ENSEMBLE PLUS: final results of shorter ocrelizumab infusion from a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Ocrelizumab is an approved intravenously administered anti-CD20 antibody for multiple sclerosis (MS). The safety profile and patient preference for conventional versus shorter ocrelizumab infusions were investigated in the ENSEMBLE PLUS study.

METHODS

ENSEMBLE PLUS was a randomized, double-blind substudy to the single-arm ENSEMBLE study (NCT03085810), comparing outcomes in patients with early-stage relapsing-remitting MS receiving ocrelizumab 600 mg over the approved 3.5-h (conventional) versus 2-h (shorter) infusion. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with infusion-related reactions (IRRs) following the first randomized dose (RD); the secondary endpoint included IRR frequency at subsequent RDs.

RESULTS

At first RD, the number of patients with an IRR in the conventional (101/373; 27.1%) versus shorter (107/372; 28.8%) infusion group was similar (difference, stratified estimates [95% CI]: 1.9% [- 4.4, 8.2]). Most IRRs (conventional: 99.4%; shorter: 97.7%) were mild/moderate. IRR frequency decreased over the course of RDs; three patients discontinued from the shorter infusion arm but continued with conventional infusion. Overall, > 98% of IRRs resolved without sequelae in both groups. Pre-randomization throat irritation was predictive of future throat irritation as an IRR symptom. Adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were consistent with the known ocrelizumab safety profile. On completion of ENSEMBLE PLUS, most patients chose to remain on (95%) or switch to (80%) shorter infusion.

CONCLUSION

ENSEMBLE PLUS demonstrates the safety and tolerability of shorter ocrelizumab infusions. Most patients remained on/switched to shorter infusion after unblinding; IRRs did not strongly influence patient decisions.

CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION

Substudy of ENSEMBLE (NCT03085810).

REGISTRATION

March 21, 2017.

Patients with infusion-related reactions on fixed-dose rituximab treatment have higher body surface area than those without infusion-related reactions in adults with frequently relapsing minimal change nephrotic syndrome: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) are major side effects of rituximab administration. Male sex, high body weight, body surface area (BSA), and body mass index are predictive markers of rituximab-induced IRRs. However, as rituximab was not administered at a fixed dosage in a previous study, whether a higher dosage or factors associated with a larger physique are more strongly associated with rituximab-induced IRRs is unknown.

MAIN BODY

Thirteen adults with frequently relapsing minimal change nephrotic syndrome (MCNS) who received an initial rituximab dose of 500 mg between September 2015 and November 2022 were retrospectively evaluated. Data on IRRs were collected from medical records. The incidence of rituximab-induced IRRs was 38.5% (5/13). The IRR group had a significantly higher BSA than the non-IRR group (median, 1.86 vs. 1.48 m2; p = 0.045). Additionally, rituximab dosage normalized by BSA in the IRR group was significantly lower than that in the non-IRR group (median, 268.8 vs. 337.9 mg/m2; p = 0.045).

CONCLUSIONS

Our study revealed that adults with frequently relapsing MCNS who experienced IRRs tend to have a higher BSA, even with fixed-dose rituximab treatment. Therefore, when patients with higher BSA receive rituximab treatment, clinicians should be careful about monitoring patient condition whether the dosage is fixed or not.

Infusion-Related Reactions Induced by Cadonilimab (PD-1/CTLA-4 Bispecific Antibody): Seven Case Reports

Introduction

Cadonilimab (AK104) is an innovative human programmed cell death-1 (PD-1)/cytotoxic T lymphocyte antigen-4 (CTLA-4) bispecific antibody. Compared with the combination therapy of PD-1 and CTLA-4 blockers, less cellular toxicity of cadonilimab was significantly manifested. As one of the characteristic adverse effects of cadonilimab, infusion-related reactions (IRRs) represent fever, chills, rash, decreased blood pressure, and other symptoms.

Case Presentation

Here, we documented seven cases of IRRs after the administration of cadonilimab. The symptoms of IRRs were relieved after the discontinuation of cadonilimab and the administration of diphenhydramine, dexamethasone, and cimetidine. Notably, 3 patients were able to tolerate the subsequent cadonilimab therapy under the pretreatment.

Conclusion

In this study, we discovered that cadonilimab-related IRRs might be lessened or prevented by administering medication and the proper pretreatment and lowering the infusion rate.

