1
|
Lee SJ, Lee IH, Kim S, Lee JM, Chae YS, Park HK. Effectiveness of Carboplatin-Prescreening Intradermal Skin Tests to Reduce Unanticipated Immediate Hypersensitivity Reactions: A Comparative Study. THE JOURNAL OF ALLERGY AND CLINICAL IMMUNOLOGY. IN PRACTICE 2024; 12:998-1005.e3. [PMID: 38070772 DOI: 10.1016/j.jaip.2023.12.005] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/11/2023] [Revised: 11/14/2023] [Accepted: 12/01/2023] [Indexed: 12/25/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND Carboplatin administration poses a risk of immediate hypersensitivity reactions (IHRs) that tend to increase with repeated administration and are mostly IgE-mediated. OBJECTIVE This study evaluated the usefulness of carboplatin-prescreening intradermal skin tests (IDTs). METHODS Carboplatin-prescreening IDTs were routinely conducted in patients with a history of receiving six or more carboplatin cycles beginning in January 2021. The primary objective was to assess disparities in the incidence of unanticipated IHRs to carboplatin administration. We compared patients in the intervention group (from 2021 to 2022) and those who did not undergo prescreening IDTs under the same conditions (preintervention group, from 2019 to 2020). Secondary objectives included evaluating the sensitivity and specificity of the prescreening IDT and the incidence of carboplatin IHR according to the number of infusion cycles. RESULTS The intervention group was composed of 67 patients who were administered 347 carboplatin cycles whereas the preintervention group included 96 patients who were administered 464 carboplatin cycles. The risk of unanticipated carboplatin IHRs decreased by 83.2% in the intervention group compared with results in the preintervention group (preintervention group, 3.45%, n = 16 vs intervention group, 0.58%, n = 2; P = .005). The prescreening IDT showed a sensitivity and specificity of 77.78% and 99.41%, respectively. The risk of newly developed IHRs based on the number of carboplatin cycles was less than 1% (cycles 1-5), 2.11% (cycle 6), 3.90% (cycles 7-12), 2.90% (cycles 13-18), and 0.74% (cycles 19 and greater), respectively. CONCLUSIONS Initiating carboplatin-prescreening IDTs from the seventh cycle on significantly reduced the risk of unanticipated IHRs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Soo Jung Lee
- Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
| | - In Hee Lee
- Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
| | - Sujeong Kim
- Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
| | - Jong-Myung Lee
- Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
| | - Yee Soo Chae
- Department of Oncology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
| | - Han-Ki Park
- Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, School of Medicine, Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea.
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Barbaud A, Garvey LH, Torres M, Laguna JJ, Arcolaci A, Bonadonna P, Scherer Hofmeier K, Chiriac AM, Cernadas J, Caubet JC, Brockow K. EAACI/ENDA position paper on drug provocation testing. Allergy 2024; 79:565-579. [PMID: 38155501 DOI: 10.1111/all.15996] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/14/2023] [Revised: 12/12/2023] [Accepted: 12/13/2023] [Indexed: 12/30/2023]
Abstract
In drug hypersensitivity, drug provocation testing (DPT), also called drug challenge, is the gold standard for investigation. In recent years, risk stratification has become an important tool for adjusting the diagnostic strategy to the perceived risk, whilst still maintaining a high level of safety for the patient. Skin tests are recommended before DPT but may be omitted in low-risk patients. The task force suggests a strict definition of such low-risk patients in children and adults. Based on experience and evidence from studies of allergy to beta-lactam antibiotics, an algorithm on how to adjust DPT to the risk, and when to omit skin tests before DPT, is presented. For other antibiotics, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and other drugs, skin tests are poorly validated and DPT is frequently necessary. We recommend performing DPT with chemotherapeutics and biologicals to avoid unnecessary desensitization procedures and DPT with skin tests negative contrast media. We suggest DPT with anesthetics only in highly specialized centers. Specifics of DPT to proton pump inhibitors, anticonvulsants and corticosteroids are discussed. This position paper provides general recommendations and guidance on optimizing use of DPT, whilst balancing benefits with patient safety and optimizing the use of the limited available resources.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Annick Barbaud
- Sorbonne Université, INSERM, Institut Pierre Louis d'Epidémiologie et de Santé Publique, AP-HP. Sorbonne Université, Hôpital Tenon, Service de dermatologie et allergologie, Paris, France
