Rapid Desensitization in Immediate Hypersensitivity Reaction to Drugs

Case report: desensitization of hypersensitivity against the antisense oligonucleotide volanesorsen

Familial chylomicronemia syndrome (FCS) is a rare autosomal recessive metabolic disorder that causes extremely elevated plasma triglyceride levels, with limited therapeutic options. Volanesorsen is an antisense oligonucleotide approved for its treatment. A 24-year-old woman with genetically diagnosed FCS secondary to a pathogenic variant in APOA5 and a history of recurrent hypertriglyceridemia-induced pancreatitis episodes was being treated with volanesorsen, 285 mg every 2 weeks. Treatment with volanesorsen achieved normalization of triglycerides to <200 mg/dl. However, after the fifth dose of the medication, the patient developed urticaria and volanesorsen was discontinued. In the absence of alternative pharmacological treatments, the patient received a novel desensitization protocol for volanesorsen that allowed continuation of therapy, without evidence of hypersensitivity reactions after subsequent administrations. FCS requires aggressive multimodal therapy and close follow-up. Volanesorsen has shown great efficacy, but a significant rate of discontinuation due to side effects has been observed. Here, the patient presented an immediate hypersensitivity reaction to volanesorsen, but the provision of a desensitization protocol was effective, facilitating continued treatment and impacting the survival and quality of life of the patient.

Case Report: Rapid Desensitization to Ocrelizumab for Multiple Sclerosis Is Effective and Safe

Monoclonal antibodies have become a mainstay of treatment for many inflammatory diseases and malignancies. Multiple sclerosis is a chronic inflammatory, demyelinating, and neurodegenerative disease of the central nervous system and a common cause of disability in young adults. Ocrelizumab is a recombinant humanized monoclonal antibody that targets CD20-positive B cells and has been approved in the treatment of multiple sclerosis. Although considered safe, more than 30% of patients treated with Ocrelizumab developed infusion-related reactions, mostly regarded as mild. When severe, they can lead to a definite suspension of that drug. We present a case report of Ocrelizumab desensitization in a female patient who presented an immediate hypersensitivity reaction (urticaria and angioedema) during the first Ocrelizumab infusion. Although mechanisms involved in the response were not elucidated, the procedure occurred uneventfully and permitted first-line multiple sclerosis treatment maintenances. Desensitization should be considered a safe therapeutic option in patients with immediate hypersensitivity reactions to Ocrelizumab.

Clinical and Translational Significance of Basophils in Patients with Cancer

Despite comprising a very small proportion of circulating blood leukocytes, basophils are potent immune effector cells. The high-affinity receptor for IgE (FcɛRI) is expressed on the basophil cell surface and powerful inflammatory mediators such as histamine, granzyme B, and cytokines are stored in dense cytoplasmic granules, ready to be secreted in response to a range of immune stimuli. Basophils play key roles in eliciting potent effector functions in allergic diseases and type 1 hypersensitivity. Beyond allergies, basophils can be recruited to tissues in chronic and autoimmune inflammation, and in response to parasitic, bacterial, and viral infections. While their activation states and functions can be influenced by Th2-biased inflammatory signals, which are also known features of several tumor types, basophils have received little attention in cancer. Here, we discuss the presence and functional significance of basophils in the circulation of cancer patients and in the tumor microenvironment (TME). Interrogating publicly available datasets, we conduct gene expression analyses to explore basophil signatures and associations with clinical outcomes in several cancers. Furthermore, we assess how basophils can be harnessed to predict hypersensitivity to cancer treatments and to monitor the desensitization of patients to oncology drugs, using assays such as the basophil activation test (BAT).

Hypersensitivity Reactions to Platinum Agents and Taxanes

Hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to chemotherapy agents can present a serious challenge to treating patients with preferred or first-line therapies. Allergic reactions through an immunologic mechanism have been established for platinum and taxane agents, which are used to treat a wide variety of cancers including gynecologic cancers. Platin HSRs typically occur after multiple cycles of chemotherapy, reflecting the development of drug IgE sensitization, while taxane HSRs often occur on first or second exposure. Despite observed differences between platin and taxane HSRs, drug desensitization has been an effective method to reintroduce both chemotherapeutic agents safely. Skin testing is the primary diagnostic tool used to risk-stratify patients after initial HSRs, with more widespread use for platinum agents than taxanes. Different practices exist around the use of skin testing, drug challenge, and choice of desensitization protocol. Here, we review the epidemiology, mechanism, and clinical presentation of HSRs to platinum and taxane agents, as well as key controversies in their evaluation and management.

