Hypersensitivity reactions associated with oxaliplatin

High-dose oxaliplatin induces severe hypersensitivity reactions and high recurrence rates during rechallenge in patients treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy

AIM

To analyze the risk factors for oxaliplatin (OXA)-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions and identify the recurrence rate of the reactions after an OXA rechallenge in patients treated with hepatic arterial infusion chemotherapy (HAIC).

METHODS

Among the 2251 patients treated with HAIC (OXA), 84 patients with gastrointestinal cancer who displayed hypersensitivity reactions between May 2013 and May 2022 were included in this study. Among the 84 patients, 23 (27.4%) developed severe anaphylactic reactions (grade III/IV), and 61 (72.6%) developed grade I/II reactions. We explored the risk factors for severe OXA-induced hypersensitivity reactions. Twenty-seven patients with grade I/II reactions underwent retreatment (HAIC with OXA), and the recurrence rate of the hypersensitivity reactions was determined. A multivariate logistic regression model was used to analyze the risk factors for OXA-induced hypersensitivity reaction.

RESULTS

In the study, multivariate analysis indicated that the dose of OXA (odds ratio [OR] 3.077, 95 % confidence interval [CI] 1.106-8.558, p = 0.031) was an independent risk factor for OXA-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions. Twenty-seven patients with non-severe hypersensitivity reactions underwent retreatment HAIC with OXA and 14 (51.9 %) experienced HSR recurrence, including 2 (7.4 %) who experienced hypersensitivity shock.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of OXA doses is a risk factor for OXA-induced severe hypersensitivity reactions in patients treated with HAIC (OXA). Rechallenging HAIC with OXA appears to be associated with a higher recurrence rate of the HSR.

Changing patterns in the epidemiology of drug allergy

Drug allergy (DA) remains a complex and unaddressed problem worldwide that often deprives patients of optimal medication choices and places them at risk for life-threatening reactions. Underdiagnosis and overdiagnosis are common and due to the lack of standardized definitions and biomarkers. The true burden of DA is unknown, and recent efforts in data gathering through electronic medical records are starting to provide emerging patterns around the world. Ten percent of the general population engaged in health care claim to have a DA, and the most common label is penicillin allergy. Up to 20% of emergency room visits for anaphylaxis are due to DA and 15%-20% of hospitalized patients report DA. It is estimated that DA will increase based on the availability and use of new and targeted antibiotics, vaccines, chemotherapies, biologicals, and small molecules, which are aimed at improving patient's options and quality of life. Global and regional variations in the prevalence of diseases such as human immunodeficiency virus and mycobacterial diseases, and the drugs used to treat these infections have an impact on DA. The aim of this review is to provide an update on the global impact of DA by presenting emerging data on drug epidemiology in adult and pediatric populations.

Oxaliplatin-Related Hypersensitivity Reactions: A Single Institution Series and Literature Review

Oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy is extensively used for the treatment of gastrointestinal tumors and other malignancies. Oxaliplatin-related hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) are common during antitumor treatment. Several studies have been conducted to identify predictive risk factors for oxaliplatin-related HSRs, but findings remain controversial. No definitive approach has been identified to reduce the risk of developing HSRs. The aim of this article is to provide an overview of oxaliplatin-related HSRs, and to report our institution's experience. With our work, we reviewed available data from the literature and described our case series. A total of 153 patients were treated with oxaliplatin and 17 developed an HSR. On the whole, 70.6% of reactions were Grade 3, mostly with respiratory and cutaneous symptoms. Steroids and antihistamines were administered to reduce hypersensitivity symptoms and prevent further reactions. A stronger premedication and prolonged time of infusion resulted in milder reactions or absence of subsequent reactions. We did not find any clear predictive factor for the development of HSRs. Although it is not possible to cancel the risk of oxaliplatin-based HSRs, strategies to reduce the risk of occurrence could be stronger premedication and prolonged time of infusion.

