Rapid desensitization for hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapy agents

Platin desensitizations in thoracic malignancies and risk factors for breakthrough reactions

Although platin desensitization is a safe and effective alternative for patients with hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), sometimes breakthrough reactions (BTRs) can be encountered. However, data about the risk factors for BTRs are limited. The aim of this study is to define the outcomes of desensitization, the characteristics of BTRs, and to identify the risk factors for BTRs with platins in thoracic malignancies. This is a retrospective report of patients with thoracic malignancies who underwent platin desensitization. Patients' demographics, initial HSR characteristics, skin test results, desensitization outcomes, and BTR characteristics were recorded. Thirty-three lung cancer and 14 malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) patients were included in the study. The culprit drug was cisplatin in 29 and was carboplatin in 18 patients. Skin test positivity was 43.5% with cisplatin, 50% with carboplatin, and it was found to be higher if the interval between the initial HSR and skin testing (ST) was ˃20 days (p = 0.027). One hundred and five desensitization courses were performed. Twenty-two patients had 33 BTRs. Skin test positivity was higher in the BTR-positive group (p = 0.025). BTRs (18.2%; n = 6) were more severe than initial HSR. In the case of epinephrine administration during initial HSR, epinephrine administration during the first BTR was found to be more (p = 0.036). The target dose was achieved in 92.4% of desensitization courses. The number of previous platin infusions ≥10 was found to be an independent risk factor for BTR development (p = 0.036 OR:17.641, 95% CI: 1.211-256.971). Identification of risk factors for BTR will guide appropriate management and desensitization approaches for platin HSRs.

Preparations of exploration of immediate hypersensitivity to antineoplastic agents: An oncology pharmacy perspective

BACKGROUND

Cancer patients are being exposed to antineoplastic drugs more frequently and for longer periods, resulting in a higher risk of hypersensitivity reactions. The aim of this study was to assess the pharmaceutical time and direct cost of drug allergy explorations following immediate hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents.

METHODS

A micro-costing method was used to collect data on consumption of human and material resources for allergy exploration preparations. The monetisation was carried out on the basis of prices and hourly wage costs applied in 2018. The number and type of allergy explorations prepared by the pharmacy as well as nature of antineoplastic drugs tested, and the number of culprit drugs reintroductions were collected.

RESULTS

Almost 1.5 h is required to realise allergy tests for one patient including pharmacist time for prescription analysis and pharmacy technician's time for tests preparation. The mean manufacturing cost of these tests is estimated at €62.87 (€57.82-65.49) per culprit drug for one patient. Programming patients according to culprit drugs tested allows rationalising healthcare provider time and increasing efficiency. From January 2010 to December 2018, 277 patients were tested and 490 allergy explorations were performed, corresponding to more than 5000 preparations. Mostly, the culprit drug could be reintroduced (n = 383, 78.2%) allowing patients to receive the best possible treatment.

CONCLUSION

Management of hypersensitivity reactions is constantly progressing, as it contributes to improving patient care in oncology. This activity is time-consuming for the pharmacy team but allows patients with previous hypersensitivity reaction to continue effective treatment.

Antimicrobial Desensitization: A Review of Published Protocols

Antimicrobial desensitization represents a last-line option for patients with no alternative therapies, where the benefits of this intensive process must outweigh the potential harm from drug exposure. The goal of antimicrobial desensitization procedures is to establish a temporary state of tolerance to drugs that may otherwise cause hypersensitivity reactions. While no universal antimicrobial desensitization protocols exist, this review critically analyzes previously published desensitization protocols. The purpose of this review is to provide a greater insight for clinicians and institutions to ensure desensitization procedures are efficacious while minimizing potential for patient harm. With an increasing rate of antimicrobial resistance and the critical need to preserve antimicrobial agents, desensitization may represent another option in our antimicrobial stewardship toolkit.

Breakthrough reactions during rapid drug desensitization: Clinical outcome and risk factors

BACKGROUND

Severe hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) interfere with the administration of necessary drugs for patients; drug desensitization can be a good alternative strategy. Although rapid drug desensitization (RDD) has been shown to be safe and effective, some patients still experience breakthrough reactions (BTRs) during desensitization.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to estimate clinical outcomes of RDD and to identify risk factors for BTR.

METHODS

From January 2015 to December 2017, retrospective analysis was done in cancer patients with HSRs to chemotherapy and monoclonal antibody who underwent 3-bag, 12-step RDD in Asan Medical Center.