One-Dilution Rapid Desensitization Protocol to Chemotherapeutic and Biological Agents: A Five-Year Experience

BACKGROUND

Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) becomes a crucial procedure to allow treatment continuation in patients who suffer drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to chemotherapeutic (CMT) and biological agents (BA).

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of a one-bag dilution protocol (1DP) with a conventional three-bag dilution protocol (3DP) for desensitization of patients with CMT or BA hypersensitivity.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of patients with immediate DHRs to CMT or BA who underwent at least 1 RDD procedure in our department between 2014 and 2019 was performed. Demographical data, clinical history, skin tests, tryptase levels, and risk assessment were registered. The safety, tolerability, occurrence, and severity of breakthrough reactions (BTR) with 3DP and 1DP were compared.

RESULTS

After the allergy workup, 157 patients fulfilled criteria to undergo RDD (137 females, mean age: 60.44 ± 12.6 years). A total of 639 RDDs (543 CMT and 96 BA) were performed using 3DP in 205 (48 patients) and 1DP in 434 (109 patients). Almost all procedures (636) were completed successfully. No BTR occurred in the first RDD in 52% and 51% of the 3DP and 1DP, respectively. Most BTR were mild. Moderate-severe BTR occurred in 17% with 3DP and 9% with 1DP. There were no statistical differences between protocols regarding the rate and severity of BTR.

CONCLUSIONS

RDD with 1DP to CMT and BA has equivalent outcomes to a 3DP desensitization in a selected population of patients in terms of efficacy, tolerability, and safety. Moreover, 1DP reduces the time required for RDD and simplifies the logistics.

Hypersensitivity reactions to biologics (part II): classifications and current diagnostic and treatment approaches

Purpose

Biotechnological substances (BS) have rapidly expanded their clinical use. In parallel, there is an increase in expected or unexpected immunological or non-immunological adverse effects. In this part of the review, the current nomenclature of BSs, the classification of hypersensitivity reactions (HSR), as well as diagnostic and treatment approaches are documented to provide the tools to understand the nomenclature used throughout the databases and the need to harmonize it where applicable.

Methods

Detailed searches were performed on Pubmed, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to include all available publications. The search terms, such as specific BS, allergy, anaphylaxis, hypersensitivity, reactions, classification, diagnosis, grading, management, and desensitization, were determined for the search. Case reports, articles, and reviews on this subject were included.

Results

Today, a variety of non-standardized methods are used to support the clinical diagnosis. These include prick-to-prick tests and intradermal tests with the drug itself and its potentially allergenic ingredients. More rarely, anti-drug antibodies are detected and basophil activation tests are used by centers with research facilities. Although the treatment protocols for acute conditions vary, the overall approach is the same.

Conclusion

HSRs to BS are gradually increasing with the widening of their clinical use and indications. It is very important to prevent HSRs and to know the degree of severity as well as the emergency treatment algorithm. This review summarizes the diagnostic tests that should be applied: (a) immediately during/after a reaction, and (b) subsequently, and in the case that a switch of BS is not possible, desensitization is an option.

Hypersensitivity Reactions to Biologicals: from Bench to Bedside

Purpose of Review

Biologic agents are new treatment options for chronic inflammatory diseases and cancers. As a result of their unique mechanism of action, they are more effective and less toxic treatment option and their clinical usage is increasing. While they are more commonly used, various adverse effects have been observed including life-threatening ones, including anaphylaxis. The aim of this review is to distinguish the anaphylaxis from other hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) and provide a management algorithm for the anaphylactic reactions induced by biological agents.

Recent Findings

Many case reports and series have been published regarding anaphylaxis and other hypersensitivity reactions (concerning cytokine release syndrome, acute infusion–related reactions) due to biologic agents. Although acute treatment of HSR varies according to the clinical presentation, desensitization with the drug is the major management option for subsequent administrations in the case of anaphylactic reactions.