Meta-analysis of risk factors associated with oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions in cancer patients

This study aimed to investigate risk factors associated with oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions in cancer patients through a meta-analysis. A comprehensive retrieve of Chinese databases China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Data, VIP Database and English databases PubMed, ScienceDirect, Embase and Cochrane library was conducted. The studies that meet the requirements for meta-analysis according to inclusion and exclusion criteria were screened and assessed for eligibility. Odds ratio (OR) / Weighted mean difference (WMD) and 95% confidence intervals (95% CIs) or calculable dichotomous and continuous raw data were extracted to perform meta-analysis using random effect model or fixed effect model on the basis of heterogeneity between studies through Review Manager 5.4 software. A total of 14 cross-sectional studies and 3367 cancer patients were included. Meta-analysis results showed that platinum exposure history (OR value 3.13, 95% CI 2.19-4.48, heterogeneity P = 0.26), allergy history (OR value 1.76, 95% CI 1.09-2.85, heterogeneity P = 0.61), platinum free interval (OR value 3.75, 95% CI 2.00-7.06, heterogeneity P = 0.83), dexamethasone premedication dose (OR value 0.28, 95% CI 0.13-0.58, heterogeneity P = 0.21) were significantly correlated to oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions. Gender, age, metastasis, combination with bevacizumab, XELOX regimen and cancer types were detected to have no statistically significant effect on oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions. Platinum exposure history, allergy history and long platinum-free interval are risk factors of oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions. High dexamethasone premedication dose is a protective factor of oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions.

Drug fever induced by carboplatin-based regimens: Higher incidence in a women's hospital

OBJECTIVE

Previous studies have reported low incidence of carboplatin-related drug fever in early cancer treatment cycles. This study describes and analyzes relatively higher incidence rate of carboplatin-related drug fever associated with gynecologic cancer chemotherapy in order to allay anxiety in patients and avoid unnecessary interventions.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

All gynecologic cancer cases treated with carboplatin in a women's hospital in 2017 and 2018 were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed. Data for patients who experienced carboplatin-induced drug fever and those who received the same treatment but did not experience drug fever were compared for statistical significance. Risk factors for drug fever were identified by logistic regression analysis.

RESULTS

In total, 318 females with a mean age of 52 years were included in the analysis. Drug fever was observed in 25 patients (7.86%) in 45 cycles of total 1605 carboplatin-containing infusions. Fever occurred at a median of the third (range: 1-7) cycle, starting at 10.62 h (range: 1.18-50.35 h) after carboplatin infusion, and was generally controlled within 3 days. After chemotherapy rechallenge, the mean frequency of drug fever was 2 times per patient (range: 1-4 times). There were 35/45 drug fever incidents (77.78%) that were classified as grade II; in 15/45 cases (33.33%), antibiotic treatment was immediately initiated to prevent infection. Younger age was found to be a risk factor for drug fever following carboplatin treatment (odds ratio = 0.126, 95% confidence interval: 0.025-0.628; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The retrospective analysis demonstrated that carboplatin-induced drug fever, which occurred on post treatment 3 days, was a type of delayed hypersensitivity reaction with an incidence rate of 7.86% in gynecologic cancer. Younger age was identified as a risk factor. Drug fever is generally tolerated by patients, who insist on chemotherapy. Knowledge of carboplatin-induced drug fever may help physicians reach timely recognition for appropriate interventions.

Clinical Features of Oxaliplatin-induced Hypersensitivity Reactions in Chinese Patients: A Retrospective Multicenter Analysis

OBJECTIVE

The characteristics of oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) in Chinese patients were investigated to provide a reference for patients treated with oxaliplatin.

METHODS

The study reviewed the records of patients who developed oxaliplatin-induced HSRs in 17 hospitals from May 2016 to May 2017. We collected and analyzed the basic information, history of oxaliplatin administration and premedication treatments, chemotherapy cycles, HSR symptoms, and the management and outcomes of these patients.

