METHODS

We first performed a retrospective review of our institutional experience to assess whether HSR rates were similar in FOLFOX and CapeOx by using computerized pharmacy records between January 1, 2011, and December 31, 2013. We then instituted a new policy to infuse all nonresearch doses of oxaliplatin at a set rate of 1 mg/m(2)/min (85 mg/m(2) given over 85 min; 68 mg/m(2) over 68 min, etc). The incidence of HSRs with the new infusion rate was actively monitored.

RESULTS

Of 2,097 patients who previously received oxaliplatin over 120 min, 1,936 received a dose of 85 mg/m(2) (± 10%), and 161 received a dose of 130 mg/m(2). The incidence of HSRs in the 85 mg/m(2) group was 11% versus 7% in the 130 mg/m(2) group (P = .13). Then between December 1, 2014, and June 4, 2015, 667 patients received oxaliplatin at a rate of 1 mg/m(2)/min for all doses. The incidence of HSRs in patients treated at this fixed infusion rate was 8%.

CONCLUSION

Infusing oxaliplatin at a rate of 1 mg/m(2)/min does not increase the rate of HSRs and does not compromise patient safety. This infusion rate is safe for use in routine practice.

Hypersensitivity reactions associated with oxaliplatin and their clinical management

INTRODUCTION

Oxaliplatin , has become an integral part of the medical treatment of colorectal cancer and other malignancies. Increased use of the drug during the last decade, has led to increased occurrence of oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), posing a significant challenge for clinicians. This article aims to review the existing literature regarding the incidence, clinical presentation, pathophysiology, risk factors and current management of oxaliplatin-induced HSRs.

AREAS COVERED

A systematic review of the English literature published in PubMed and Medline was undertaken. The clinical manifestations of HSRs were found to be variable and unpredictable. These reactions should be an important concern, as their potential life-threatening risks can force doctors to stop treatment and seek alternatives, which may be less effective, not as well tolerated and/or more expensive. There are a few strategies to prevent these reactions so that patients can still benefit from oxaliplatin. Such strategies include the use of premedication (steroid and antagonists of type I and II histamine receptors), prolonged infusion time and desensitization.

EXPERT OPINION

The presented management strategies as well as novel diagnostic tools including skin/intradermal tests and specific IgE have shown promising results. However, future research and validation are warranted in bigger clinical trials.

Oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity reaction: underlying mechanisms and management

Hypersensitivity reactions are rare but feared drugs adverse effect. These reactions are not uncommon with anticancer drugs, such as taxanes, monoclonal antibodies, and platinum compounds. Oxaliplatinum, a third-generation platinum compound, one of the mainstay drugs in the treatment of many gastrointestinal cancers, can give rise to hypersensitivity reactions, sometimes with fatal outcomes. In this paper, we reviewed the incidence and mechanisms underlying the occurrence of this event, highlighting the most recent advances concerning the pathogenesis of the reaction and also reporting possible risk factors identified and the most effective treatment in preventing the onset of this event.

Oxaliplatin-induced severe anaphylactic reactions in metastatic colorectal cancer: Case series analysis

AIM: To investigate oxaliplatin-induced severe anaphylactic reactions (SAR) in metastatic colorectal cancer in a retrospective case series analysis and to conduct a systemic literature review.

METHODS: During a 6-year period from 2006 to 2011 at Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, a total of 412 patients exposed to oxaliplatin-related chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. Relevant English-language studies regarding life-threatening SAR following oxaliplatin were also reviewed in MEDLINE^® and PubMed^® search.

RESULTS: Eight patients (1.9%, 8 of 412 cases) were identified. Seven patients were successful resuscitated without any sequelae and one patient expired. We changed the chemotherapy regimen in five patients and rechallenged oxaliplatin use in patient 3. Twenty-three relevant English-language studies with 66 patients were reported. Patients received a median of 10 cycles of oxaliplatin (range, 2 to 29). Most common symptoms were respiratory distress (60%), fever (55%), and hypotension (54%). Three fatal events were reported (4.5%). Eleven patients (16%) of the 66 cases were rechallenged by oxaliplatin.