| | - Lene Heise Garvey
- Allergy Clinic, Department of Dermatology and Allergy, Herlev and Gentofte Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark
- Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
| | - Maria Torres
- Allergy Unit, Regional University Hospital of Malaga-IBIMA-UMA-ARADyAL, Malaga, Spain
| | - Jose Julio Laguna
- Allergy Unit, Allergo-Anaesthesia Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Hospital Central de la Cruz Roja, Alfonso X El Sabio University, ARADyAL, REI, Madrid, Spain
| | - Alessandra Arcolaci
- Immunology Unit, University Hospital of Verona, Policlinico G.B. Rossi, Verona, Italy
| | - Patrizia Bonadonna
- Allergy Unit, University Hospital of Verona, Policlinico G.B. Rossi, Verona, Italy
| | - Kathrin Scherer Hofmeier
- Allergy and Dermatology, Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Cantonal Hospital Aarau, Aarau, Switzerland
- Department of Biomedicine, University of Basel, Basel, Switzerland
| | - Anca Mirela Chiriac
- Allergy Unit, University Hospital of Montpellier and IDESP, UMR UA11, Univ. Montpellier - INSERM, Montpellier, France
| | - Josefina Cernadas
- Hospital Lusíadas, Porto, Portugal
- Centro Hospitalar Universitário H. S. João, Porto, Portugal
| | - Jean Christoph Caubet
- Department of Women-Children-Teenagers, University Hospital of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland
| | - Knut Brockow
- Department of Dermatology and Allergy Biederstein, Technical University of Munich, Faculty of Medicine and Health, Munich, Germany
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Lynch DM, Menon S, Mazzola E, Costa J, Jabaley T. A Three-Step Taxane Titration Protocol Decreases Hypersensitivity Reactions During First and Second Exposures. JCO Oncol Pract 2023:OP2200845. [PMID: 37058683 DOI: 10.1200/op.22.00845] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 04/16/2023] Open
Abstract
INTRODUCTION Patients receiving taxanes are at risk for developing hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) primarily during first and second lifetime exposures. Immediate HSRs require emergency care and can interfere with the continuation of preferred treatment. Although different approaches to slow titration have been used successfully for desensitization after HSR occurrence, there are no standardized recommendations for taxane titration to prevent HSRs. PURPOSE To determine if a gradual, three-step infusion rate titration decreases the rate and severity of immediate HSRs during first and second lifetime exposures to paclitaxel and docetaxel. METHODS We used a prospective, interventional design with historical comparisons to evaluate a sample of 222 first and second lifetime exposure paclitaxel and docetaxel infusions. The intervention was a three-step infusion rate titration provided at the initiation of first and second lifetime exposures. Ninety-nine titrated infusions were compared with 123 historical records of nontitrated infusions. RESULTS Compared with the nontitrated group (n = 123), the titrated group (n = 99) had significantly less HSRs (19% v 7%; P = .017). No significant difference in HSR severity was found between groups (P = 1.00). However, four nontitrated patients received epinephrine, and one required transfer to the emergency department (ED) because of reaction severity. In contrast, no titrated patients received epinephrine or required transfer to the ED. In the nontitrated group, seven patients did not complete their infusions versus one patient in the titrated group. CONCLUSION A standardized, three-step infusion rate titration prevented HSR occurrence. Significant issues affecting practice feasibility and sustainability were addressed.
Collapse
|
4
|
Gelis S, Verdesoto JT, Pascal M, Muñoz-Cano RM. Hypersensitivity Reactions to Monoclonal Antibodies: New Approaches. CURRENT TREATMENT OPTIONS IN ALLERGY 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s40521-022-00318-1] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
|
5
|
New Technical Aspects Used in the Management of Desensitization to Antineoplastic Drugs. CURRENT TREATMENT OPTIONS IN ALLERGY 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s40521-022-00312-7] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 10/16/2022]
|
6
|
Alvarez-Cuesta E, Madrigal-Burgaleta R, Broyles AD, Cuesta-Herranz J, Guzman-Melendez MA, Maciag MC, Phillips EJ, Trubiano JA, Wong JT, Ansotegui I. Standards for practical intravenous rapid drug desensitization & delabeling: A WAO committee statement. World Allergy Organ J 2022; 15:100640. [PMID: 35694005 PMCID: PMC9163606 DOI: 10.1016/j.waojou.2022.100640] [Citation(s) in RCA: 18] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/17/2021] [Revised: 01/27/2022] [Accepted: 03/03/2022] [Indexed: 12/16/2022] Open
Abstract
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).