RESULTS

Oxaliplatin-induced HSRs were recorded in 137 patients who had been treated with oxaliplatin-containing regimens. Five different chemotherapy regimens were applied. The median infusion cycle when oxaliplatin-induced HSRs occurred was 7, and HSRs occurred during or shortly after oxaliplatin infusion. Most of the patients experienced grade 1 or grade 2 HSRs with mild symptoms of pruritis (49.64%), flushing (46.72%), chest discomfort (26.28%), and urticaria (25.55%). The majority of the patients completely recovered from HSRs following treatment with antihistamines and dexamethasone. Seven patients completed chemotherapy with oxaliplatin after the symptoms resolved with proper management.

CONCLUSION

The results indicate that oxaliplatin-induced HSRs remain an important issue in safely and successfully fulfilling oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy. Further studies are needed to analyze the risk factors and establish prophylaxis for such reactions.

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.

Managing Infusion-Related Reactions for Patients With Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia Receiving Obinutuzumab

BACKGROUND

In patients with previously untreated chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) and comorbidities, treatment with the glycoengineered, type II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody obinutuzumab (Gazyva®) (GA101) plus chlorambucil (Leukeran®) was associated with superior outcomes to rituximab (Rituxan®) plus chlorambucil, with a similar safety profile. However, a higher occurrence of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) was reported with obinutuzumab. These reactions typically require additional management.

OBJECTIVES

The focus of this article is to provide oncology nurses and physicians with advice for obinutuzumab IRR management based on clinical trial data and nursing experience.

METHODS

The authors reviewed the published management strategies for IRRs with obinutuzumab that were identified during the phase III CLL11 trial and an expanded access phase IIb study (ML28979). Practical advice for obinutuzumab IRR management was developed based on available clinical trial information and nursing experience.

FINDINGS

IRRs with obinutuzumab are generally manageable. Most IRRs (all grades), and all grade 3-4 IRRs, occurred during the first infusion. Therefore, IRR management could be improved substantially with extra vigilance at this early stage.

Atypical presentation of fever as hypersensitivity reaction to oxaliplatin

Oxaliplatin, a third-generation, platinum-based agent is widely used, most commonly in the FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and oxaliplatin) regimen, which is the first-line therapy in metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma and adjuvant chemotherapy in stage III colorectal cancer. Platinum-based products are well known for causing hypersensitivity reactions. Fever associated with oxaliplatin-hypersensitivity reactions typically follows a specific pattern. It usually starts during the oxaliplatin infusion or immediately after (within hours instead of days) and happens after several administrations (mean 2–25) with unpredictable clinical presentations. We report a case of oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity reaction manifesting as fever but with unusual presentation than the aforementioned features.

Oxaliplatin-induced severe anaphylactic reactions in metastatic colorectal cancer: Case series analysis

AIM: To investigate oxaliplatin-induced severe anaphylactic reactions (SAR) in metastatic colorectal cancer in a retrospective case series analysis and to conduct a systemic literature review.

METHODS: During a 6-year period from 2006 to 2011 at Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, a total of 412 patients exposed to oxaliplatin-related chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed. Relevant English-language studies regarding life-threatening SAR following oxaliplatin were also reviewed in MEDLINE^® and PubMed^® search.

RESULTS: Eight patients (1.9%, 8 of 412 cases) were identified. Seven patients were successful resuscitated without any sequelae and one patient expired. We changed the chemotherapy regimen in five patients and rechallenged oxaliplatin use in patient 3. Twenty-three relevant English-language studies with 66 patients were reported. Patients received a median of 10 cycles of oxaliplatin (range, 2 to 29). Most common symptoms were respiratory distress (60%), fever (55%), and hypotension (54%). Three fatal events were reported (4.5%). Eleven patients (16%) of the 66 cases were rechallenged by oxaliplatin.

