Nationwide pharmacovigilance data for cetuximab-induced anaphylaxis and predictive model validation using prospective specific IgE detection

Background

Cetuximab (chimeric monoclonal antibody to human epidermal growth factor receptor) is used to treat colorectal and head and neck cancers. Due to cross-reactivity with galactose-α-1,3-galactose (alpha-gal), it can induce hypersensitivity even at first administration. We aimed to determine the incidence and clinical manifestation of cetuximab-induced anaphylaxis, and to establish a means of predicting its incidence in patients ahead of treatment.

Methods

Nationwide and single-center pharmacovigilance data from 2010 to 2017 were collected from the Korea Institute of Drug Safety-Korea Adverse Event Reporting System and Severance Regional Pharmacovigilance Center. Patients scheduled for cetuximab administration were enrolled prospectively. A skin prick test was carried out and serum IgE specific to cetuximab and cross-reactive allergens were measured. Reactions were monitored after cetuximab infusion.

Results

Over 8 years, there were 23 reports of anaphylaxis nationwide. In a single-center study, incidence of cetuximab-induced anaphylaxis was 1.1%. Most anaphylaxis occurred at first injection (93.3%), even under pretreatment with anti-allergic drugs. Four of 64 patients (6.3%) experienced severe anaphylaxis. The median cetuximab-specific IgE titer was 6.9 kU_A/L in patients experiencing anaphylaxis and 0 kU_A/L in those who did not (P < 0.001). The results of alpha-gal, beef sIgE, and cetuximab skin prick testing were similar to those of cetuximab sIgE. Patients who did not experience hypersensitivity were negative in all 4 allergy tests. Its positive and negative predictive values were 100%.

Conclusions

Specific IgE detection of cetuximab or alpha-gal can accurately predict cetuximab-induced anaphylaxis prior to first administration.

Colon Cancer, Version 2.2021, NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology

This selection from the NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology (NCCN Guidelines) for Colon Cancer focuses on systemic therapy options for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), because important updates have recently been made to this section. These updates include recommendations for first-line use of checkpoint inhibitors for mCRC, that is deficient mismatch repair/microsatellite instability-high, recommendations related to the use of biosimilars, and expanded recommendations for biomarker testing. The systemic therapy recommendations now include targeted therapy options for patients with mCRC that is HER2-amplified, or BRAF V600E mutation-positive. Treatment and management of nonmetastatic or resectable/ablatable metastatic disease are discussed in the complete version of the NCCN Guidelines for Colon Cancer available at NCCN.org. Additional topics covered in the complete version include risk assessment, staging, pathology, posttreatment surveillance, and survivorship.

Cardiovascular Toxicity of Targeted Therapies for Cancer: An Overview of Systematic Reviews

Background

Several targeted therapies for cancer have been associated with cardiovascular toxicity. The evidence for this association has not been synthesized systematically nor has the quality of evidence been considered. We synthesized systematic review evidence of cardiovascular toxicity of individual targeted agents.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for systematic reviews with meta-analyses of cardiovascular outcomes for individual agents published to May 2020. We selected reviews according to prespecified eligibility criteria (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews CRD42017080014). We classified evidence of cardiovascular toxicity as sufficient, probable, possible, or indeterminate for specific cardiovascular outcomes based on statistical significance, study quality, and size.

Results

From 113 systematic reviews, we found at least probable systematic review evidence of cardiovascular toxicity for 18 agents, including high- and all-grade hypertension for bevacizumab, ramucirumab, axitinib, cediranib, pazopanib, sorafenib, sunitinib, vandetanib, aflibercept, abiraterone, and enzalutamide, and all-grade hypertension for nintedanib; high- and all-grade arterial thromboembolism (includes cardiac and/or cerebral events) for bevacizumab and abiraterone, high-grade arterial thromboembolism for trastuzumab, and all-grade arterial thromboembolism for sorafenib and tamoxifen; high- and all-grade venous thromboembolism (VTE) for lenalidomide and thalidomide, high-grade VTE for cetuximab and panitumumab, and all-grade VTE for bevacizumab; high- and all-grade left ventricular ejection fraction decline or congestive heart failure for bevacizumab and trastuzumab, and all-grade left ventricular ejection fraction decline/congestive heart failure for pazopanib and sunitinib; and all-grade corrected QT interval prolongation for vandetanib.

Conclusions

Our review provides an accessible summary of the cardiovascular toxicity of targeted therapy to assist clinicians and patients when managing cardiovascular health.