RESULTS

A total of 58 patients (42 females; mean age, 54.7 ± 11.0) underwent 234 desensitization procedures. The most common underlying malignancy was gynecologic cancer (n = 26, 44.8%), and platinum-based drugs were common target drugs (135 cases of 36 patients). Twenty-six of 58 patients (44.8%) experienced 56 BTRs, whereas 178 cases (76.1%) of total desensitization did not show any reactions. Among them, 12 patients (20.7%) had moderate BTRs requiring systemic steroids, and 3 (5.1%) experienced severe BTRs requiring epinephrine administration. Logistic regression analysis revealed more severe initial HSRs (OR = 17.94, 95% CI = 1.78-181.68, P = .015), drug allergy history (OR = 7.83, 95% CI = 1.48-41.44, P = .035), and frequency of exposure to the chemotherapeutic agents (OR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.01-1.28, P = .016) increased the risk of moderate to severe BTR.

CONCLUSION

The standardized 12-step protocol for RDD was effective and safe for most patients. Severity of initial HSR, history of drug allergy, and previous high exposure to the chemotherapeutic agent showed a positive correlation with BTR above moderate grade. Studies are needed to propose an individualized protocol according to patient-specific risk assessment.

Desensitization in patients with hypersensitivity to haem arginate: A case report

Background

Porphyria comprises a group of metabolic disorders caused by the irregular activities of enzymes within the haem biosynthetic pathway. This disease can provoke a large variety of symptoms. Acute porphyria attacks need to be treated urgently to avoid prolonged illness and fatal complications. Haem arginate, a concentrated haem solution stabilized with arginine, is the only preparation available for treatment in Europe and South America. This report describes a safe desensitization protocol for patients who require such treatment and have haem arginate hypersensitivity.

Case presentation

A 25-year-old female patient diagnosed with acute intermittent porphyria, who had an anaphylactic reaction while receiving haem arginate. The patient was treated with a desensitization protocol for patients with hypersensitivity to haem arginate.

Conclusion

Porphyria is a disease that can significantly compromise a patient's quality of life. The desensitization protocol for patients with hypersensitivity to haem arginate is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with a history of haem arginate allergies, to whom it is not possible to administer haematin.

Desensitization therapy using 'Mariana Castells' protocol in a patient with multiple autoimmune disorders- does it work?

Clinical use of antibiotics is becoming more widespread with each passing day for various infectious diseases. This has caused an abrupt increase in hypersensitivity reactions linked to these drugs, sometimes preventing the use of first-line therapies. In these patients, clinical presentation may vary from mild skin infections to life-threatening anaphylactic reactions. Our patient is a 30 year old female with past medical history significant for mast cell activation syndrome and multiple autoimmune diseases who presented with chief complaint of fever. Patient was diagnosed with MSSA bacteremia requiring the start of an antibiotic regimen. Mariana castells protocol was used for desensitizing the patient before starting her on antibiotic regimen. Patient was desensitized in 2 days using the standard 12-step protocol and started on cefazolin for her long-term treatment of the infection. No acute episodes of drug hypersensitivity were reported. During the course of her hospital admission, she improved significantly with no complications. Our patient having a history of both multiple autoimmune diseases and mast-cell activation syndrome tolerated the protocol well with no complications. Appropriate treatment of the reactions including epinephrine use and management with personalized desensitization protocols can enhance the quality of life, life expectancy, and safety of an increasing at risk population of patients with infectious diseases allergic to their best medications. Protocols, such as mariana castells, are completely safe in autoimmune disorders and should be utilized as the standard of care in appropriate patient population.

Interleukin-10 is increased in successful drug desensitization regardless of the hypersensitivity reaction type

Background

Little is known about the mechanism of desensitization in hypersensitivity drug reactions.

Objective

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of drug desensitization on some cytokine levels in patients desensitized for drug hypersensitivity reactions.

Methods

Patients with a hypersensitivity reaction to any drug for whom desensitization was planned with the culprit drug, patients who could tolerate the same drugs and healthy subjects who were not exposed to these drugs were enrolled. Bead-based Milliplex MAP multiplex technology was used to determine interleukin (IL)-4, IL-5, interferon-γ and IL-10 levels in the sera of the subjects as a baseline and 24 hours after desensitization had been completed in the patients.