Transient Daratumumab-Induced Refractive Shift in Multidrug-Resistant Multiple Myeloma: Case Report and Literature Review

Daratumumab, an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody, is worldwide approved for treatment of newly diagnosed and relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (MM) patients and is available as intravenous or subcutaneous formulations. Intravenous daratumumab is associated with frequent infusion-related reactions, while eye complications, especially refractive shifts, are very rare, with only previously reported cases. Here, we described a rare case of multi-refractory MM who developed transient myopic shift during intravenous daratumumab infusion successfully treated only with cycloplegic collyrium not requiring infusion rate lowering or drug discontinuation. This conservative therapeutic approach allowed termination of induction therapy and autologous hematopoietic stem-cell transplantation resulting in durable complete remission.

Evaluation of a Pharmacist-Developed, Nurse-Driven Protocol for Management of Parenteral Anticancer Therapy Infusion Reactions in an Ambulatory Infusion Center

PURPOSE

Intravenous anticancer therapy can be associated with hypersensitivity- and/or infusion-related reactions (IRRs) which may result in life-threatening symptoms. As part of a quality improvement project, oncology pharmacists developed and implemented a nurse-driven, symptom-based IRR protocol. The objective of the evaluation was to evaluate IRR treatment failure after implementation of a symptom-based protocol in an ambulatory infusion center. Secondary objectives included determining the most common anticancer agents requiring IRR treatment, documentation of ED visits or hospital admissions within 72 h of treatment, documentation of mortality due to an IRR, and evaluating whether there were multiple documented IRRs to the same medication.

METHODS

A total of 456 patients, who received an infusion of anticancer therapy at Grady Health System (GHS) between February 2014 and March 2018, were retrospectively evaluated. Patients were included if they received a protocol-specific medication for infusion reaction management of a parenterally administered anticancer agent. The primary outcome was the rate of treatment failure within 72 h of treatment for an IRR.

RESULTS

Seventy-eight patients experiencing 108 IRRs were included in the analysis. Five percent of IRRs consisted of rigors only, 57% of IRRs were mild/moderate severity, 31% of IRRs were severe/anaphylactic severity and 7% of IRRs were rigors in addition to a mild/moderate/severe reaction. Of the 108 IRRs, treatment failure within 72 h was observed in eight reactions; six were evaluated in the emergency department and two required a hospital admission. Overall, 93% of reactions resolved in the infusion center and patients were discharged home; there were no patient deaths. The most common offending agents were paclitaxel and oxaliplatin.

CONCLUSION

Following implementation of a novel pharmacist-developed, symptom-based nurse-driven protocol, infusion reaction treatment failure occurred in 7% of IRRs evaluated. Although the failure rate was low, additional nurse education and improved access to protocol-directed medications may optimize use of the protocol.

Pre-medication protocols for the prevention of paclitaxel-induced infusion related reactions: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Prophylaxis against infusion-related reactions (IRR) from paclitaxel with steroids and antihistamines is a standard of care due to high rates of IRR. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to comprehensively summarize the evidence behind various prophylaxis strategies.

METHODS

EMBASE, MEDLINE, PubMed, and the Cochrane Register of Controlled Trials were searched (1946 to May 14, 2021). The primary outcomes were Grade 3/4 IRR and any-grade IRR. Secondary outcomes included treatment delay or discontinuation and adverse events secondary to pre-medications.

RESULTS

Of the 1285 unique citations, 26 studies were selected: 11 studies for quantitative analysis and 15 studies for qualitative analysis. Studies included randomized controlled trials and observational studies (n = 25-281). There was a non-significant benefit in favour of oral steroids starting 12 h prior to paclitaxel administration versus intravenous steroids immediately prior to paclitaxel administration for grade 3/4 IRRs, with a risk difference (RD) of 2% [95%CI 0 to 5%], any-grade IRR with a RD of 4% [95%CI: -1% to 9%] and treatment discontinuation with a RD of 1% [95%CI -1% to 2%]. For de-escalation strategies, a point-estimate for any-grade IRR was 0.44% [95% CI, 0 to 0.02, p = 0.98] and for grade 3/4 IRR was 3.1% (95% CI, 0.02 to 0.07, p = 0.11).

CONCLUSION

Although studies have high risk of bias and risk, differences between steroid routes of administration were small, there was a non-significant trend in favour of oral steroids. De-escalation strategies after two previous successful paclitaxel infusions have an overall low incidence rate of severe IRR and warrant further prospective clinical trials. Insufficient evidence remains to recommend for or against other interventions for the prevention of paclitaxel IRR.