CONCLUSION: SAR must be considered in patients receiving oxaliplatin-related chemotherapy, especially in heavily pretreated patients. Further studies on the mechanism, predictors, preventive methods and management of oxaliplatin-related SAR are recommended.

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.

Risk factors for oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions in Japanese patients with advanced colorectal cancer

OBJECTIVE

Previously, we suggested that oxaliplatin (L-OHP)-related grade 3/4 hypersensitivity reactions occurred immediately after the initiation, but grade 1/2 reactions did not. This study was conducted to clarify the risk factors for L-OHP-related hypersensitivity reactions.

METHODS

Clinical data from 108 Japanese patients with colorectal cancer were analyzed, who were treated with L-OHP-containing regimens, FOLFOX4 and/or mFOLFOX6. The risk factors examined included demographic data, preexisting allergies, laboratory test data, treatment regimen, treatment line of therapy, pretreatment with steroids, total number of cycles and cumulative amount of L-OHP.

RESULTS

The incidence of grade 1/2 and grade 3/4 hypersensitivity reactions were found at 13.0% (14/108) and 9.3% (10/108), respectively. Female (P = 0.037), preexisting allergies (P = 0.004) and lower level of lactate dehydrogenase (P = 0.003) were risk factors for grade 1/2 hypersensitivity reactions, and higher neutrophil count (P = 0.043) and lower monocyte count (P = 0.007) were for grade 3/4 reactions. Total number of cycles were larger in the patients with grade 3/4 reactions than those without reactions (P = 0.049).

CONCLUSIONS

Further extensive examination with a large number of patients is needed to establish a patient management strategy.

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.

The complex clinical picture of presumably allergic side effects to cytostatic drugs: symptoms, pathomechanism, reexposure, and desensitization

The number of drugs used for the treatment of different types of cancers is constantly increasing and actually exceeds 100 distinct chemical formulations. The use of most cytotoxic agents is associated with potential hypersensitivity reactions, and the constant increase of their administration has caused an increase in incidence of these adverse effects, thus becoming a relevant problem for clinicians. Hypersensitivity reactions are common with platinum compounds, L-asparaginase, taxanes, procarbazine, and epipodophyllotoxins, whereas they are unusual, but always possible, with the other chemotherapeutic drugs. Reactions associated with individual drugs are discussed in detail. The mechanism underlying these hypersensitivity reactions involves IgE-mediated hypersensitivity reactions, nonallergic hypersensitivity reactions, and a few pathogenetically unclear reactions. More studies are needed to better understand, diagnose, treat, and prevent these reactions. To achieve this goal, a multidisciplinary approach to treat patients with cancer who have potential allergies is needed.

Hypersensitivity reaction and acute immune-mediated thrombocytopenia from oxaliplatin: two case reports and a review of the literature

Background

Oxaliplatin is a platinum compound used in the treatment of gastrointestinal malignancies, including colorectal cancer. The incidence of hypersensitivity reaction in patients receiving oxaliplatin is approximately 15%, with severe reaction (grade 3 and 4) occurring in 2% of patients.

Case presentation

We report two patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who developed de novo hypersensitivity reaction and acute thrombocytopenia after oxaliplatin infusion. Both patients had oxaliplatin treatment several years before and exhibited hypersensitivity on the third dose of oxaliplatin in recent treatment. Oxaliplatin was discontinued when clinical reaction was identified. Both patients were confirmed to have strong oxaliplatin-induced IgG platelet-reactive antibodies. Both patients' thrombocytopenia resolved within two weeks after discontinuation of oxaliplatin. One patient had disease stabilization lasting for three months without chemotherapy. Both patients subsequently received other chemotherapeutic agents without evidence of hypersensitivity reaction or immune-mediated thrombocytopenia.