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | - Ricardo Madrigal-Burgaleta
- Allergy & Severe Asthma Service, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
- Drug Desensitisation Centre, Catalan Institute of Oncology (ICO), Barcelona, Spain
- Corresponding author. Allergy & Severe Asthma Service, Respiratory Department, 4th Floor, King George V Building, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, West Smithfield, London EC1A 7BE, UK
| | - Ana D. Broyles
- Division of Allergy & Immunology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Javier Cuesta-Herranz
- Department of Allergy and Immunology, FIIS-Fundación Jiménez Díaz, UAM, Madrid, Spain
- RETIC ARADyAL, Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spain
| | | | - Michelle C. Maciag
- Division of Allergy & Immunology, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Elizabeth J. Phillips
- Department of Medicine & Pathology, Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, Nashville, TN, USA
| | - Jason A. Trubiano
- Department of Infectious Diseases and Centre for Antibiotic Allergy and Research, Austin Health, Heidelberg, Australia
| | - Johnson T. Wong
- Division of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | | | - Steering Committee AuthorsAliF. RunaMBBS, PhD, FRCPaxAngel-PereiraDenisseMDlBanerjiAleenaMDayBerges-GimenoMaria PilarMD, PhDmBernal-RubioLorenaMDmBrockowKnutMDnCardona VillaRicardoMDoCastellsMariana C.MD, PhDpCaubetJean-ChristophMDqChangYoon-SeokMD, PhDrEnsinaLuis FelipeMD, MSc, PhDsChikhladzeMananaPhDtChiriacAnca MirelaMD, PhDuChungWeng-HungMD, PhDvEbisawaMotohiroMD, PhDwFernandesBryanMBBS, MRCPaxGarveyLene HeiseMD, PhDxawGomezMaximilianoMD, PhDyGomez VeraJavierMDzGonzalez DiazSandraMD, PhDaaHongDavid I.MDpIvancevichJuan CarlosMDabKangHye-RyunMD, PhDacKhanDavid A.MDadKuruvillaMerinMDaeLarco SousaJose IgnacioMDafLatour-StaffeldPatriciaMDagLiuAnne Y.MDahMacyEricMDaiMallingHans JorgenMDajMasperoJorgeMDakMaySara M.MDalMayorgaCristobalinaPhDamParkMiguel A.MDanPeterJonathanMBChB, PhDaoPicardMatthieuMD, FRCPCapRodriguez-BouzaTitoMD, PhDaq2RomanoAntoninoMDarSanchez-BorgesMarioMDazbaTannoLuciana KaseMD, PhDuTorresMaria JoseMD, PhDamUreña-TaveraAliciaMDasValluzziRocco L.MDatVolcheckGerald W.MDauYamaguchiMasaoMD, PhDavHospital Universitario de Canarias, Tenerife, SpainAllergy Division, Ramon y Cajal University Hospital, Madrid, SpainDepartment of Dermatology and Allergy Biederstein, School of Medicine, Technical University of Munich, Munich, GermanyUniversidad de Antioquia, Medellín, ColombiaDivision of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, Brigham & Women's Hospital, Boston, MA, USAPediatric Allergy Unit, Geneva University Hospitals, Geneva, SwitzerlandDivision of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University Bundang Hospital, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of KoreaDivision of Allergy, Clinical Immunology and Rheumatology, Department of Pediatrics, Federal University of Sao Paulo, BrazilMedical Faculty at Akaki Tsereteli State University, KuTaisi, Tskaltubo, GeorgiaDivision of Allergy, Department of Pulmonology, Hôpital Arnaud de Villeneuve, University Hospital of Montpellier, Montpellier, FranceDepartment of Dermatology, Chang Gung Memorial Hospital, Taipei, Linko and Keelung, TaiwanClinical Research Center for Allergy and Rheumatology, National Hospital Organization Sagamihara National Hospital, Sagamihara, Kanagawa, JapanAllergy Clinic, Copenhagen University Hospital Gentofte, Copenhagen, DenmarkSchool of Health Sciences, Catholic University of Salta, ArgentinaInstitute of Security and Social Services of State Workers, López Mateos Regional Hospital, Mexico City, MexicoRegional Center of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, University Hospital “Dr. José Eleuterio González”, Gonzalitos y Madero s/n Colonia Mitras Centro, Monterrey, MexicoServicio de Alergia e Immunologia, Clinica Santa Isabel, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaInstitute of Allergy and Clinical Immunology, Seoul National University Medical Research Center, Department of Internal Medicine, Seoul National University College of Medicine, Seoul, Republic of KoreaDepartment of Internal Medicine, Division of Allergy & Immunology, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USADivision of Pulmonary, Allergy, Critical Care & Sleep Medicine, Department of Medicine, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, GA, USAAllergy