A novel rituximab administration protocol to minimize infusion-related adverse reactions in patients with B-cell lymphoma

Background Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) during rituximab administration are occasionally severe and remain problematic in oncology practice. Aim To establish a safer, risk-stratified rituximab protocol for patients with B-cell lymphoma. Method We stratified patients into low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups according to the number of risk factors for IRRs, specifically, low-grade histology and bulky tumors (> 10 cm): Then, the administrating schedule of rituximab (375 mg/m², diluted in 1 mg/mL concentration) was individualized. For the first rituximab cycle, the low- and moderate-risk groups underwent conventional infusion #1 (25-200 mg/h, ~4.3 h), and the high-risk group underwent long infusion (25-100 mg/h, 6.8 h). Patients in the low-, moderate-, and high-risk groups without IRRs in the first cycle underwent short infusion (100-400 mg/h, 2.3 h), conventional infusion #2 (100-200 mg/h, 3.5 h), and conventional infusion #1, respectively. Patients with IRRs in the first cycle received a second rituximab cycle with the same schedule as the first cycle. The procedure for the third cycle was at the attending physician's discretion. Results Among 81 patients, the overall incidence of IRRs was 28%. IRR incidences in the low- (n = 39), moderate- (n = 35), and high-risk groups (n = 7) were 31%, 20%, and 57%, respectively. All IRRs were grade ≤ 2. The overall conversion rate to short infusion in the third cycle was 54%, without any IRRs. Conclusions Our step-by-step rituximab protocol demonstrated a fewer incidence of severe IRRs among B-cell lymphoma patients receiving rituximab.

Evaluation of Montelukast for the Prevention of Infusion-related Reactions With Daratumumab

BACKGROUND

Daratumumab is an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody indicated for the treatment of multiple myeloma. Infusion-related reactions (IRRs) are among the most common adverse events associated with daratumumab. IRRs are most common with the first infusion of daratumumab. Recommended premedications to be given prior to the daratumumab dose include acetaminophen, diphenhydramine, and a corticosteroid. There is emerging data to suggest that the addition of montelukast to this premedication regimen can lower the incidence of daratumumab-related IRRs.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective chart review conducted at a large, multistate health system with several different hematology/oncology practice sites. Eligible patients included those with a primary diagnosis of a plasma cell disorder who received at least 1 dose of daratumumab. The primary outcome was the incidence of IRRs with the first daratumumab infusion.

RESULTS

A total of 141 patients receiving daratumumab-based therapy were included in this study. All patients received acetaminophen, diphenhydramine, and a corticosteroid as premedications prior to the first infusion of daratumumab. Overall, 46 (33%) patients experienced an IRR with the first infusion of daratumumab. The incidence of IRR was lower in patients that received montelukast as a premedication compared with those that did not (montelukast, n = 25 [27%]; no montelukast, n = 21 [45%]; P = .0371). Patients in each arm experienced similar rates of overall, composite pulmonary, gastrointestinal, and systemic IRR manifestations.

CONCLUSION

The use of montelukast prior to the first daratumumab infusion led to a reduction in the incidence of IRRs in our experience.

Safe administration of rituximab for follicular lymphoma after obinutuzumab infusion-related reaction

Obinutuzumab is a novel glycoengineered, type-II anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody that was recently developed to treat follicular lymphoma (FL), the most prevalent subtype of indolent B-cell lymphoma. Several intensely hypermetabolic lesions (SUVmax: 40) were identified in the post-mediastinal and paraaortic lymph nodes by 18F-FDG-PET maximum-intensity projection images of a 58-year-old man who presented with systemic lymphadenopathy. A biopsy at the time of laparotomy definitively diagnosed grade 1 FL. The patient was given the recommended standard premedication, comprising acetaminophen (1000 mg), diphenhydramine (50 mg), and dexamethasone (20 mg), and then started on six cycles of obinutuzumab plus cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone (CHOP). However, the patient developed severe hypotension and dyspnea about 15 min after starting obinutuzumab. It was difficult to differentiate between a possible allergic reaction and infusion-related reaction. A pleural effusion was drained to reduce the tumor burden, after which a single course of CHOP was started. Rituximab (R) was added 10 days later without incident, and the patient completed six cycles of the R-CHOP therapy without adverse events. We conclude that R-CHOP was safe for administration to patients who react to infused obinutuzumab. Such patients should be carefully monitored during R infusion, given the risk of cross-reactivity.

Clinical significance of rituximab infusion-related reaction in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients receiving R-CHOP

BACKGROUND/AIMS

This study was to evaluate the clinical significance of infusion-related reaction (IRR) of rituximab in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) patients who received R-CHOP (rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisolone) as a first-line chemotherapy.