CONCLUSION: SAR must be considered in patients receiving oxaliplatin-related chemotherapy, especially in heavily pretreated patients. Further studies on the mechanism, predictors, preventive methods and management of oxaliplatin-related SAR are recommended.

Analysis of neurosensory adverse events induced by FOLFOX4 treatment in colorectal cancer patients: a comparison between two Asian studies and four Western studies

The grades of neurosensory adverse events (NSAEs) induced by FOLFOX4 treatment were compared between Asian and Western colorectal cancer patients and correlated with cumulative oxaliplatin doses. A total of 3359 patients treated with FOLFOX4 were analyzed: 1515 from two Asian studies (Japanese Post Marketing Surveillance [J-PMS] and MASCOT) and 1844 from four Western studies (EFC2962, N9741, EFC4584, and MOSAIC). The onset of NSAEs was analyzed in terms of treatment duration and cumulative dose of oxaliplatin. The incidence of grade ≥3 NSAEs ranged from 2.0% to 4.4% in Asian studies and 9.3% to 19% in Western studies. The cumulative doses of oxaliplatin that induced grade ≥3 NSAEs in 10% of patients were higher in Asian studies (1526 mg/m² or not reached) than in Western studies (805–832 mg/m²). No significant correlations were noted between occurrence of grade ≥3 NSAEs and demographic/baseline characteristics. The frequency of escalation from grade 0 to 1 in J-PMS was statistically significantly lower than that in EFC4584, and that from grade 0 to 1 and from grade 1 to 2 in MASCOT lower than that in MOSAIC. The cumulative oxaliplatin doses administered during grade escalation in J-PMS were similar to those in EFC2962 or EFC4584. All grade-3 NSAEs in MASCOT and 96% of those in MOSAIC improved to grade 2 or less within 12 months of follow-up. The Asian populations accrued to these studies appear to be less susceptible to the neurotoxicity of oxaliplatin than the mainly Caucasian populations in the Western studies.

Review of hypersensitivity reactions to antineoplastic agents

OBJECTIVE

To review the characteristics and management of hypersensitivity reactions caused by antineoplastic agents.

METHOD

We conducted a search in the Pubmed and EMBASE databases for the last 10 years.

RESULTS

Almost all chemotherapeutic agents have the potential to cause hypersensitivity reactions, but some groups have been associated with increased risk, such as platinum compounds, taxanes, asparaginase, monoclonal antibodies and epipodophyllotoxins. The clinical manifestations of these reactions are variable and unpredictable, including symptoms affecting the skin and the pulmonary, cardiac and gastrointestinal systems. The mechanism associated with their development is not yet fully understood. Diagnosis is based on patients' signs and symptoms and skin testing. The management of patients who suffer a hypersensitivity reaction to a chemotherapeutic agent varies with the severity of the reaction, the need to continue treatment, and the availability of alternative therapies.

CONCLUSIONS

Due to a progressive increase in the use of chemotherapeutic agents an increased incidence of hypersensitivity reactions is to be expected. Desensitisation protocols are a noteworthy alternative that make it possible to re-initiate patients' therapy with the causative agent of the hypersensitivity reaction. Their use should be assessed individually, weighing risks and benefits.

A retrospective review of the frequency and nature of acute hypersensitivity reactions at a medium-sized infusion center: comparison to reported values and inconsistencies found in literature

Purpose: To evaluate acute hypersensitivity reactions at the UCSD Moores Cancer Center in San Diego, compare our findings to those reported previously in the literature, and examine the effectiveness of the objective grading scale as represented by the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE).

Patients and Methods: Using the available pharmacy and electronic medical record data from 2006-2010, we examined our reported hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) using the CTCAE v.3.0 and v.4.0. A thorough literature review was also performed to compare our findings with those previously reported.

