Acute infusion-related reactions in pediatric patients receiving etoposide at a tertiary cancer center

INTRODUCTION

Etoposide is a key component of many pediatric chemotherapy regimens for both hematologic and solid tumors. It is well documented that patients receiving etoposide may experience infusion-related reactions.

METHODS

In this study, total doses of etoposide and etoposide phosphate were identified, and infusion-related reactions were retrospectively evaluated at a large pediatric oncology ambulatory clinic. The primary outcome was to determine the rate of acute infusion-related reactions to etoposide. A secondary objective was to identify potential risk factors associated with such reactions.

RESULTS

Overall, 1463 doses of etoposide were dispensed to 150 unique patients and 15 patients (10%) experienced etoposide infusion-related reactions. Of the 15 patients that experienced etoposide infusion-related reaction, two were successfully able to tolerate subsequent infusions with a slower etoposide infusion rate and pre-medications. The remaining patients changed drug formulation to etoposide phosphate (n = 12) or continued therapy without any formulation of etoposide (n = 1). Patients with classical Hodgkin's lymphoma experienced a higher incidence of infusion-related reactions compared to the overall patient population (30.5% vs. 10%) and made up 73.3% of all infusion-related reactions during the study period.

CONCLUSIONS

During the examined study period, 10% of patients experienced an acute infusion-related reaction to etoposide. This review builds on previous literature concluding that additional monitoring may be warranted in patients with classical Hodgkin's lymphoma receiving etoposide.

Multidisciplinary Approach to Deciphering Etoposide Infusion Reactions and Potential Role of Polyethersulfone Filter Membranes

PURPOSE

Etoposide, a topoisomerase II inhibitor used clinically to treat cancer, has been associated with severe anaphylactic infusion related adverse drug reactions (ADRs). In a previous study we identified a hydrophilic polyethersulfone filter as a possible cause of increased rates of pediatric etoposide infusion reactions. In this multidisciplinary follow-up analytical study, we aimed to assess the chemical structure of etoposide after passing through the same hydrophilic polyethersulfone filter.

METHODS

An etoposide 0.4 mg/mL infusion was prepared under aseptic conditions and then passed through a standard IV infusion set with an in-line filter in place. Samples were taken in triplicate using a needle-less access system to include sampling sites directly from the IV bag port and from the IV tubing both before and after the in-line filter. Samples were diluted into mobile phase, then an aliquot was injected into a high-performance liquid chromatography mass spectrometry HPLC-MS (Thermo TSQ Quantum Ultra) system coupled to a Diode Array Detector (DAD) (Thermo Dionex Ultimate 3000). Etoposide was monitored using a selected reaction monitoring scan (SRM) of 606.2/228.8 and wavelengths of 210, 220, 254, and 280 nm for 30 minutes.

RESULTS

No detectable differences were observed upon comparing the three samples. Based on these results, a chemical change in etoposide resulting from an in-line filter is unlikely to be the primary cause of increased rates of infusion reactions.

CONCLUSION

Pharmacists working in healthcare systems, observe many ADRs, but rarely have the resources necessary to investigate the potential etiology or causality. This report highlights importance of multi-disciplinary collaboration to investigate serious ADRs.

Etoposide hypersensitivity reactions associated with in-line filter use: A retrospective cohort study at CHU de Québec-Université Laval

INTRODUCTION

A case series of hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) during intravenous administration of etoposide was observed following the introduction of in-line filters (ILFs) at a specialized university-affiliated center. This raised questions about the possible involvement of filters in these reactions. Despite there being very little published evidence to inform clinical decision making in this potentially clinically significant situation, the use of ILFs was discontinued at this center pending further investigation. The aims of this study were to evaluate the cumulative incidence of etoposide-related HSR with and without the use of ILF and to describe the reactions in adult and pediatric patients with cancer.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study was performed among all pediatric and adult patients treated with intravenous etoposide at a maximal concentration of 0.4 mg/mL at our center between 30 September 2015 and 16 August 2018. This covered periods of time during which ILFs were used, as well as 6 months before their implementation and after their withdrawal. Data were extracted from medical records and cumulative incidence was calculated for each of the time periods (pre-ILF, ILF, and post-ILF) as the proportion of patients who recorded an HSR (one or more). Confidence intervals were calculated for each proportion using Fisher's Exact 95%. Comparisons of proportions between time periods were performed using Exact Pearson Chi-squared tests. Data were stratified by a number of perfusion cycles (single cycle or multiple cycles) and by patient population (adult and pediatric).