METHODS

The medical records of 326 patients diagnosed with DLBCL were re trospectively analyzed. Both doctor's progress records and nursing records were reviewed. IRR was graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria.

RESULTS

IRR was not associated with overall survival (OS) or progression-free survival (PFS) of DLBCL patients as compared to those who did not have IRR (OS: median 78.0 months vs. 69.0 months, p = 0.700; PFS: median 65.4 months vs. 64.0 months, p = 0.901). IRR grade did not affect OS or PFS. B symptoms was independently associated with IRR (hazard ratio [HR], 1.850; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.041 to 3.290; p = 0.036). Further, bone marrow involvement was independently associated with re-IRR (HR, 4.904; 95% CI, 0.767 to 3.118; p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Our study shows that IRR of rituximab is not associated with OS or PFS of DLBCL patients who received R-CHOP. Furthermore, our study suggests a need for more careful observation for IRR in patients with B symptoms or bone marrow involvement.

Safety of shortened infusion times for combined ipilimumab and nivolumab

BACKGROUND

Combined ipilimumab and nivolumab induces encouraging response rates in patients with unresectable or metastatic melanoma. However, the approved protocol for dual checkpoint inhibition (3 mg/kg ipilimumab over 90 min and 1 mg/kg nivolumab over 60 min) is time-intensive and several trials have shown that both single agents can be safely administered at faster infusion rates.

AIM

To investigate whether combined checkpoint inhibition with 3 mg/kg ipilimumab and 1 mg/kg nivolumab can be safely administered over 30 min per agent.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We reviewed the rate of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) in the first 12 months of our single-institution experience using shortened infusion times for combined checkpoint inhibition with ipilimumab and nivolumab.

RESULTS

Between May 24, 2016 and June 10, 2017, a total of 46 melanoma patients received 100 shortened cycles of combined 3 mg/kg ipilimumab and 1 mg/kg nivolumab. One patient (2.2%; 1/46) had a questionable reaction after administration of 1 mg/kg nivolumab over 30 min, but none of the other patients had a bona fide IRR.

CONCLUSIONS

Shortened infusion times for combined ipilimumab and nivolumab treatment are safe, thereby facilitating a more efficient use of outpatient facilities and enhancing patient's convenience.

A Prospective, Multicenter Phase II Study of the Efficacy and Feasibility of 15-minute Panitumumab Infusion Plus Irinotecan for Oxaliplatin- and Irinotecan-refractory, KRAS Wild-type Metastatic Colorectal Cancer (Short Infusion of Panitumumab Trial)

BACKGROUND

In some recently updated clinical guidelines, the fully humanized monoclonal antibody panitumumab, combined with irinotecan, has been recommended as an optional third-line chemotherapy for KRAS wild-type metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). The present prospective, multicenter phase II study evaluated the effectiveness and safety of short 15-minute panitumumab infusions.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

From January 2011 to December 2011, patients with KRAS wild-type mCRC were enrolled at 8 centers. The key eligibility criteria were age ≥ 20 years and resistance or intolerance to irinotecan, fluoropyrimidine, and oxaliplatin. All patients received 6 mg/kg of panitumumab and 150 mg/m² or the previous tolerated dose of irinotecan, biweekly, until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The initial panitumumab infusion was 60 minutes, followed by a 30-minute infusion and then 15-minute infusions. The primary endpoint was the confirmed response rate using Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors, version 1.0. The secondary endpoints were progression-free survival, overall survival, and toxicity. The trial is registered in the University Hospital Medical Information Network Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN no. 000004647).

RESULTS

Of the 43 patients, the median age was 62 years (range, 32-75 years), 58% were male, and the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status was 0 to 1. The total response rate was 37.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 23.0-53.3), and the confirmed response rate was 18.6% (95% CI, 8.4-33.4). The median progression-free and overall survival were 5.8 months (95% CI, 3.3-8.4 months) and 13.6 months (95% CI, 10.8-16.5 months), respectively. The most frequent grade 3/4 toxicities were anorexia (12%), leukopenia (9%), and neutropenia (9%). Nine patients did not reach the 15-minute infusion, primarily because of disease progression. No infusion-related reactions were observed.

CONCLUSION

The short 15-minute panitumumab infusion regimen was well tolerated, without compromising safety or efficacy in patients with KRAS wild-type, oxaliplatin- and irinotecan-refractory mCRC.