Results

A total of 26 patients (16 female [61.5%]; mean age 48.46 ± 15.97 years old), 10 control patients (5 female [50%]; mean age 47.4 ± 15.4 years old) and 5 healthy subjects (3 female [60%]; mean age 34.2 ± 5.6 years old) were enrolled. Four of the 26 patients did not tolerate the procedure and were grouped as the 'unsuccessful desensitization group' whereas 22 patients successfully completed the procedure and formed the 'successful desensitization group.' Baseline cytokine levels in the 3 groups were not statistically different. Postdesensitization IL-10 levels in the successful desensitization group were significantly higher than their initial levels (p = 0.005) whereas none of the cytokine levels significantly changed in the unsuccessful desensitization group. The rise in IL-10 levels was greater in chemotherapeutic desensitizations when compared to other drugs (p = 0.006).

Conclusion

Successful desensitization independent of the hypersensitivity reaction type seems to be related to the increase of IL-10.

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.

Mast cell desensitization inhibits calcium flux and aberrantly remodels actin

Rush desensitization (DS) is a widely used and effective clinical strategy for the rapid inhibition of IgE-mediated anaphylactic responses. However, the cellular targets and underlying mechanisms behind this process remain unclear. Recent studies have implicated mast cells (MCs) as the primary target cells for DS. Here, we developed a murine model of passive anaphylaxis with demonstrated MC involvement and an in vitro assay to evaluate the effect of DS on MCs. In contrast with previous reports, we determined that functional IgE remains on the cell surface of desensitized MCs following DS. Despite notable reductions in MC degranulation following DS, the high-affinity IgE receptor FcεRI was still capable of transducing signals in desensitized MCs. Additionally, we found that displacement of the actin cytoskeleton and its continued association with FcεRI impede the capacity of desensitized MCs to evoke the calcium response that is essential for MC degranulation. Together, these findings suggest that reduced degranulation responses in desensitized MCs arise from aberrant actin remodeling, providing insights that may lead to improvement of DS treatments for anaphylactic responses.

Rapid Desensitization for Immediate Hypersensitivity to Galsulfase Therapy in Patients with MPS VI

Mucopolysaccharidosis type VI (MPS VI) is a progressive, chronic, and multisystem lysosomal storage disease. Enzyme replacement therapy (ERT) with the recombinant human arylsulfatase B enzyme (galsulfase [Naglazyme]) is recommended as first-line therapy. It is generally reported as safe and well tolerated. Frequently observed mild to moderate infusion-related reactions which can be easily handled by reducing or interrupting the infusion and/or administering additional antihistamines, antipyretics, and corticosteroids are mostly mediated by non-IgE mechanisms. Here we report two children with MPS VI who experienced IgE-mediated reactions with galsulfase at the second year of the therapy. One child had anaphylaxis and the other had urticarial eruptions. They could receive ERT after successful rapid desensitization. To our knowledge, this is the second report on galsulfase allergy with IgE-mediated reaction. It is important to recognize IgE-mediated reactions since they can be life-threatening and do not respond to the standard therapies. We recommend allergy skin tests in the evaluation of infusion-related reactions unresponsive to standard therapies, so that continuation of ERT will be feasible after successful desensitization.

Management of allergy to penicillins and other beta-lactams

The Standards of Care Committee of the British Society for Allergy and Clinical Immunology (BSACI) and an expert panel have prepared this guidance for the management of immediate and non-immediate allergic reactions to penicillins and other beta-lactams. The guideline is intended for UK specialists in both adult and paediatric allergy and for other clinicians practising allergy in secondary and tertiary care. The recommendations are evidence based, but where evidence is lacking, the panel reached consensus. During the development of the guideline, all BSACI members were consulted using a Web-based process and all comments carefully considered. Included in the guideline are epidemiology of allergic reactions to beta-lactams, molecular structure, formulations available in the UK and a description of known beta-lactam antigenic determinants. Sections on the value and limitations of clinical history, skin testing and laboratory investigations for both penicillins and cephalosporins are included. Cross-reactivity between penicillins and cephalosporins is discussed in detail. Recommendations on oral provocation and desensitization procedures have been made. Guidance for beta-lactam allergy in children is given in a separate section. An algorithm to help the clinician in the diagnosis of patients with a history of penicillin allergy has also been included.

An effective strategy to prevent allopurinol-induced hypersensitivity by HLA typing

PURPOSE

This study was conducted to evaluate the usefulness of human leukocyte antigen (HLA) typing in preventing allopurinol-induced severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs) through the application of an allopurinol tolerance induction protocol or prescription of other alternative medications in high-risk patients.

METHODS

HLA typing was performed in patients with chronic renal insufficiency who needed allopurinol. HLA-B*58:01-negative patients were prescribed the usual dose of allopurinol. For HLA-B*58:01-positive patients, administration of either allopurinol based on a 28-day tolerance induction protocol or alternative medications was initiated. Hypersensitivity reactions were surveyed for 90 days and compared with the result of a previous retrospective cohort study.

RESULTS

Among a total of 401 study subjects, no SCARs were noted in HLA-B*58:01-positive patients with application of the tolerance induction protocol (n = 30) or alternative medications (n = 16), nor were any SCARs observed in HLA-B*58:01-negative patients who started allopurinol at the usual dose (n = 355). Compared with the previous retrospective cohort study, a significant reduction in SCARs was observed in HLA-B*58:01-positive patients (0 vs. 18%; P = 0.002).

CONCLUSION

This study shows the usefulness of HLA-B*58:01 screening in identifying patients at high risk for the development of allopurinol-induced SCARs and suggests that application of a tolerance induction protocol or alternative medications could be an effective strategy to prevent allopurinol-induced SCARs in HLA-B*58:01-positive patients.

Carboplatin-, oxaliplatin-, and cisplatin-specific IgE: cross-reactivity and value in the diagnosis of carboplatin and oxaliplatin allergy

BACKGROUND

The diagnosis of hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to platins is based on the characterization of the reaction and the results of skin testing. Platins can be irritants when used in skin testing; therefore, in vitro testing may offer an alternative diagnostic tool.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate sensitivity and specificity of platin specific IgE (sIgE) in patients with HSRs and in controls.

METHODS

Twenty-four patients with immediate HSR to platins were included (carboplatin, 12; oxaliplatin, 12): 19 women and 5 men (mean age, 61 years). The control group included 17 patients exposed to platin and with no HSR. Skin testing was performed on 22 patients. Carboplatin sIgE and oxaliplatin sIgE were measured in 24 patients and 17 controls; carboplatin sIgE was measured in 21 patients.

RESULTS

Skin test results were positive in 22 patients (carboplatin, 12/12; oxaliplatin, 10/12). Seven of 12 patients sensitive to carboplatin (59%) had positive carboplatin sIgE, 2 also had positive cisplatin sIgE, and all had negative oxaliplatin sIgE; 9 of 12 patients sensitive to oxaliplatin (75%) had positive sIgE to oxaliplatin, 8 of 12 (67%) also had positive carboplatin and cisplatin sIgE, to which they had not been exposed. All 5 carboplatin controls had negative sIgE; 3 oxaliplatin controls (25%) had positive carboplatin sIgE, and 2 had positive oxaliplatin sIgE.

CONCLUSION

Carboplatin sIgE is very specific but less sensitive. In contrast, oxaliplatin sIgE had higher sensitivity but lower specificity. Analysis of our data suggests that oxaliplatin exposure was more immunogenic. This could be clinically relevant because patients sensitized to carboplatin may be able to tolerate oxaliplatin, but patients sensitized to oxaliplatin may be at risk when exposed to carboplatin and cisplatin.

Hypersensitivity and desensitization to antineoplastic agents: outcomes of 189 procedures with a new short protocol and novel diagnostic tools assessment

BACKGROUND

Desensitization to antineoplastic agents is becoming a standard of care. Efforts to establish and improve these techniques are being made at many institutions. Our aims are to evaluate a new rapid desensitization protocol designed to be shorter (approximately 4 h) and safer (reducing hazardous drugs exposure risks) and to assess the oxaliplatin-specific immunoglobulin E (IgE) as a novel diagnostic tool.

METHODS

Prospective, observational, longitudinal study with patients who, for a 1-year period, suffered reactions to antineoplastic agents and were referred to the Desensitization Program at Ramon y Cajal University Hospital (RCUH). Patients were included or excluded as desensitization candidates after anamnesis, skin testing, risk assessment, and graded challenge. Specific IgE was determined in oxaliplatin-reactive patients. Candidate patients were desensitized using the new RCUH rapid desensitization protocol.

RESULTS

Of 189 intravenous rapid desensitizations, 188 were successfully accomplished in the 23 patients who met inclusion criteria for desensitization (of 58 referred patients). No breakthrough reactions occurred in 94% of desensitizations, and most breakthrough reactions were mild. In 10 oxaliplatin-reactive patients, 38 desensitizations were successfully accomplished. Sensitivity for oxaliplatin-specific IgE was 38% (0.35UI/l cutoff point) and 54% (0.10UI/l cutoff point); specificity was 100% for both cutoff points.

CONCLUSIONS

In the hands of a Desensitization Program, managed by drug desensitization experts, this new protocol has proven an effective therapeutic tool for hypersensitivity to several antineoplastic agents (oxaliplatin, carboplatin, paclitaxel, docetaxel, cyclophosphamide, and rituximab); moreover, it improves safety handling of hazardous drugs. We report the first large series of oxaliplatin desensitizations. Oxaliplatin-specific IgE determination could be helpful.

Hypersensitivity to antineoplastic agents: mechanisms and treatment with rapid desensitization

Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy drugs, such as taxanes and platins, and to monoclonal antibodies limit their therapeutic use due to the severity of some reactions and the fear of inducing a potentially lethal reaction in highly sensitized patients. Patients who experience hypersensitivity reactions face the prospect of abandoning first-line treatment and switching to a second-line, less effective therapy. Some of these reactions are mast cell-mediated hypersensitivity reactions, a subset of which occur through an immunoglobulin (IgE)-dependent mechanism, and are thus true allergies. Others involve mast cells without a demonstrable IgE mechanism. Whether basophils can participate in these reactions has not been demonstrated. Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) is a procedure that induces temporary tolerance to a drug, allowing a medication allergic patient to receive the optimal agent for his or her disease. Through RDD, patients with IgE and non-IgE HSRs can safely be administered important medications while minimizing or completely inhibiting adverse reactions. Due to the clinical expansion and success of RDD, the molecular mechanisms inducing the temporary tolerization have been investigated and are partially understood, allowing for safer and more effective protocols. This article reviews the current literature on molecular mechanisms of RDD with an emphasis in our recent contributions to this field as well as the indications, methods and outcomes of RDD for taxanes, platins, and monoclonal antibodies.

A paragonimiasis patient with allergic reaction to praziquantel and resistance to triclabendazole: successful treatment after desensitization to praziquantel

Paragonimiasis is an infectious disease caused by trematodes of the genus Paragonimus. This trematode can be treated successfully with praziquantel in more than 90% of the cases. Although praziquantel is generally well tolerated, anaphylactic reactions to this drug have been reported in a few cases. We report here a 46-year-old Korean female with paragonimiasis, presumed to be due to Paragonimus westermani, who displayed an allergic reaction to praziquantel and resistance to triclabendazole treatment. The patient was successfully treated with praziquantel following a rapid desensitization procedure. Desensitization to praziquantel could be considered when no alternative drugs are available.

General considerations on rapid desensitization for drug hypersensitivity - a consensus statement

Drug hypersensitivity reactions can occur with most drugs, are unpredictable, may affect any organ or system, and range widely in clinical severity from mild pruritus to anaphylaxis. In most cases, the suspected drug is avoided in the future. However, for certain patients, the particular drug may be essential for optimal therapy. Under these circumstances, desensitization may be performed. Drug desensitization is defined as the induction of a temporary state of tolerance of a compound responsible for a hypersensitivity reaction. It is performed by administering increasing doses of the medication concerned over a short period of time (from several hours to a few days) until the total cumulative therapeutic dose is achieved and tolerated. It is a high-risk procedure used only in patients in whom alternatives are less effective or not available after a positive risk/benefit analysis. Desensitization protocols have been developed and are used in patients with allergic reactions to antibiotics (mainly penicillin), insulins, sulfonamides, chemotherapeutic and biologic agents, and many other drugs. Desensitization is mainly performed in IgE-mediated reactions, but also in reactions where drug-specific IgE have not been demonstrated. Desensitization induces a temporary tolerant state, which can only be maintained by continuous administration of the medication. Thus, for treatments like chemotherapy, which have an average interval of 4 weeks between cycles, the procedure must be repeated for every new course. In this paper, some background information on rapid desensitization procedures is provided. We define the drugs and drug reactions indicated for such procedures, describe the possible mechanism of action, and discuss the indications and contraindications. The data should serve as background information for a database (accessible via the EAACI-homepage) with standardized protocols for rapid desensitization for antibiotics, chemotherapeutic agents, monoclonal antibodies/fusion proteins, and other drugs.

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.

Adverse drug reactions to biologics

The use of biologics has rapidly expanded since the introduction of the first diagnostic antibodies; they are now widely employed in oncology, autoimmune disorders, inflammatory diseases and transplantation medicine. Their widespread use has resulted in an increase in adverse drug reactions. Adverse effects result from both direct pharmacological actions and immunological actions, as well as through induction of a specific immune response. The nomenclature, particularly of the monoclonal antibodies, identifies the target structure and organ as well as the species of origin, which then helps predict their effects and antigenic properties. Depending on the extent of foreign protein, anti-allotypic or anti-idiotypic antibodies with or without neutralizing properties may be induced. Adverse drug reactions from biologics often depend on the target and may be explained by activation or inhibition of particular cytokine pathways. Adverse drug reactions are classified by their pathomechanism, which enhances understanding of the pathogenesis and facilitates both allergologic diagnostic measures and planning of premedication in future treatments. This review emphasizes immunostimulatory and hypersensitivity reactions.

Cancer-induced expansion and activation of CD11b+ Gr-1+ cells predispose mice to adenoviral-triggered anaphylactoid-type reactions

Intravascular delivery (1.5 x 10(9) particles and higher) of recombinant adenovirus (rAd) induces myeloid cell mediated, self-limiting hemodynamic responses in normal mice. However, we observed anaphylactoid-type reactions and exacerbated hemodynamic events following rAd injection in mice bearing malignant 4T1 mammary carcinoma. Because 4T1 tumors induce significant CD11b(+)Gr-1(+) myeloid cell expansion and activation, we set to determine whether this causes rAd-induced exaggerated responses. When treated with a single intravenous dose (1 x 10(10) particles) of rAd, mice implanted with 4T1 carcinoma succumbed due to the anaphylactoid-type reactions. In contrast, normal mice and mice implanted with a related mammary carcinoma (66cl4) that does not induce CD11b(+)Gr-1(+) cell expansion, showed minimal responses. Depletion of phagocytic CD11b(+)Gr-1(+) cells prior to rAd delivery protected 4T1 tumor-bearing animals, whereas passive transfer of CD11b(+)Gr-1(+) cells from 4T1 tumor-bearing animals was sufficient to convey susceptibility to anaphylactoid-type reactions in normal animals. We further show that there is upregulation of nitric oxide and leukotriene signaling pathways in the 4T1 tumor-induced CD11b(+)Gr-1(+) myeloid cells and that pretreating mice with inhibitors of nitric oxide synthetase and leukotrienes can attenuate the anaphylactoid-type reactions. These data show that malignant tumor growth can alter CD11b(+)Gr-1(+) myeloid cells, rendering hosts susceptible to anaphylactoid-type reactions upon intravascular treatment with rAd.

Evaluation and management of pediatric drug allergic reactions

Drug allergy is a common reason for consulting an allergist. Determining whether a particular drug is involved can be accomplished with a careful history and physical examination, knowledge of the common and idiosyncratic reactions of the drugs in question, and selective skin testing. If a drug reaction is suspected, alternatives exist to allow continued appropriate treatment. A practical approach to the pediatric patient is outlined along with a general discussion of common drug allergic reactions encountered in clinical practice.

Rituximab and desensitization for a patient with severe factor IX deficiency, inhibitors, and history of anaphylaxis

We report the case of a 9-year-old boy with severe hemophilia B with an inhibitor and a history of anaphylaxis to factor IX (FIX), who was successfully treated with immune tolerance (IT) that included rituximab (Genentech, San Francisco, CA) and desensitization. The patient began the first course of IT at age of 7 years with daily recombinant FIX infusions that was aborted at day 32 because of a systemic allergic reaction. A second course of IT was attempted 11 months later, initiated with a desensitization protocol with escalating doses of plasma-derived FIX in addition to therapy with rituximab. This was well tolerated without allergic symptoms and with eradication of the inhibitor and improvement in factor kinetics. A second course of rituximab was given 13 months later for worsening FIX kinetics again with an excellent response and without evidence of adverse effects.

11th annual Inflammatory and Immune Diseases Drug Discovery and Development Summit 12-13 March 2007, San Francisco, USA

The Strategic Research Institute (SRi) hosted the 11th International Inflammation and Immune Diseases Drug Discovery and Development World Summit in San Francisco during 12-13 March 2007. The summit comprised keynote sessions and two parallel tracks and focussed on targeting mechanisms for drug discovery and development, which modulate the immune response and which have anti-inflammatory activity in a number of human diseases. Indications included psoriasis, hepatitis C, allergic dermatitis, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis and osteoarthritis, multiple sclnerosis, cardiovascular disease and asthma. Data were presented supporting all stages of drug discovery from target identification and validation through to lead identification and optimisation to both early- and late-stage clinical development.