Search

Drug desensitization is the temporary induction of tolerance to a sensitized drug by administering slow increments of the drug, starting from a very small amount to a full therapeutic dose. It can be used as a therapeutic strategy for patients with drug hypersensitivity when no comparable alternatives are available. Desensitization has been recommended for immunoglobulin E (IgE)-mediated immediate hypersensitivity; however, its indications have recently been expanded to include non-IgE-mediated, non-immunological, or delayed T cell-mediated reactions. Currently, the mechanism of desensitization is not fully understood. However, the attenuation of various intracellular signals in target cells is an area of active research, such as high-affinity IgE receptor (FcεRI) internalization, anti-drug IgG4 blocking antibody, altered signaling pathways in mast cells and basophils, and reduced Ca2+ influx. Agents commonly requiring desensitization include antineoplastic agents, antibiotics, antituberculous agents, and aspirin/nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs. Various desensitization protocols (rapid or slow, multi-bag or one-bag, with different target doses) have been proposed for each drug. An appropriate protocol should be selected with the appropriate concentration, dosage, dosing interval, and route of administration. In addition, the protocol should be adjusted with consideration of the severity of the initial reaction, the characteristics of the drug itself, as well as the frequency, pattern, and degree of breakthrough reactions.

Background: Desensitization is used to safely continue treatment with a culprit drug in patients with drug hypersensitivity. Currently, a multi-bag protocol is widely used for rapid desensitization, but performing the desensitization procedure is labor intensive as pharmacists and nurses need to prepare and administer diluted solutions. However, it has not been investigated whether dilution is essential for successful desensitization., Objective: To investigate the efficacy and safety of a nondilution, 1-bag protocol in comparison with a conventional multi-bag protocol for desensitization of patients with paclitaxel hypersensitivity., Methods: Patients who underwent paclitaxel desensitization between 2011 and 2018 were analyzed in this retrospective cohort study. The completion rate, time to completion, and occurrence and severity of breakthrough reaction (BTR) between a 1-bag protocol and a multi-bag protocol were compared., Results: A total of 211 desensitization procedures were performed, of which 207 procedures (98.1%) were completed successfully. The administration time was significantly shorter in the 1-bag protocol group compared with the conventional multi-bag protocol group (266.0 ± 149.3 minutes vs 484.2 ± 178.6 minutes, P < .05) without differences in the completion rate (97.6% vs 98.9%, P = .645), the incidence of BTR (16.1% vs 27.6%, P = .778), and the proportion of severe BTR (2.6% vs 5.7%, P = .134)., Conclusions: A nondilution, 1-bag protocol is noninferior to a multi-bag rapid desensitization protocol and can be a safe and effective option for paclitaxel desensitization., (Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Allergy, Asthma & Immunology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Desensitization is a safe alternative for patients with hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to platinum-based chemotherapeutic agents and widely used in real practice by employing stepwise administration of multiple serial dilutions of the culprit drugs. However, its labor-intensive nature has required a simpler protocol that is easier to prepare and perform., Methods: We performed an observational study of patients with platinum HSR who underwent a new non-dilution one-bag desensitization protocol. Premedication consisted of Montelukast as well as H1 and H2 blockers. The outcomes and safety profiles of a new protocol were assessed., Results: A total of 36 patients were recruited (oxaliplatin 23, carboplatin 9, and cisplatin 4) and the most common grade of HSR presented was grade 2 (61.1%), followed by grade 3 (25%), and grade 1 (13.9%). Of 175 desensitization procedures, all cases were successfully completed in re-administration of culprit chemotherapeutic platinum agents; 146 (83.4%) had no breakthrough reactions (BTRs) while 29 (16.6%) did. Most BTRs were mild reactions (grade 1, 51.7%) or moderate reactions (grade 2, 44.8%) of Brown's Scale. Although there was one case of asymptomatic mild hypotension (grade 3, 3.5%), categorized as severe reaction, dyspnea, desaturation, and anaphylaxis did not occur. The proportion of severe HSRs was significantly lower than that of initial HSRs (3.5% vs. 25%, P = 0.0167)., Conclusions: The new non-dilution desensitization protocol was safe and effective for re-administration of culprit platinum agents in patients with a history of HSRs. Therefore, this new protocol can be used as an alternative to existing protocols using multiple serial dilutions.