RESULTS

A total of 284 patients were included in the study. The overall cumulative incidence of etoposide HSR was 9.9%. The cumulative incidence of HSR tended to be higher during ILF use when compared with combined pre- and post-ILF periods (12.2% [95% CI: 7.9-17.8] vs. 5.2% [95% CI: 1.7-11.7], p  =  0.09). In patients who received multiple cycles of etoposide, the cumulative incidence of HSRs was higher during ILF use when compared with combined pre- and post-ILF periods (15.0% [95% CI: 9.6-21.8] vs. 3.9% [95% CI: 0.8-11.0], p  =  0.01). The majority of HSRs' maximal severity were grade 1 or 2 (85.7%) according to Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests a link between the use of ILFs and increased incidence of HSR during etoposide perfusion.

Immediate severe hypersensitivity reaction to etoposide phosphate: Case report and review of the literature

INTRODUCTION

Hypersensitivity reactions from intravenous (IV) etoposide have been rarely reported, with these being seen more commonly with etoposide than with etoposide phosphate. This is generally explained by the need for polysorbate 80, a known cause of hypersensitivity, as a solubiliser, in the etoposide formulation.

CASE REPORT

We report a 22-year-old male, being treated with adjuvant BEP (bleomycin/etoposide phosphate/cisplatin) for a testicular germ cell tumour. Bleomycin and cisplatin were administered without incident. Within one minute of etoposide phosphate commencement he experienced a severe hypersensitivity reaction, consisting of widespread erythematous rash, facial swelling, and nausea. Observations included unrecordable blood pressure, tachycardia, hypoxia, and loss of consciousness, confirming a diagnosis of anaphylactic shock.

MANAGEMENT AND OUTCOME

Etoposide phosphate was ceased immediately. He was successfully managed with IV hydrocortisone, IV promethazine, intramuscular adrenaline, IV fluids and oxygen. Following admission for observation, significant improvement occurred over 48 h.

DISCUSSION

Hypersensitivity reactions to etoposide were first reported in the 1980s. Following reactions to etoposide, substituting etoposide phosphate into chemotherapy regimens has commonly allowed treatment to continue without incidence. Anaphylactic reactions to etoposide phosphate were first documented in 2012, with further cases reported subsequently. Unlike etoposide, etoposide phosphate is highly soluble in aqueous solutions and doesn't require adjuvants in the formulation. Hypersensitivity reactions to etoposide phosphate are therefore likely related to the etoposide drug molecule itself. Clinicians should be aware of this rare, but potentially life-threatening, toxicity when using etoposide-based treatments and have procedures in place to urgently manage any hypersensitivity reactions that may occur.

Risks and mitigation strategies to prevent etoposide infusion-related reactions in children

Etoposide is an antineoplastic agent widely used for treatment of many pediatric cancers. Etoposide has been associated with infusion-related reactions. In this brief report, we compare etoposide infusion-related reactions that occurred over a 10-year period at two freestanding pediatric hospitals. Infusion reactions occurred in 1% of patients at two hospitals across the study period. Rates of 4.8%, 3.4%, and 7.9% were observed at Children's Mercy Hospital during 2018, 2019, and 2020, respectively, after the implementation of in-line filters during etoposide infusions in late 2017. Of the 32 patients who experienced adverse reactions, 41% were rechallenged after the reaction and all were able to tolerate at least one future dose with either pre-treatment or extending infusion duration. This work highlights the importance of a multicenter approach to investigating adverse drug reactions (ADRs) as variation in practice can provide key information about ADRs and potential risk factors.

Six-step etoposide desensitization protocol: A pediatric, adolescent, and young adult case series

Etoposide administration can be complicated by hypersensitivity reactions. Desensitization may provide a strategy to prevent hypersensitivity recurrence. One challenge with desensitization is regimen complexity. This case series describes 12 pediatric, adolescent, and young adult patients who received a simplified six-step etoposide desensitization protocol. This protocol contains 50% fewer titration steps compared with previously described protocols and eliminates infusion rate changes during titration. Simplified titration may minimize risk of error during administration and improve safety. This protocol was tolerated by 92% of patients. Given increasing frequency and duration of drug shortages, a simplified desensitization protocol provides a valuable treatment option.