Anti-EGFR therapy in metastatic colorectal cancer: mechanisms and potential regimens of drug resistance

Cetuximab and panitumumab, as the highly effective antibodies targeting epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), have clinical activity in the patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). These agents have good curative efficacy, but drug resistance also exists at the same time. The effects of KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations and HER2 amplification on the treatment of refractory mCRC have been elucidated and the corresponding countermeasures have been put forward. However, the changes in EGFR and its ligands, the mutations or amplifications of PIK3CA, PTEN, TP53, MET, HER3, IRS2, FGFR1, and MAP2K1, the overexpression of insulin growth factor-1, the low expression of Bcl-2-interacting mediator of cell death, mismatch repair-deficient, and epigenetic instability may also lead to drug resistance in mCRC. Although the emergence of drug resistance has genetic or epigenetic heterogeneity, most of these molecular changes relating to it are focused on the key signaling pathways, such as the RAS/RAF/mitogen-activated protein kinase or phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt/mammalian target of the rapamycin pathway. Accordingly, numerous efforts to target these signaling pathways and develop the novel therapeutic regimens have been carried out. Herein, we have reviewed the underlying mechanisms of the resistance to anti-EGFR therapy and the possible implications in clinical practice.

Meta-analysis on the risk of fatal adverse events by bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab in 31 randomized trials including 25,000 patients with colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Targeted drugs including bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab have been widely used during the management of patients diagnosed with colorectal carcinoma, especially as palliative treatment. The present meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the fatal adverse events (FAEs) of targeted drugs including bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab in patients with colorectal cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Studies of prospective, randomized, and controlled feature from EMBASE, Medline, and Cochrane Library, which reported FAEs potentially associated with bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab were adopted. Clinical characteristics and FAEs were collected from the enrolled literatures, with the quality of which been evaluated. Pooled analysis of FAEs, caused by each agent as first line, second/further line, and adjuvant treatment were performed with relative risks (RRs) and their corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) in software RevMan 5.3.

RESULTS

Thirty-one studies including 25,939 patients were brought into the final analysis. The RR and its 95% CI of the FAEs among all the agents including bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab was 1.07 (95% CI, 0.89-1.29; P = .50). The RRs and their 95% CIs of the FAEs as first line, second or further line, and adjuvant treatment related to bevacizumab were 0.91 (95% CI, 0.62-1.32; P = .61), 1.14 (95% CI, 0.57-2.28; P = .71), and 1.10 (95% CI, 0.67-1.79; P = .72). The RRs and their 95% CIs of the FAEs as first line, second or further line, and adjuvant treatment related to cetuximab were 1.02 (95% CI, 0.60-1.76; P = .93), 2.51 (95% CI, 0.49-12.88; P = .27), and 2.40 (95% CI, 1.00-5.77; P = .05). The RRs and their 95% CIs of the FAEs as first line, second or further line treatment related to panitumumab were 1.40 (95% CI, 0.89-2.18; P = .14) and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.43-1.09; P = .11), respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The present meta-analysis did not show any significantly increased RR of FAEs belonging to bevacizumab, cetuximab, or panitumumab, whether as first line, second/further line, or adjuvant treatment among patients with colorectal carcinoma comparing to placebo or blank treatment.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of selective first-line use of biologics for unresectable RAS wild-type left-sided metastatic colorectal cancer

Background

Evidence from a retrospective analysis of multiple large phase iii trials suggested that primary tumour location (ptl) in RAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (wtRAS mcrc) might have predictive value with respect to response to drug therapies. Recent studies also show a potential preferential benefit for epidermal growth factor inhibitors (egfris) for left-sided tumours. In the present study, we aimed to determine the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (icer) for the first-line use of an egfri for patients with left-sided wtRAS mcrc.

Methods

We developed a state-transition model to determine the cost effectiveness of alternative treatment strategies in patients with left-sided mcrc:■ Standard of care■ Use of an egfri in first-line therapyThe cohort for the study consisted of patients diagnosed with unresectable wtRAS mcrc with an indication for chemotherapy and previously documented ptl. Model parameters were obtained from the published literature and calibration. The perspective was that of a provincial ministry of health in Canada. We used a 5-year time horizon and an annual discount rate of 1.5%.

Results

Selecting patients for first-line egfri treatment based on left-sided location of their colorectal primary tumour was more effective than the standard of care, resulting in an increase in quality-adjusted life-years (qalys) of 0.226 (or 0.644 life-years gained). However, the strategy was also more expensive, costing an average of $60,639 more per patient treated. The resulting icer was $268,094 per qaly. A 35% price reduction in the cost of egfri would be needed to make this strategy cost-effective at a willingness-to-pay threshold (wtp) of $100,000 per qaly.