Oxaliplatin is a platinum compound commonly used in the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer. This report describes two patients who had received repetitive combination chemotherapy including oxaliplatin for the treatment of metastatic colon cancer and who visited the emergency department with acute kidney injury several days after experiencing a hypersensitivity reaction to oxaliplatin. In both cases, the pathologic diagnosis was acute tubulointerstitial nephritis, and corticosteroid therapy resulted in improved renal function. Induction of acute tubulointerstitial nephritis by oxaliplatin has rarely been reported.
.

Purpose: This study investigated the characteristics of oxaliplatin-related hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) and evaluated the efficacy of premedication and desensitization administration for controlling HSR in patients with gastrointestinal malignancy., Methods: This retrospective study includes oxaliplatin hypersensitivity cases reported to our in-hospital, adverse drug reaction monitoring system between May 2008 and April 2012. We analyzed administration histories of oxaliplatin and premedication treatments, chemotherapy cycle and severity of the initial HSR, and prophylactic measures and their outcomes in subsequent chemotherapy cycles., Results: One hundred and seventy-three patients showed hypersensitivity to oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy. Oxaliplatin HSR developed after mean chemotherapy cycle 6.3 ± 0.3. Specifically, while HSR occurred at cycle 7.6 ± 0.3 in the case of patients previously unexposed to oxaliplatin-containing chemotherapy, it occurred at cycle 2.6 ± 0.3 in previously exposed patients. Of the 173 patients who exhibited HSR, premedication was administered in 134 patients and 71.6 % of them succeeded in preventing HSR. Desensitization was attempted in 38 patients, including 20 patients in whom premedication administration was unsuccessful, and 89 % of desensitized patients successfully underwent oxaliplatin chemotherapy without HSR. As severity of HSR increased, the success rate by premedication decreased and the percentage of patients that underwent desensitization increased., Conclusions: Attention should be paid to patients with any prior exposure to oxaliplatin, especially during early chemotherapy cycles. Given the high success rate of preventing HSR by desensitization administration and its apparent safety profile, we suggest that desensitization be considered as the first option for the treatment of grades 3 and 4 HSR cases.

Background: Rituximab is a chimeric anti-CD20 human/mouse monoclonal antibody. As its usage has increased, there have been growing concerns about rituximab-related infusion-related reactions (IRRs)., Objective: The aim of this study is to verify the clinical features and risk factors of IRRs by rituximab, and to help establish clinical guidelines for their prevention., Methods: We reviewed electronic medical records of all the adult patients who were prescribed rituximab from January 2005 to July 2010 for B cell malignancy at Seoul National University Hospital., Results: A total of 389 cases of IRRs by rituximab (12.5% of a total of 3,104 infusions) were identified in 281 patients (49.4% of a total of 568 patients). IRRs most frequently occurred during the first infusion (40.5%) and abruptly decreased in subsequent infusions to rates of 3-8% (p < 0.001). The incidence of IRRs in patients premedicated with corticosteroid for their first infusion was significantly lower when compared to patients not pretreated with corticosteroid prior to rituximab infusion (8.3 vs. 41.2%, p = 0.017)., Conclusion: Almost half of all patients in the study experienced IRRs at least once during their scheduled rituximab treatment. Premedication with corticosteroid can be recommended in patients with high risk of IRR in the first infusion.

Children with complex chronic conditions (CCC) are presumed to be vulnerable to adverse drug reactions (ADRs). The clinical profiles of ADRs in CCC are not well known. Herein, we aim to describe the ADR profiles in CCC with regard to typical presentations and vulnerable groups. We accessed the ADR yearly reports at a tertiary children's hospital whose practice is mainly dedicated to CCC and descriptively analyzed their clinical profiles according to the presence of a complex chronic condition, ADR severity, and age groups. A total of 1841 cases were analyzed, among which 1258 (68.3%) were mild, 493 (26.8%) moderate, and 90 (4.9%) cases were severe. A total of 1581 (85.9%) cases of complex chronic condition were reported. The proportion of CCC in each severity group increased as the ADR becomes more severe. In CCC, ADRs were most frequently reported by nurses in the adolescent group and in cases where the symptoms involved the gastrointestinal system. The class of antineoplastic and immunomodulating drugs was the most commonly suspected of causing an ADR, followed by one of the antibiotics. When we focus on the trend across the age groups, the ratio of severe-to-total ADRs decreased with older age. Among severe cases, the ratio of off-label prescription-related cases was the highest in the infant/toddler group and decreased as the groups aged. In conclusion, ADRs of CCCs admitted to a tertiary children’s hospital have a unique profile. These groups are vulnerable to ADRs and thus they should be monitored closely, especially when they are infants or toddlers, so that severe ADRs can be identified and treated immediately. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]