Advertisement

Drug Safety

, Volume 24, Issue 10, pp 767–779 | Cite as

Prevention and Management of Antineoplastic-Induced Hypersensitivity Reactions

  • Kristine M. Zanotti
  • Maurie Markman
Practical Drug Safety

Abstract

Acute hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) are an unpredictable and potentially catastrophic complication of treatment with chemotherapeutic agents. Reactions may affect any organ system in the body and range widely in severity from mild pruritus to systemic anaphylaxis. Certain classes of chemotherapeutic agents, such as the taxanes, platinum compounds, asparaginases, and epipodophyllotoxins are commonly associated with HSRs. The clinical characteristics of these high risk agents with respect to HSRs are discussed in this review.

Protocols to prevent or reduce the severity of these reactions have been developed, but despite these attempts, HSRs will still happen. Should a reaction occur, it is imperative that it be recognised quickly in order to minimise exposure to the inciting agent and implement appropriate therapeutic and supportive measures. When a patient becomes sensitised to a chemotherapeutic agent, avoidance of re-exposure is the mainstay of future prevention. For sensitised patients who have derived clinically meaningful benefit from a particular agent, however, continuation of treatment with the agent is desirable. Options may include attempting a trial of desensitisation or treatment with a related compound. Virtually all patients demonstrating HSRs to paclitaxel and docetaxel are able to successfully tolerate re-treatment following discontinuation and administration of diphenhydramine and hydrocortisone. Re-treatment has generally been less successful with platinum compounds, with recurrent HSRs occurring in up to 50% of patients following desensitisation protocols. Patients sensitised to asparaginase are often able to tolerate the alternative preparations, Erwinia carotovora asparaginase or polyethylene glycol-modified Escherichia coli asparaginase. There is very little experience with re-treatment following sensitisation to the epipodophyllotoxins. As re-treatment may have serious consequences, careful consideration of the risks and benefits of these strategies is imperative when deciding among these options.