Conclusion

We recommend vigilant monitoring of complete blood count and signs and symptoms of bleeding after the occurrence of oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity to avoid serious complications of immune-mediated thrombocytopenia.

Oxaliplatin-induced allergic reaction in patients with colorectal cancer in Japan

BACKGROUND

Oxaliplatin is a platinum compound that is clinically effective for colorectal cancer (CRC), in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV), and it is widely used for metastatic disease and for the adjuvant treatment of stage III CRC. With the increasing use of oxaliplatin in Japan, serious adverse events have been experienced other than hematologic and neurologic toxicities.

METHODS

In order to clarify the clinical features of allergic reactions to oxaliplatin, we retrospectively investigated CRC patients who had received oxaliplatin-based chemotherapies.

RESULTS

One hundred and twenty-five CRC patients who had been treated with FOLFOX regimens (containing oxaliplatin, 5-FU, and LV) were examined, and 21 patients (17%) were found to have developed allergic reactions. Sixteen patients (13%) had grade 1/2 adverse events, classified according to the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTC-AE) version 3.0 and 5 (4%) had grade 3/4 adverse events. The allergic reaction appeared after a median number of nine cycles (range, 2-15 cycles). Previous chemotherapy included 5-FU/LV, CPT-11, and S-1. All of the patients with allergic reactions recovered completely when treated with antiallergy drugs. Oxaliplatin was reintroduced in 11 patients, with the use of prophylactic agents; allergic reaction to the reintroduction was not observed in 8 patients and grade 1/2 allergic reactions developed in 3 patients. No correlation was identified between allergic reaction and patients' background characteristics such as sex, history of allergy, and profile of other adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Allergic reactions to oxaliplatin remain an important issue for patients being able to safely continue effective chemotherapies; further analysis will be needed to establish methods for the prediction and prophylaxis of such reactions.

A phase II trial of biweekly oxaliplatin with simplified schedule of 48-h infusion of high-dose 5-fluorouracil and leucorvin for advanced biliary tract carcinoma

PURPOSE

Advanced biliary tract carcinoma (BTC) is a dismal disease with no standard chemotherapy. We investigated efficacy and toxicity of biweekly oxaliplatin with 48-h infusion of 5-FU/LV in advanced BTC.

METHODS

All patients had histologic confirmation of BTC, at least one measurable site of disease, and had received no prior chemotherapy. Patients were older than 20 years with ECOG performance scores (PS) of 0-2. Treatment involved 2-h infusion of oxaliplatin (85 mg/m(2)) diluted in D5W 500 ml followed by 48-h infusion of 5-FU (3,000 mg/m(2)) and LV (100 mg/m(2)) biweekly. Response evaluation was based on RECIST criteria and was carried out every two courses of treatment; toxicity evaluation was based on NCI common toxicity criteria version 3.0.

RESULTS

From August 2005 to December 2006, 34 chemotherapy-naive patients with advanced BTC were enrolled and 32 intention-to-treat patients were evaluated. Partial response was 18.8%, stable disease was 31.3%, resulting in a disease control rate of 50.0%. Median time to progression and survival was 3.7 and 7 months, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia 15.6% (5/32), stomatitis 9.4% (3/32), thrombocytopenia 6.3% (2/32), diarrhea 6.3% (2/32) and neuropathy 3.1% (1/32). No treatment-related deaths occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

The biweekly OXA and 48-h infusion of 5-FU/LV in patients with advanced BTC showed tolerable and efficacy equivalent to other combination regimens treatment.

Hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin and other antineoplastic agents

Although the reported incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to antineoplastic agents is considered to be uncommon, it is difficult to evaluate their exact prevalence, mainly because their definition is vast and pathogenic mechanisms are vague. HSR include facial flushing, erythema, pruritus, fever, tachycardia, dyspnea, tongue swelling, rash/hives, headache, chills, weakness, vomiting, burning sensations, dizziness, and edema. Treatment and prevention consists of slowing the infusion rate, steroids, and type 1 and 2 histamine receptor antagonists. Desensitization could allow the small number of patients who experience severe HSR to receive effective therapy for their cancer. Reintroductions have only been reported as single case studies or small cohorts. Large-scale validation on desensitization strategies is still missing. With regard to oxaliplatin, knowledge of its rare but eminent toxicity is paramount, because this drug is widely used in treating colorectal cancer, the second-highest cause of cancer mortality in the United States.

Pulmonary complications of novel antineoplastic agents for solid tumors

Antineoplastic agent-induced pulmonary toxicity is an important cause of respiratory failure. Although the incidence of antineoplastic agent-induced pulmonary toxicity seems to be low, more cases can be expected, with increasing numbers of patients receiving the new generations of antineoplastic agents. Antineoplastic agents have previously been associated with bronchospasm, hypersensitivity reactions, venous thromboembolism, and pulmonary hemorrhage. Physicians should be aware of the clinical and radiographic presentations of the pulmonary toxicities associated with the newer antineoplastic agents. The approach to diagnosis, risk factors, and possible mechanisms of antineoplastic agent-induced pulmonary toxicity are discussed in this article.

Successful desensitization to oxaliplatin with incorporation of calcium gluconate and magnesium sulfate

Since the results of the MOSAIC trial demonstrated an improved disease-free survival in stage III colorectal patients treated with oxaliplatin combined with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid when they were compared with those treated with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid alone, the addition of this organoplatin to 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid has become first-line adjuvant treatment for stage III colorectal cancer. Unfortunately, there is a small population of patients who develop grade III/IV hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin which, until recently, have interfered with further treatment with oxaliplatin-containing regimens. Successful oxaliplatin desensitization protocols for patients having severe oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions have been reported. However, none of these protocols, have incorporated magnesium and calcium salts. Retrospective data has suggested that pretreating colorectal cancer patients with magnesium sulfate and calcium gluconate before the administration of oxaliplatin may reduce the incidence of neurotoxicities induced by this drug. Therefore, we modified a previously published oxaliplatin-desensitization protocol by incorporating intravenous calcium gluconate and magnesium sulfate, and report a patient with stage IIIc colorectal cancer and prior severe hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin who underwent successful oxaliplatin desensitization using this protocol.

Standardization of Skin Tests for Diagnosis and Prevention of Hypersensitivity Reactions to Oxaliplatin

BACKGROUND

Platinum salts can cause allergic sensitization. Recently, hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin, the most recent platinum coordination complex introduced into clinical practice, have been reported.

OBJECTIVE

To validate and standardize skin tests to diagnose and possibly prevent hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin. The secondary aims were to confirm IgE-mediated pathogenesis of the clinical manifestations and to evaluate skin tests to predict patients at risk of hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin.

METHODS

We performed skin tests at increasing concentrations of oxaliplatin on 15 patients never exposed to platinum salts, on 10 patients treated with oxaliplatin without any adverse reactions, and on 4 patients who had shown hypersensitivity reactions to the drug. Moreover we performed skin tests on 8 additional patients starting before the 5th dose and following a course of chemotherapy.

RESULTS

A positive skin reaction to the prick test at a concentration of 1 mg/ml was seen in 1 patient with hypersensitivity reactions. The intradermal test was positive in all the patients with hypersensitivity reactions at a concentration of 0.1 mg/ml. It was negative in the 15 nonexposed subjects, and in the 10 patients who had been exposed to oxaliplatin without hypersensitivity reactions. The skin test administered to patients before chemotherapy was positive in one case.

CONCLUSION

A skin prick test at a concentration of 1 mg/ml and, in the case of a negative response, an intradermal test at the optimal concentration of 0.1 mg/ml should be used, starting from the 5th course of therapy, to diagnose and prevent hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin.