Omalizumab and other biologics in drug desensitization

Differential presentation of hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin and oxaliplatin: Phenotypes, endotypes, and management with desensitization

BACKGROUND

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to platinum-based drugs are heterogenous and restrict their access, and drug desensitization (DD) has provided a ground-breaking procedure for their re-introduction, although the response is heterogeneous. We aimed to identify the phenotypes, endotypes, and biomarkers of reactions to carboplatin and oxaliplatin and their response to DD.

METHODS

Seventy-nine patients presenting with DHRs to oxaliplatin (N = 46) and carboplatin (N = 33) were evaluated at the Allergy Departments of two tertiary care hospitals in Spain. Patient symptoms, skin testing, biomarkers, and outcomes of 267 DDs were retrospectively analyzed.

RESULTS

Oxaliplatin-reactive patients presented with type I (74%), cytokine release reaction (CRR) (11%), and mixed (Mx) (15%) phenotypes. In contrast, carboplatin reactive patients presented with predominantly type I (85%) and Mx (15%) but no CRRs. Out of 267 DDs, breakthrough reactions (BTRs) to oxaliplatin occurred twice as frequently as carboplatin (32% vs. 15%; p < .05). Phenotype switching from type I to another phenotype was observed in 46% of oxaliplatin DDs compared to 21% of carboplatin DDs. Tryptase was elevated in type I and Mx reactions, and IL-6 in CRR and Mx, indicating different mechanisms and endotypes.

CONCLUSION

Carboplatin and oxaliplatin induced three different types of reactions with defined phenotypes and endotypes amendable to DD. Although most of the initial reactions for both were type I, oxaliplatin presented with unique CRR reactions. During DD, carboplatin reactive patients presented mostly type I BTR, while oxaliplatin-reactive patients frequently switched from type I to CRR, providing a critical difference and the need for personalized DD protocols.

Mast Cell-Targeting Therapies in Mast Cell Activation Syndromes

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Provide an overview of the expanding landscape of mast cell (MC)-targeting treatments in mast cell activation syndromes (MCAS).

RECENT FINDINGS

Tyrosine-kinase inhibitors (TKIs) targeting wild-type and mutated KIT can efficiently induce MC depletion. Avapritinib and midostaurin can also temper IgE-mediated degranulation. Avapritinib has been recently approved by the FDA for the treatment of indolent systemic mastocytosis (ISM). Targeting activation pathways and inhibitory receptors is a promising therapeutic frontier. Recently, the anti Siglec-8 antibody lirentelimab showed promising results in ISM. MCAS is a heterogeneous disorder demanding a personalized therapeutic approach and, especially when presenting as anaphylaxis, has not been formally captured as outcome in prospective clinical trials with TKI. Long-term safety of TKI needs to be addressed. New drugs under investigation in diseases in which non-neoplastic MCs play a pivotal role can provide important inputs to identify new efficient and safe treatments for MCAS.

Managing Severe Adverse Reactions to Biologicals in Severe Asthma

BACKGROUND

The use of biological agents in the treatment of various inflammatory and malignancy conditions has expanded rapidly. However, these agents can induce hypersensitivity reactions, posing significant clinical challenges.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective study that included nine patients with severe asthma who experienced hypersensitivity reactions to biological agents (omalizumab, benralizumab and dupilumab).

RESULTS

Hypersensitivity reactions to biologicals in severe asthma were observed in 9 of 68 patients treated. In five cases, treatment was stopped or changed to another available biological, and for four patients administered under close surveillance, titrated provocation or desensitization was applied. Successful desensitization was achieved in three of the patients, allowing them to continue therapy without adverse reactions. Improvements in asthma control were observed post-desensitization, leading to the reduced need for systemic steroid treatments and an increase in quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the importance of recognizing hypersensitivity reactions to biologicals to have an appropriate approach for patients with severe asthma. As an effective approach for patients experiencing hypersensitivity reactions to biological agents, desensitization allows treatment continuation.

Therapeutical Targets in Allergic Inflammation

From the discovery of IgE to the in-depth characterization of Th2 cells and ILC2, allergic inflammation has been extensively addressed to find potential therapeutical targets. To date, omalizumab, an anti-IgE monoclonal antibody, and dupilumab, an anti-IL-4 receptor α monoclonal antibody, represent two pillars of biologic therapy of allergic inflammation. Their increasing indications and long-term follow-up studies are shaping the many different faces of allergy. At the same time, their limitations are showing the intricate pathogenesis of allergic diseases.

Standards for practical intravenous rapid drug desensitization & delabeling: A WAO committee statement

Drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to intravenous drugs can be severe and might leave patients and doctors in a difficult position where an essential treatment or intervention has to be suspended. Even if virtually any intravenous medication can potentially trigger a life-threatening DHR, chemotherapeutics, biologics, and antibiotics are amongst the intravenous drugs most frequently involved in these reactions. Admittedly, suspending such treatments may negatively impact the survival outcomes or the quality of life of affected patients.

Delabeling pathways and rapid drug desensitization (RDD) can help reactive patients stay on first-choice therapies instead of turning to less efficacious, less cost-effective, or more toxic alternatives. However, these are high-complexity and high-risk techniques, which usually need expert teams and allergy-specific techniques (skin testing, in vitro testing, drug provocation testing) to ensure safety, an accurate diagnosis, and personalized management. Unfortunately, there are significant inequalities within and among countries in access to allergy departments with the necessary expertise and resources to offer these techniques and tackle these DHRs optimally.

The main objective of this consensus document is to create a great benefit for patients worldwide by aiding allergists to expand the scope of their practice and support them with evidence, data, and experience from leading groups from around the globe.