Keywords

Paclitaxel Docetaxel Carboplatin Chemotherapeutic Agent Asparaginase 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Greenberger PA, Patterson R, Simon R, et al. Pretreatment of high-risk patients requiring radiographic contrast media studies. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1981; 67: 185–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Trudeau ME, Eisenhauer EA, Higgins BP, et al. Docetaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a Phase II study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada-Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 422–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Verweij J, Clavel M, Chevalier B. Paclitaxel (Taxol) and docetaxel (Taxotere): not simply two of a kind. Ann Oncol 1994; 5: 495–505PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Eisenhauer EA, ten Bokkel Huinink WW, Swenerton KD, et al. European-Canadian randomized trial of paclitaxel in relapsed ovarian cancer: high-dose versus low-dose and long versus short infusion. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 2654–66PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Weiss RB, Donehower RC, Wiernik PH, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions from Taxol. J Clin Oncol 1990; 8: 1263–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K, et al. Paclitaxel-associated hypersensitivity reactions: experience of the gynecologic oncology program of the Cleveland Clinic Cancer Center. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18: 102–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Akerly W, Glantz M, Choy H, et al. Phase I trial of weekly paclitaxel in advances lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 1998; 16: 153–8Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Burris H. Weekly schedules of docetaxel. Semin Oncol 1998; 25Suppl. 13: 21–3PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Tomiak E, Piccart MJ, Kerger J, et al. Phase I study of docetaxel administered as a 1-hous intravenous infusion on a weekly basis. J Clin Oncol 1994; 12: 1458–67PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Trivedi c, Redman B, Flaherty LE, et al. Weekly 1-hour infusion of paclitaxel: clinical feasibility and efficacy in patients with hormone-refractory prostate carcinoma. Cancer 2000; 89: 431–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Lorenz W, Reimann HJ, Schmal A, et al. Histamine release in dogs by Cremophor EL and its derivatives: oxethylated oleic acid is the most effective constituent. Agents Actions 1977; 7: 63–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Essayan DM, Kagey-Sobotka A, Colarusso PJ, et al. Successful parenteral desensitization for paclitaxel. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1996; 97: 42–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    McGuire WP, Hoskins WJ, Brady MF, et al. Cyclophosphamide and cisplatin compared with paclitaxel and cisplatin in patients with stage III and stage IV ovarian cancer. N Engl J Med 1996; 334: 1–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K, et al. Simplified regimen for the prevention of paclitaxel-associated hypersensitivity reactions. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15(12): 3517PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bookman MA, Kloth DD, Kover PE, et al. Intravenous prophylaxis for paclitaxel-related hypersensitivity reactions. Semin Oncol 1997; 24(6 Suppl. 19): S19–13–S19–15PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Langer CJ, Leighton JC, Comis RL, et al. Paclitaxel and carboplatin in combination in the treatment of advanced nonsmall cell lung cancer: a phase II toxicity, response, and survival analysis. J Clin Oncol 1995; 13: 1860–70PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Trudeau ME, Eisenhauer EA, Higgins BP, et al. Docetaxel in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a phase II study of the National Cancer Institute of Canada-Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 1996; 14: 422–8PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Verweij J, Clavel M, Chevalier B. Paclitaxel (Taxol) and docetaxel (Taxotere): not simply two of a kind. Ann Oncol 1994; 5(6): 495–505PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Piccart MJ, Klijn J, Paridaens R, et al. Corticosteroids significantly delay the onset of docetaxel-induced fluid retention: final results of a randomized study of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Investigational Drug Branch for Breast Cancer. J Clin Oncol 1997; 15(9): 3149–55PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Takanow R. Docetaxel: a taxoid for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. Am Soc Health Syst Pharm 1998; 55(17): 1777–91Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wanders J, Schrijvers D, Bruntsch U, et al. The EORTC-ECTG experience with acute hypersensitivity reactions in Taxotere studies. Proc ASOC 1993; 12: 73Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Schrijvers D, Wanders J, Dirix L, et al. Coping with toxicities of docetaxel. Ann Oncol 1993; 4: 610–1PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Lokich J. Phase I clinical trial of weekly combined paclitaxel plus docetaxel in patients with solid tumors. Cancer 2000; 89: 2309–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Adachi I, Watanabe T, Takashima S, et al. A late phase II study of docetaxel in patients with advanced or recurrent breast cancer. Br J Cancer 1996; 73: 210–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Pazdur R, Lassere Y, Soh LT, et al. Phase II trial of docetaxel in metastatic colorectal carcinoma. Ann Oncol 1994; 11945: 468Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Lokich J, Anderson N. Paclitaxel hypersensitivity reactions: a role for docetaxel substitution. Ann Oncol 1998; 9: 573–4PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Weiss ME, Adkinson NF. Immediate hypersensitivity reactions to penicillin and related antibiotics. Clin Allergy 1988; 18: 515–40PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Stark BJ, Earl HS, Gross GN, et al. Acute and chronic desensitization of penicillin-allergic patients using oral penicillin. J All Clin Immunol 1987; 79: 523–32CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cleare MJ, Highes EG, Jacoby B, et al. Immediate (type I) allergic responses to platinum compounds. Clin Allergy 1976; 6: 183–95PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Shukunami K, Kuorkawa T, Kawakami Y, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to intraperitoneal administration of carboplatin in ovarian cancer: the first report of a case. Gyn Oncol 1999; 72(3): 431–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Blumenreich MS, Needles B, Yagoda A, et al. Intravesical cisplatin for superficial bladder tumors. Cancer 1982; 50: 863–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Denis L. Anaphylactoid reactions to repeated intravesical installation with cisplatin. Lancet 1983; I: 1378–9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Markman M, Kennedy A, Webster K, et al. Clinical features of hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin. J Clin Oncol 1999; 17: 1141–5PubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Weiss RB. Hypersensitivity reactions. Semin Oncol 1992; 19(5): 458–77PubMedGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Zweizig S, Roman LD, Muderspach LI. Death from anaphylaxis to cisplatin: a case report. Gynecol Oncol 1994; 53(1): 121–2PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Saunders MP, Denton CP, O’Brien ME, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to cisplatin and carboplatin: a report on six cases. Ann Oncol 1992; 3(7): 574–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Cromwell O, Papys J, Parish WE, et al. Specific IgE antibodies to platinum salts in sensitized workers. Clin Allergy 1979; 9: 109–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Zanotti KM, Kennedy AW, Belinson JL, et al. A simplified skin testing protocol for predicting hypersensitivity to carboplatin chemotherapy [abstract]. Gynecol Oncol 2000; 76(2): 241Google Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shlebak AA, Clark PI, Green JA. Hypersensitivity and cross-reactivity to cisplatin and analogues. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1995; 35(4): 349–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Weidmann B, Mulleneisen N, Bojko P, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to carboplatin: report of two patients, review of the literature, and discussion of diagnostic procedures and management. Cancer 1994; 73(8): 2218–22PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Chang SM, Fryberger S, Crouse V, et al. Carboplatin hypersensitivity in children: a report of five patients with brain tumors. Cancer 1995; 75(5): 1171–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Broome CB, Schiff RI, Friedman HS. Successful desensitization to carboplatin in patients with systemic hypersensitivity reactions. Med Pediatr Oncol 1996; 26(2): 105–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Kook H, Kim HM, Choi SH, et al. Life-threatening carboplatin hypersensitivity during conditioning for autologous PBSC transplantation: successful rechallenge after desensitization. BMT 1998; 21(7): 727–9Google Scholar
  44. 44.
    Rose PG, Fusco N, Fluellen L, et al. Carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions in patients with ovarian and peritoneal carcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer 1998 8: 365–6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Billett AL, Carls A, Belber RD, et al. Allergic reactions to Erwinia asparaginase in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia who had previous allergic reactions to Escherichia coli asparaginase. Cancer 1992; 70(1): 201–6PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Evans WE, Tsiatis A, Rivera G, et al. Anaphylactoid reactions to Escherichia coli and Erwinia asparaginase in children with leukemia and lymphoma. Cancer 1982; 49: 1378–83PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Nesbit ME, Chard R, Evans A, et al. Evaluations of intramuscular versus intravenous administration of L-asparaginase in childhood leukemia. Am J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 1979; 1: 9–13PubMedGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Albo V, Miller D, Leiken S, et al. Toxicity experience with a second course of E. coli L-asparaginase therapy 3 years after induction course in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in continuous remission [abstract]. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 1983; 68Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Spiegel RJ, Echelberger CK, Poplack DG. Delayed allergic reactions following intramuscular L-asparaginase. Med Pediatr Oncol 1980; 8(2): 123–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Asselin BL. The three asparaginases. Comparative pharmacology and optimal use in childhood leukemia. Adv Exp Med Biol 1999; 457: 621–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Woo MH, Hak LJ, Storm MC, et al. Hypersensitivity or development of antibodies to asparaginase does not impact treatment outcome of childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 2000; 18(7): 1525–32PubMedGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Larson RA, Fretzin MH, Dodge RK, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to L-asparaginase do not impact on the remission duration of adults with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 1998; 12(5): 660–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Korholz D, Wahn U, Jurgens H, et al. Allergic reactions in treatment with L-asparaginase. Significance of specific IgE antibodies Monatsschrift Kinderheilkunde 1990; 138(1): 23–5Google Scholar
  54. 54.
    Woo MH, Hak LJ, Storm MC, et al. Anti-asparaginase antibodies following E. coli asparaginase therapy in pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 1998; 12(10): 1527–33PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Capizzi RL, Bertino JR, Handschumacher RE. L-asparaginase. Annu Rev Med 1970; 21: 433–42PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Land VH, Sutow WW, Fernbach DJ, et al. Toxicity of L-asparaginase in children with advanced leukemia. Cancer 1972; 40: 339–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    The United states Pharmacopeial Convention. USP dispensing information: Vol. I: drug information for the health care professional. Englewood (CO): Micromedex Inc., 2000Google Scholar
  58. 58.
    Muller HJ, Loning L, Horn A, et al. Pegylated asparaginase (Oncaspar) in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: drug monitoring in reinduction according to the ALL/NHLBFM 95 protocols. Br J Haematol 2000; 111(2): 379–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Sikorska-Fic B, Makowska K, Rokicka-Milewska R. New possibilities of treatment with PEG-L-asparaginase in patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia sensitized to L-asparaginase E. coli and erwinase. Wiadomosci Lekarskie 1998; 51Suppl. 4: 233–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bonno M, Kawasaki H, Hori H, et al. Rapid desensitization for L-asparaginase hypersensitivity. J Allergy Clin Immunol 1998; 101(4 Pt 1): 571–2PubMedGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Rodriguez T, Baumgarten E, Fengler R, et al. Long-term infusion of L-asparaginase—an alternative to intramuscular injection? Klin Padiatr 1995; 207(4): 207–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    O’Dwyer PJ, King SA, Fortner CL, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to teniposide (VM-26): an analysis. J Clin Oncol 1986; 4(8): 1262–9PubMedGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Kellie SJ, Crist WM, Pui C, et al. Hypersensitivity reactions to epiphodophyllotoxins in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Cancer 1991; 67: 1070–5PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Nolte H, Carstensen H, Hertz H. VM-26 (teniposide)-induced hypersensitivity and degranulation of basophils in children. Am J Pediatr Hematol Oncol 1988; 10(4): 308–12PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. 65.
    Carstensen H, Nolte H, Hertz H. Teniposide-induced hypersensitivity reactions in children. Lancet 1989; II: 55CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Adis International Limited 2001

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Desk A81The Cleveland Clinic FoundationClevelandUSA

Personalised recommendations