Department, Clinica San Felipe, Lima, PeruCentro Avanzado de Alergia y Asma de Santo Domingo, Santo Domingo, Dominican RepublicStanford University School of Medicine, Palo Alto, CA, USASouthern California Permanente Medical Group, Kaiser Permanente Southern California, San Diego Medical Center, San Diego, CA, USADanish Allergy Centre, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DenmarkAllergy and Respiratory Research Unit, Fundación CIDEA, Buenos Aires, ArgentinaDivision of Pulmonary, Critical Care, Sleep & Allergy, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE, USAAllergy Unit and Research Group, Hospital Regional Universitario de Málaga, UMA-IBIMA-BIONAND, ARADyAL, Málaga, SpainDivision of Allergic Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USADivision of Allergology and Clinical Immunology, Department of Medicine, University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South AfricaDepartment of Medicine, Division of Allergy and Immunology, Hôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont, Université de Montréal, Montréal, Québec, CanadaCentro de Patología Alérgica, Hospital Quirón Palmaplanas, Palma, SpainOasi Research Institute – IRCCS, Troina, ItalyClinica Union Medica del Norte, Santiago, Dominican RepublicMultifactorial and Systemic Diseases Research Area, Predictive and Preventive Medicine Research Unit, Division of Allergy, Bambino Gesù Children's Hospital IRCCS, Rome, ItalyDivision of Allergic Diseases, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN, USADivision of Respiratory Medicine, Third Department of Medicine, Teikyo University Chiba Medical Center, Anesaki, Ichihara, Chiba, JapanDepartment of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, DenmarkAllergy & Severe Asthma Service, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UKDivision of Rheumatology, Allergy and Immunology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USAAllergy and Clinical Immunology Department, Centro Médico Docente La Trinidad, Caracas, VenezuelaAllergy and Clinical Immunology Department, Clínica El Avila, Caracas, Venezuela
| | | |
Collapse
|
7
|
Madrigal-Burgaleta R, Guzman-Melendez MA, Alvarez-Cuesta E. Drug allergy desensitization is not a unique recipe. Curr Opin Allergy Clin Immunol 2022; 22:167-174. [PMID: 35152228 DOI: 10.1097/aci.0000000000000821] [Citation(s) in RCA: 2] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 01/22/2023]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Drug desensitization is the only therapeutic option for patients with drug allergies who need to receive the drugs they are allergic to, and it is especially critical in patients with an urgent need for chemotherapy, biologics, or antibiotics, where equally effective alternatives might not be available. However, drug desensitization is not a cookbook where anyone with no experience or specific training can find a general recipe. This review article will approach the singularities that make personalized and highly specialized care essential in this field. RECENT FINDINGS Drug desensitization needs to be personalized for each individual patient bearing in mind countless factors. Recent articles have tried to define the optimal resources and the most important factors to account for in personalization. However, drug desensitization is only a tool within the wider management pathway, and we will discuss recent findings in allergy delabelling in chemotherapy, biologics, and antibiotics. SUMMARY Risk-assessment, delabelling, and desensitization protocols, as a part of wider management pathways, can be adapted locally along with comprehensive and multifactorial risk-management strategies. These high-complexity and high-risk procedures, such as drug desensitization, need to be managed by expert allergists who can provide personalization, innovation, continuous improvement, research, and teaching in expert centres.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Ricardo Madrigal-Burgaleta
- Allergy & Severe Asthma Service, St Bartholomew's Hospital, Barts Health NHS Trust, London, UK
- Drug Desensitisation Centre, Catalan Institute of Oncology/Bellvitge University Hospital, Barcelona, Spain
| | | | | |
Collapse
|
8
|
Pagani M, Bavbek S, Alvarez‐Cuesta E, Berna Dursun A, Bonadonna P, Castells M, Cernadas J, Chiriac A, Sahar H, Madrigal‐Burgaleta R, Sanchez Sanchez S. Hypersensitivity reactions to chemotherapy: an EAACI Position Paper. Allergy 2022; 77:388-403. [PMID: 34587281 DOI: 10.1111/all.15113] [Citation(s) in RCA: 46] [Impact Index Per Article: 23.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 07/24/2021] [Revised: 03/30/2021] [Accepted: 08/27/2021] [Indexed: 12/19/2022]
Abstract
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.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Mauro Pagani
- Department of Medicine Medicine Ward C. Poma Mantova HospitalASST Mantova Mantova Italy
| | - Sevim Bavbek
- Division of Immunology and Allergy Department of Chest Diseases Ankara University School of Medicine Ankara Turkey
| | | | - Adile Berna Dursun
- Department of Immunology and Allergic Diseases Recep Tayyip Erdoğan University Rize Turkey
| | | | - Mariana Castells
- Division of Rheumatology, Immunology and Allergy Department of Medicine Brigham and Women's HospitalHarvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA
| | - Josefina Cernadas
- Department of Allergy and Clinical Immunology Medical University, H. S. Joao Porto Portugal
| | - Anca Chiriac
- Division of Allergy Department of Pulmonology Hôpital Arnaud de VilleneuveUniversity Hospital of Montpellier Montpellier France
| | - Hamadi Sahar
- The Department of Medicine Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School Boston Massachusetts USA
| | - Ricardo Madrigal‐Burgaleta
- Allergy & Severe Asthma Service St Bartholomew's Hospital'sBarts Health NHS Trust London UK
- Drug Desensitisation Centre Catalan Institute of Oncology (ICO) Bellvitge University Hospital Barcelona Spain
| | - Soledad Sanchez Sanchez
- Division of Allergy & Clinical Immunology Department of Medicine University Hospital Complex of A Coruna A Coruna Spain
| |
Collapse
|
9
|
Rapid drug desensitization with platin-based chemotherapy: Analysis of risk factors for breakthrough reactions. World Allergy Organ J 2022; 15:100619. [PMID: 34992710 PMCID: PMC8703063 DOI: 10.1016/j.waojou.2021.100619] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/08/2021] [Revised: 11/20/2021] [Accepted: 11/29/2021] [Indexed: 11/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background All platin-based chemotherapeutics can cause hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs). With rapid drug desensitization (RDD), few patients experience breakthrough reactions (BTR) during desensitization. However, data about risk factors for BTRs during RDD in patients with HSRs to platins are limited. We first aimed to describe characteristics of our platin-reactive population and to validate the Brigham and Women's Hospital's (BWH's) RDD protocol in our population along with their outcomes with RDD. Our second aim was to identify the risk factors for BTRs. Method This was a retrospective chart review (2013–2020) of patients with symptoms of immediate HSRs to platins. Initial HSRs were classified as grade 1, 2, or 3 based on their severity. Skin prick tests (SPT)/intradermal tests (IDT) were performed with implicated platins. A 12-step protocol was used during RDD. Results The study comprised 65 women and seven men (mean age 57.78 ± 8.73 years). Initial HSRs to carboplatin, cisplatin, and oxaliplatin occurred in 38, 13, and 21 patients, respectively. All patients reacted at the fifth (median) recurrent infusions (min:1, max:20). The median values for carboplatin, cisplatin, and oxaliplatin were 6 (1–20), 3 (1–15), and 3 (1–11), respectively. Most initial HSRs were grade 2 (n = 40, 55.6%) and 3 (n = 27, 37.5%); only 6.9% (n = 5) were grade 1. Patients with grade 1, 2, and 3 initial HSRs had positive platin skin test results at rates of 80%, 74%, and 88%, respectively. A total of 232 RDDs were performed in 72 patients and 98.7% of these desensitizations were completed. BTRs occurred in 56 (24.1%) (grade 1 n = 14, 25%; grade 2 n = 32, 57%; grade 3 n = 10, 18%) of these desensitizations. Breakthrough reactions were more severe in patients with positive SPTs or 1:100 or 1:10 dilutions of IDT (p = 0.014). BTR was not observed during RDD in any of the patients with positive 1:1 dilutions of IDT. Positivity on prick or 1:100 or 1:10 IDT increased the risk of BTR 5.058 times. There was no significant association between the risk of BTRs and age, drug cycle, sex, comorbidities, or atopy. Conclusion In our experience, 98.7% of 232 RDDs to platins were completed successfully, showing that RDD was safe and effective. Drug skin test positivity is a potential marker for identifying high-risk patients who will have BTRs during RDDs to platins.
Collapse
|