Conclusions

Selective use of an egfri based on ptl was more cost-effective than unselected use of those agents; however, based on traditional wtp thresholds, it was still not cost-effective. While awaiting the elucidation of more precise predictive biomarkers that might improve cost-effectiveness, the price of egfris could be reduced to meet the wtp threshold.

Antitumor pharmacotherapy of colorectal cancer in kidney transplant recipients

Renal transplantation has become the sole most preferred therapy modality for end-stage renal disease patients. The growing tendency for renal transplants, and prolonged survival of renal recipients, have resulted in a certain number of post-transplant colorectal cancer patients. Antitumor pharmacotherapy in these patients is a dilemma. Substantial impediments such as carcinogenesis of immunosuppressive drugs (ISDs), drug interaction between ISDs and anticancer drugs, and toxicity of anticancer drugs exist. However, experience of antitumor pharmacotherapy in these patients is limited, and the potential risks and benefits have not been reviewed systematically. This review evaluates the potential impediments, summarizes current experience, and provides potential antitumor strategies, including adjuvant, palliative, and subsequent regimens. Moreover, special pharmaceutical care, such as ISDs therapeutic drug monitoring, metabolic enzymes genotype, and drug interaction, are also highlighted.

Drug-related problems with targeted/immunotherapies at an oncology outpatient clinic

Background

Some studies in the literature describe drug-related problems in patients with cancer, although few studies focused on patients receiving targeted chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy. To identify the incidence of drug-related problems in patients receiving targeted chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy, and demonstrate the impact of a clinical pharmacist in an outpatient oncology care setting.

Methods

Prospective study was conducted in a hospital outpatient oncology clinic between October 2015 and March 2016. Patients greater than 18 years old receiving cetuximab, nivolumab, ipilimumab, or pembrolizumab were included in the study and monitored over a three-month period by a clinical pharmacist. Drug-related problems were analyzed using the Pharmaceutical Care Network Europe classification system. The main outcome measures were the frequency and causes of drug-related problems and the degree of resolution achieved through the involvement of a clinical pharmacist.

Results

A total of 54 patients (mean age: 57 ± 12 years) were included. There were 105 drug-related problems and 159 associated causes. Among the planned interventions (n = 149), 92 interventions were at the patient-level with 88 (96%) being accepted by the doctors. This resulted in 68 (65%) drug-related problems being completely resolved and 9 (8.6%) being partially resolved. The most common drug-related problem identified was “adverse drug event” (n = 38, 36%). Of the 105 drug-related problems, 63 (60%) related to targeted chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy with 34 (54%) classified as an “adverse drug event.”

Conclusion

Adverse drug events were the most common drug-related problems in patients with cancer. The involvement of a clinical pharmacist improved the identification of drug-related problems and helped optimize treatment outcomes in patients receiving targeted chemotherapy/immunotherapy.

Fatal adverse events with molecular targeted agents in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Aims

Concerns have increased about the risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) associated with molecular targeted agents (MTAs) in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). The purpose of this study is to investigate the overall incidence and risk of FAEs in advanced HCC with administration of MTAs by using a meta-analysis of available clinical trials.

Materials and methods

Electronic databases were searched for relevant articles before March 2017. Eligible studies were selected according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Pooled incidence, Peto ORs and 95% CIs were calculated according to the heterogeneity of selected studies.

Results

A total of 4,716 HCC participants from 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were finally considered for this meta-analysis. The pooled incidence of death due to MTAs was 2.1% (95% CI 1.6%–2.8%) with a Peto OR of 1.79 (95% CI 1.07–3.01; p=0.027) in comparison with controlled groups. Subgroup analysis according to biological agents showed that brivanib treatment in HCC patients significantly increased the risk of developing FAEs (Peto OR 3.97; 95% CI 1.17–13.51; p=0.028) but not for sorafenib (Peto OR 1.78; 95% CI 0.54–5.89; p=0.34) and other MTAs (Peto OR 1.43; 95% CI 0.75–2.76; p=0.28). Sensitive analysis showed that the pooled results were influenced by removing each single trial. The most common causes of FAEs were hepatic failure (22.2%) and hemorrhage (13.3%), respectively.

Conclusion

Clinicians should be aware of the risks of FAEs during the administration of MTAs in advanced HCC patients, especially for patients with abnormal liver function. However, the use of sorafenib remains justified in its approved indications due to their potential survival benefits and limited toxicities.