This statement of the Drug Hypersensitivity Committee of the World Allergy Organization (WAO) aims to be a comprehensive practical guide on the technical aspects of implementing acute-onset intravenous hypersensitivity delabeling and RDD for a wide range of drugs. Thus, the manuscript does not only focus on clinical pathways. Instead, it also provides guidance on topics usually left unaddressed, namely, internal validation, continuous quality improvement, creating a healthy multidisciplinary environment, and redesigning care (including a specific supplemental section on a real-life example of how to design a dedicated space that can combine basic and complex diagnostic and therapeutic techniques in allergy).

Hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapy: an EAACI Position Paper

Chemotherapeutic drugs have been widely used in the treatment of cancer disease for about 70 years. The development of new treatments has not hindered their use, and oncologists still prescribe them routinely, alone or in combination with other antineoplastic agents. However, all chemotherapeutic agents can induce hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs), with different incidences depending on the culprit drug. These reactions are the third leading cause of fatal drug-induced anaphylaxis in the United States. In Europe, deaths related to chemotherapy have also been reported. In particular, most reactions are caused by platinum compounds, taxanes, epipodophyllotoxins and asparaginase. Despite their prevalence and relevance, the ideal pathways for diagnosis, treatment and prevention of these reactions are still unclear, and practice remains considerably heterogeneous with vast differences from center to center. Thus, the European Network on Drug Allergy and Drug Allergy Interest Group of the European Academy of Allergy and Clinical Immunology organized a task force to provide data and recommendations regarding the allergological work-up in this field of drug hypersensitivity reactions. This position paper aims to provide consensus on the investigation of HSRs to chemotherapeutic drugs and give practical recommendations for clinicians that treat these patients, such as oncologists, allergologists and internists. Key sections cover risk factors, pathogenesis, symptoms, the role of skin tests, in vitro tests, indications and contraindications of drug provocation tests and desensitization of neoplastic patients with allergic reactions to chemotherapeutic drugs. Statements, recommendations and unmet needs were discussed and proposed at the end of each section.

Omalizumab for successful chemotherapy desensitisation: What we know so far

BACKGROUND

Hypersensitivity reactions induced by chemotherapeutic drugs may influence the course of the oncologic disease by preventing doctors from prescribing first-line therapy. In order to prevent another hypersensitivity reaction to the culprit chemotherapeutic agent, the physician can decide between two possibilities: premedication or desensitisation protocols. Rapid drug desensitisation showed successful results for most patients, but some of them may develop symptoms. Although omalizumab is not licensed as premedication or adjuvant therapy in chemotherapy desensitisation protocols, there have been published some case reports and small sample size studies that indicated promising results.

METHODS

We reviewed all the published literature regarding the use of omalizumab during chemotherapy desensitisation protocols.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS

We found a great heterogeneity between the doses and the interval between omalizumab injections and chemotherapy - rapid drug desensitisation, but most of the studies showed promising results. As a corollary, we propose a dose regimen of omalizumab administered before the first desensitisation protocol. Then, omalizumab should be administered one day before every chemotherapy regimen. Omalizumab might be used as an adjuvant therapy and might be a solution for a hopeless situation.

Biologics as treatment options for anaphylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide the most recent insights in the use of biologicals in the treatment of patients with anaphylaxis.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is evidence that biologics such as omalizumab may be safe and effective in preventing anaphylactic reactions in patients at high risk mainly because of severe food allergy or desensitization procedures to food, airborne allergen, drugs, or hymenoptera venom.

SUMMARY

Further knowledge will guide the adoption and implementation of any new therapy including biologics for anaphylaxis according to the stratification of risk/benefits.

Mechanisms of human drug-induced anaphylaxis

Drug-induced anaphylaxis is a hyperacute reaction affecting multiple organs that can be of fatal consequence. Its incidence is increasing, consistent with a global increased sensitization to various allergens and drugs in the population. Few risk factors and mechanisms have been identified from human studies due to the rarity of anaphylactic events and their unpredictability. This systemic reaction is caused by the rapid release of a large range of functionally diverse mediators, including histamine and platelet-activating factor as the main drivers identified. Mechanisms defined from models of experimental anaphylaxis identify drug-specific antibodies of the IgE and IgG class that link the drug to antibody receptors on multiple cell types, causing their activation and mediator release. In the case of drugs with peculiar chemical structures, antibodies may not be necessary because drug-binding receptors, such as Mas-related G protein-coupled receptor member X2, have been identified. This review describes the complex reaction leading to drug-induced anaphylaxis that can involve various antibody classes, various cell types-including mast cells, neutrophils, platelets, basophils, macrophages, and monocytes-and their mediators and receptors that, importantly, can be activated alone or in association to participate in the severity of the reaction.

Hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis to checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies and desensitization

OBJECTIVE

To review type 1 hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis to checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies and its management with drug desensitization.

DATA SOURCES

English-language literature on MEDLINE regarding hypersensitivity, anaphylaxis, and checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies.

STUDY SELECTIONS

References were selected based on relevance, novelty, robustness, and applicability.

RESULTS

There are well-known tissue toxicities associated to checkpoint inhibitors, but hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis have been underreported. The presentation of these reactions is based on clinical phenotypes with underlying endotypes identified by specific biomarkers. Drug desensitizations have been successfully applied to checkpoint inhibitor drugs to allow patients with cancer to receive first-line therapies. This review provides current best practices for the recognition and diagnosis of hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis to checkpoint inhibitors and their management using drug desensitization.

CONCLUSION

Hypersensitivity reactions and anaphylaxis have been identified as potential adverse effects induced by checkpoint inhibitor-monoclonal antibodies. Drug desensitization is a safe and effective treatment option for patients who experience hypersensitivity reactions in need of these monoclonal antibodies to improve cancer outcomes.