Results: We found 222 cases of HSRs, of which 50% were due to immunotherapeutics. Most were grade 1 or 2 by any CTCAE criteria. The clinical presentation of HSRs varied between drug classes. Using different versions of grading schema led to inconsistencies in ~50% of all HSRs. Fifty-two percent of all cases not due to blood products were rechallenged on the same day. The reported literature HSR frequencies for each causative agent showed a striking variability, possibly indicating that previous studies used a wide variety of grading and reporting systems for adverse events.

Conclusion: HSRs are common in clinical practice, and most are mild or moderate. There are inconsistencies in reporting HSRs between studies. The existence of several grading schema and subjective definitions of hypersensitivity could be contributing to poor clinical generalizability. Along with an improved system of reporting HSRs to minimize underreporting, a standard system of objectively assessing HSRs is necessary for purposes of research and clinical practice.

Sudden-onset pancytopenia with intracranial hemorrhage after oxaliplatin treatment: a case report and literature review

Oxaliplatin is a third-generation platinum compound and has been widely employed in the treatment of colorectal cancer. Despite its good efficacy, it is reported to induce immune-mediated cytopenia. We report the case of a 78-year-old male patient who experienced acute pancytopenia along with coagulopathy and intracranial hemorrhage after his 17th course of oxaliplatin. This condition appeared immediately after completion of oxaliplatin infusion, and was persistent despite aggressive transfusion and treatment with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor. The patient died 72 h after the administration of oxaliplatin. The only preceding symptom was chills 30 min after initiation of oxaliplatin, although steroid was given as premedication. We review the literature describing oxaliplatin-induced cytopenia, and discuss the manifestation, immune mechanism and treatment of this condition. We conclude that any symptoms that occur during infusion of oxaliplatin should not be overlooked but should be taken seriously as they may represent 'a little spark that kindles a great fire', and that steroids may provide an effective treatment for oxaliplatin-induced cytopenia. However, a major complication in our patient may still happen. Further studies for the mechanism and the predictive markers of oxaliplatin-induced cytopenia are worthy.

Infusion reactions: diagnosis, assessment, and management

Many cancer therapies administered by IV infusion, including monoclonal antibodies, have the potential for infusion reactions. All infusion reactions involve the immune system; however, some (anaphylactic) are allergic in nature and usually are mediated by immunoglobulin E (lgE), whereas others (anaphylactoid) are not true allergic reactions and are not mediated by lgE. Although reactions can be allergic or nonallergic, the clinical manifestations are the same and require prompt, accurate assessment and astute management to avoid severe adverse events, including fatality. Monoclonal antibodies have a unique side-effect profile that includes the potential for nonallergic infusion reactions caused by cytokine release. Understanding the pathophysiology underlying any infusion reaction will enhance decision making regarding rechallenge and thereby improve treatment outcomes. Rituximab is an example of a drug with the potential for varying types of infusion reactions. This article discusses oncology nurses' role in patient risk assessment, institution of prophylactic measures, administration monitoring, severity grading, management, and follow-up. This understanding will clarify new data regarding the safety of a rapid infusion schedule of rituximab.

Managing premedications and the risk for reactions to infusional monoclonal antibody therapy

Monoclonal antibodies-including rituximab, alemtuzumab, trastuzumab, bevacizumab, cetuximab, and panitumumab-have improved the treatment of various malignancies. Although generally better tolerated with less toxicity than conventional anticancer agents, monoclonal antibodies may cause infusion-related reactions like other infusional agents. The incidence of infusion reactions varies by agent, but severe events occur only occasionally, mostly with the first or second infusion. Although the exact etiology of infusion reactions remains unclear, they may arise via either IgE- or non-IgE-dependent mechanisms. There is a compelling clinical need to improve the risk assessment for severe infusion reactions. The recent identification of pre-existing IgE crossreacting with cetuximab, its association with severe reactions, and regional variation in the prevalence may provide a marker for high-risk assessment. Premedication with antihistamines, acetaminophen, and/or corticosteroids is a common practice to prevent infusion reactions with all monoclonal antibodies. However, a recent observational study suggests that premedication may no longer be necessary after the second infusion of cetuximab if patients did not develop any symptoms with the first two infusions. Considering the heterogeneity of infusion reactions, clinicians need to recognize the underlying nature of these events in order to identify patients at risk as well as provide optimal prophylactic measures and management of symptoms.

Hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin and other antineoplastic agents

Although the reported incidence of hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to antineoplastic agents is considered to be uncommon, it is difficult to evaluate their exact prevalence, mainly because their definition is vast and pathogenic mechanisms are vague. HSR include facial flushing, erythema, pruritus, fever, tachycardia, dyspnea, tongue swelling, rash/hives, headache, chills, weakness, vomiting, burning sensations, dizziness, and edema. Treatment and prevention consists of slowing the infusion rate, steroids, and type 1 and 2 histamine receptor antagonists. Desensitization could allow the small number of patients who experience severe HSR to receive effective therapy for their cancer. Reintroductions have only been reported as single case studies or small cohorts. Large-scale validation on desensitization strategies is still missing. With regard to oxaliplatin, knowledge of its rare but eminent toxicity is paramount, because this drug is widely used in treating colorectal cancer, the second-highest cause of cancer mortality in the United States.

Fever as the only manifestation of hypersensitivity reactions associated with oxaliplatin in a patient with colorectal cancer Oxaliplatin-induced hypersensitivity reaction

Hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to oxaliplatin in patients with colorectal cancer include facial flushing, erythema, pruritis, fever, tachycardia, dyspnea, tongue swelling, rash/hives, headache, chills, weakness, vomiting, burning sensations, dizziness, and edema. We report a patient with fever as the sole manifestation of initial HSR, review the literature and discuss the management of HSR. A 57-year-old female with T3N2M0 rectal adenocarcinoma received modified FOLFOX-6. She tolerated the first 8 cycles without any toxicities except grade 1 peripheral neuropathy and nausea. During 9^th and 10^th infusions, she developed fever to a maximum of 38.3°C with stable hemodynamic status despite medications. During 11^th infusion, she developed grade 3 HSR consisting of symptomatic bronchospasm, hypotension, nausea, vomiting, cough, and fever. On examination, she was pale, cyanotic, with a temperature of 38.8°C, BP dropped to 95/43 mm Hg, pulse of 116/min and O₂ saturation of 88%-91%. She was hospitalized for management and recovered in 24 h. Fever alone is not a usual symptom of oxaliplatin HSR. It may be indicative that the patient may develop serious reactions subsequently, as did our patient who developed hypotension with the third challenge. Treatment and prevention consists of slowing the infusion rate, use of steroids and antagonists of Type 1 and 2 histamine receptor antagonists, whereas desensitization could help to provide the small number of patients who experience severe HSR with the ability to further receive an effective therapy for their colorectal cancer.

Successful desensitization to oxaliplatin with incorporation of calcium gluconate and magnesium sulfate

Since the results of the MOSAIC trial demonstrated an improved disease-free survival in stage III colorectal patients treated with oxaliplatin combined with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid when they were compared with those treated with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid alone, the addition of this organoplatin to 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid has become first-line adjuvant treatment for stage III colorectal cancer. Unfortunately, there is a small population of patients who develop grade III/IV hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin which, until recently, have interfered with further treatment with oxaliplatin-containing regimens. Successful oxaliplatin desensitization protocols for patients having severe oxaliplatin hypersensitivity reactions have been reported. However, none of these protocols, have incorporated magnesium and calcium salts. Retrospective data has suggested that pretreating colorectal cancer patients with magnesium sulfate and calcium gluconate before the administration of oxaliplatin may reduce the incidence of neurotoxicities induced by this drug. Therefore, we modified a previously published oxaliplatin-desensitization protocol by incorporating intravenous calcium gluconate and magnesium sulfate, and report a patient with stage IIIc colorectal cancer and prior severe hypersensitivity reactions to oxaliplatin who underwent successful oxaliplatin desensitization using this protocol.