Research progress on common adverse events caused by targeted therapy for colorectal cancer

As targeted drug therapy is increasingly applied in the treatment of colon cancer, understanding and managing the adverse reactions of patients is becoming increasingly important. The present review examines the mechanisms of and adverse reactions to the most commonly used targeted drugs for colon cancer, and discusses methods of coping with these adverse reactions. Approved targeted drugs for metastatic colon cancer include monoclonal antibodies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), including bevacizumab, ziv-aflibercept and regorafenib, and monoclonal antibodies targeting epithelial growth factor receptor (EGFR), including cetuximab and panitumumab. The present review assesses the major adverse effects of these drugs and methods of dealing with reactions to them. VEGF inhibitors primarily result in cardiovascular and kidney problems. Meanwhile, EGFR receptor inhibitors are frequently reported to cause rashes, diarrhea and hypertension, and are reviewed from the point of view of resulting electrolyte disturbances.

Treatment-related severe and fatal adverse events with molecular targeted agents in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer: a meta-analysis

AIM

To perform a systematic review and meta-analysis of Phase III randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to determine the incidence and risk of severe adverse events (AEs) with molecular targeted agents (MTAs) in advanced/metastatic gastric cancer (GC) patients.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search for related trials published up to December 2015 was performed. Eligible studies were Phase III RCTs of advanced/metastatic GC patients assigned to MTAs or control group. Data were extracted by two authors for severe and fatal AEs (FAEs).

RESULTS

A total of nine Phase III RCTs involved 4,934 GC patients were ultimately identified. The pooled results demonstrated that the addition of TAs to therapies in advanced GC significantly increased the risk of developing severe AEs (relative risk: 1.12, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.24, P=0.02), but not for FAEs (relative risk: 0.97, 95% confidence interval: 0.65-1.45, P=0.88). Additionally, the most common causes of FAEs with MTAs were infections (16.3%), gastrointestinal hemorrhage (8.2%), and arterial thromboembolic events (8.2%), respectively.

CONCLUSION

With available evidence, the use of TAs in GC patients was associated with an increased risk of severe AEs, but not for FAE. Clinicians should be aware of the risk of severe AEs with the administration of these drugs in these patients.

Molecular therapy of colorectal cancer: progress and future directions

Colorectal cancer (CRC) remains one of the most common types of cancer and leading causes of cancer death worldwide. Although the introduction of cytotoxic drugs such as oxaliplatin, irinotecan and fluorouracil has improved the treatment of advanced CRC, the individual response to chemoradiotherapy varies tremendously from one patient to another. However, recent progress in CRC molecular therapies may provide new insight into the treatment of this disease. Currently, components of the EGFR, VEGF, Wnt and NF-kB pathways are the most important targets for CRC therapy. This review chronicles the development of molecular CRC therapies over the past few decades. We also provide an update on the current progress of research concerning the molecular pathways leading to CRC and discuss the possible implications for CRC therapy.

Incidence and risk of treatment-related mortality with anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody in cancer patients: a meta-analysis of 21 randomized controlled trials

BACKGROUND

Anti-epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs) cetuximab and panitumumab have emerged as an effective targeted therapy in the treatment of cancer patients, but the overall incidence and risk of fatal adverse events (FAEs) associated with these agents is still unclear.

METHODS

Databases from PubMed, Web of Science and abstracts presented at ASCO meeting up to May 31, 2013 were searched to identify relevant studies. Eligible studies included prospective randomized controlled trials evaluating MoAbs in cancer patients with adequate data on FAEs. Statistical analyses were conducted to calculate the summary incidence, odds ratio and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) by using either random effects or fixed effect models according to the heterogeneity of included studies.

RESULTS

A total of 14,776 patients with a variety of solid tumors from 21 clinical trials were included in our analysis. The overall incidence of MoAbs associated FAEs was 1.7% (95%CI: 1.1-2.5%), and the incidence of cetuximab-related FAEs was higher than that of panitumumab (2.0% versus 0.9%). Compared with the controls, the use of MoAbs was associated with a significantly increased risk of FAEs, with an OR of 1.37 (95%CI: 1.04-1.81, p=0.024). Subgroup analysis based on EGFR-MoAbs drugs, phase of trials and tumor types demonstrated a tendency to increase the risk of FAEs, but the risk did not increase in breast cancer, esophagus cancer and phase II trials.

CONCLUSIONS

With present evidence, the use of EGFR-MoAbs is associated with an increased risk of FAEs in patients with advanced solid tumors.