Chemotherapy and Biotherapy-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions

Medication Desensitization: Single Intravenous Bag Method, in 3 Pediatric Patients

Chemotherapies and biologic agents are known to cause hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). It is imperative that pediatric patients receive these agents to treat their cancer or other rare condition, as oftentimes there are no available therapeutic alternatives. Successful medication desensitization has been described previously with a 12-step method using 3 intravenous (IV) infusion bags of varying concentrations. However, this 12-step process is time and resource intensive and increases the risk for medication errors. A recent study successfully used a simplified 12-step method with a single IV infusion bag for a paclitaxel desensitization. From the results of this study, our institution used this single IV infusion bag method for desensitization with 3 different medications. Two of these experiences were successful. We share those 3 experiences in this report.

Management of chemotherapy hypersensitivity reactions and desensitization: An SGO clinical practice statement

OBJECTIVE

The goal of this practice statement is to help members and their multidisciplinary teams recognize infusion reactions and hypersensitivity reactions in the clinical setting. It will provide recommendations to help guide response to reactions and desensitization when appropriate, to promote safe use of chemotherapeutic agents among all providers in the delivery process.

METHODS

A multi-disciplinary team of healthcare professionals from the Society of Gynecologic Oncology Education Committee collaborated to review peer reviewed literature and guidelines to develop a practice statement on the management of chemotherapy hypersensitivity reactions and desensitization regimens.

RESULTS

There is always potential for a patient to have a reaction to any medication, with both infusion reactions and hypersensitivity reactions potentially occurring in the treatment of gynecologic cancers. Premedication to prevent reactions should be given at least prior to infusion for regimens that include the most common agents associated with reactions. At the time when reaction is occurring it might be difficult to distinguish between an infusion reaction versus true hypersensitivity given the similarities in signs and symptoms, therefore it is important that orders to manage reactions be included in every chemotherapy order set so the infusion nurse can provide immediate interventions while waiting for the provider to arrive to assess the patient. Desensitization is a potential option to allow the patient to continue to receive the offending agent. While a variety of desensitization regimens have been presented in the literature, the goal is to minimize steps and variability to decrease opportunity for errors during chemotherapy preparation or administration.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating a review of the literature and clinical experience from the SGO Education Committee, this paper provides an overview of current approaches for prevention and management of reactions to commonly used chemotherapy agents for gynecologic cancers.

Premedication Protocols to Prevent Hypersensitivity Reactions to Chemotherapy: a Literature Review

Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy may prevent patients from receiving the most effective therapy. This review was undertaken to identify evidence-based preventive premedication strategies that reduce the likelihood of HSR in the first instance and improve the safety of subsequent infusions in patients who have demonstrated HSR to a certain class of chemotherapy. PubMed was searched until October 2021 using the key words: "hypersensitivity to chemotherapeutic drugs," "hypersensitivity to antineoplastic agents," "taxanes hypersensitivity," "platinum compound hypersensitivity," "premedication," "dexamethasone," "prednisone," "hydrocortisone," "antihistamine," "diphenhydramine," "cetirizine," "famotidine," "meperidine," "aspirin," "ibuprofen," and "montelukast." The search was restricted to articles published in English. A total of 73 abstracts were selected for inclusion in the review. Most premedication regimens have been derived empirically rather than determined through randomized trials. Based on the available evidence, we provide an update on likely HSR mechanisms and a practical guide for classifying systemic HSR. The evidence indicates that a combination of prevention strategies using newer antihistamines, H2 antagonists, leukotriene receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids and other interventions used judiciously reduces the occurrence and severity of HSR and improves safety.

Retrospective evaluation of a rechallenge protocol in patients experiencing hypersensitivity reactions with prior chemotherapy in a tertiary hospital

When encountering a hypersensitivity reaction to chemotherapy, a dilemma arises whether to continue the current regimen. In our institution, a standardized protocol has been developed. This study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of our rechallenge protocol in rechallenging patients with previous hypersensitivity reactions of grades 1 to 2 to paclitaxel, docetaxel, carboplatin and oxaliplatin. The protocol consisted of intensification of premedication and lengthening of infusion time. A retrospective review of electronic medical records was conducted. Patients who attempted rechallenge with paclitaxel, docetaxel, carboplatin and oxaliplatin under the protocol during the time period from August 2014 to December 2015 were included. Forty-six rechallenge cases were included (12 paclitaxel, 15 docetaxel, 5 carboplatin and 15 oxaliplatin cases). The first rechallenge cycle was completed successfully in 43/46 patients (93.5%) and 42/46 patients (91.3%) were hypersensitivity reaction-free throughout the treatment course under the rechallenge protocol. A total of 133/137 cycles (97.1%) were completed successfully under the protocol. Among patients who continued chemotherapy until disease progression or treatment completion, a median of three additional cycles (range: 1 to 9 cycles) were administered under the protocol. The four cases of recurrent hypersensitivity reactions responded well to infusion interruption and symptomatic treatment and all four patients were discharged uneventfully. Further rechallenge was not performed. Our study demonstrated that a combined strategy of intensification of premedication and lengthening of infusion duration is effective and probably safe in rechallenging patients with previous grades 1 to 2 hypersensitivity reaction to paclitaxel, docetaxel, carboplatin and oxaliplatin.

Immunology of infusion reactions in the treatment of patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia

Infusion reactions are potentially dose-limiting adverse events associated with intravenous administration of several common agents used to treat patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. True clinical hypersensitivity reactions are antibody-mediated and can occur only after repeated exposure to an antigen. Conversely, anaphylactoid infusion reactions are nonantibody-mediated and often occur on the initial exposure to a drug. Cytokine-release syndrome comprises a subset of nonantibody-mediated infusion reactions associated with the use of monoclonal antibodies and immune therapies. Clinical symptoms of hypersensitivity reactions and nonantibody-mediated infusion reactions heavily overlap and can be difficult to distinguish in practice. Regardless of the underlying mechanism, any infusion reaction can negatively affect treatment efficacy and patient safety. These events require prompt response, and potentially, modification of subsequent therapy.

Admission criteria and prognostication in patients with cancer admitted to the intensive care unit

Critical care for patients with cancer was once considered inappropriate because of a perceived poor prognosis for their long-term survival. Three decades of research has yielded evidence to support the use of critical care resources for many patients with cancer. A methodical approach to triage and evaluation of critically ill patients regardless of baseline medical diagnosis, coupled with an appreciation for the likely prognosis of their current cancer, is most likely to yield the fairest and most accurate appropriation of care. No clinical scoring system has emerged that accurately defines the severity of illness and likelihood for survival in patients with cancer. This article reviews the studies that have attempted to apply mortality prediction scales or scoring systems to these patients. Clinical judgment with incorporation of consensus opinions from the literature should be used to develop admission or restriction criteria for intensive care of patients with cancer.

Incidence and predictors of cetuximab hypersensitivity reactions in a North Carolina academic medical center

OBJECTIVES

Previous research has indicated a high incidence of cetuximab hypersensitivity reactions in the southern US. This study documents the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions in North Carolina, and explores whether factors such as patient demographics, allergy history, premedications, and cancer type are potential predictors for cetuximab reactions.

METHODS

This retrospective chart review consisted of 72 consecutively treated patients from Duke University's Morris Oncology treatment center between September 2005 and August 2007. Data regarding stage of malignancy, premedications, and hypersensitivity reactions were collected from electronic databases. The number and type of reactions were characterized. Patients with and without hypersensitivity reactions were compared using bivariate statistics and multivariate logistic regression.

RESULTS

Of the 72 patients, 21 (29%) experienced hypersensitivity reactions. The majority of reactions (62%) were grades III or IV. Of the 21 patients having a reaction, 9 (43%) were sent to the emergency room and 5 (24%) had an overnight hospitalization. Three hospitalized patients were admitted to the intensive care unit. Both male gender (p = 0.039) and head/neck cancer (p = 0.014) were related to an increased likelihood of hypersensitivity reaction in bivariate analyses. In multivariate analyses, controlling for demographics, allergy history, premedications, and cancer type/stage, only type of cancer was predictive of hypersensitivity reaction (colon vs head/neck OR = 0.177; 95% CI 0.036-0.858).

CONCLUSION

This study confirms a high rate of cetuximab hypersensitivity reactions in a southern region of the US. Patients with head/neck cancers were significantly more likely to have hypersensitivity reactions than patients with colon cancers.