Summary

Anaphylaxis and other immediate onset hypersensitivity reactions are occasionally difficult to differentiate from each other, and mixed-type reactions may be observed. Immediate management of anaphylaxis includes discontinuation of infusion, immediate administration of adrenaline, antihistamines, corticosteroids, and other treatment options depending on the symptoms. After 30–120 min of the reaction, a blood sample for serum tryptase levels should be obtained and after 4–6 weeks skin testing with the culprit drug should be performed for decision of long-term management via either graded challenge or desensitization.

Cephalosporin Allergy: Current Understanding and Future Challenges

Cephalosporins are commonly used antibiotics both in hospitalized patients and in outpatients. Hypersensitivity reactions to cephalosporins are becoming increasingly common with a wide range of immunopathologic mechanisms. Cephalosporins are one of the leading causes for perioperative anaphylaxis and severe cutaneous adverse reactions. Patients allergic to cephalosporins tend to tolerate cephalosporins with disparate R1 side chains but may react to other beta-lactams with common R1 side chains. Skin testing for cephalosporins has not been well validated but appears to have a good negative predictive value for cephalosporins with disparate R1 side chains. In vitro tests including basophil activation tests have lower sensitivity when compared with skin testing. Rapid drug desensitization procedures are safe and effective and have been used successfully for immediate and some nonimmediate cephalosporin reactions. Many gaps in knowledge still exist regarding cephalosporin hypersensitivity.

Diagnoses and Management of Drug Hypersensitivity and Anaphylaxis in Cancer and Chronic Inflammatory Diseases: Reactions to Taxanes and Monoclonal Antibodies

Due to the increase in utilization of chemotherapies and antibodies, drug hypersensitivity reactions have increased dramatically worldwide, preventing the use of first-line therapies and impacting patients' survival and quality of life. Some of the more frequently used medications in cancer include taxanes for ovarian, lung, breast, and prostate cancers. Monoclonal antibodies are used in the treatment of neoplastic, autoimmune, and inflammatory diseases, and their clinical applications are becoming broader. Monoclonal antibody targets include CD20, HER-2, EGFR, IL-6 receptor, TNF-α, CD30, VEGF-A, IgE, and more, and examples of immune-mediated and inflammatory diseases that respond to monoclonal antibodies include rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn's disease, ulcerative colitis, juvenile idiopathic arthritis, psoriasis and psoriatic arthritis, Wegener's granulomatosis, microscopic polyangiitis, ankylosing spondylitis, plaque psoriasis, and asthma. Neoplastic diseases include non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, chronic lymphocytic leukemia, and colorectal, breast, gastric, and lung cancer. The clinical presentation of drug hypersensitivity reactions ranges from mild cutaneous reactions to life-threatening symptoms including anaphylaxis. Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) has become a groundbreaking approach to the management of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions IgE and non-IgE mediated. It is the only effective procedure that enables sensitized patients to receive the full treatment dose safely, thus representing an important advance in the patients' treatment and prognosis. The aim of this review is to provide an update on hypersensitivity reactions to commonly used monoclonal and taxanes, their clinical presentations, diagnosis, and the use of RDD for their management.

Angioedema associated with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The review critically assesses the different phenotypes of angioedemas associated with NSAIDs. Angioedemas exacerbated or induced by NSAIDs have high morbidity and, when they affect the larynx, can lead to death by asphyxiation.

RECENT FINDINGS

Angioedema can present as a manifestation of a syndrome such as anaphylaxis or it can be a separate entity, which comprises different forms that can be diagnosed based on specific criteria. NSAIDs are the drugs most used worldwide and they are also one of the leading causes of angioedema.

SUMMARY

The manuscript addresses the pathophysiology and pharmacogenetics of angioedema, reviews its classification and assesses the diagnosis and management of angioedemas exacerbated and induced by NSAIDs.

Drug-Induced Anaphylaxis

Drugs are among the main triggers of anaphylaxis, but identification of the culprit drug is frequently difficult. To confirm diagnosis of the causative agent, medical records and clinical history are fundamental. There are a few in vitro tests available in clinical practice, such as serum-specific IgE and basophil activation test. Skin tests are often useful for the diagnosis, although drug challenge is indicated in patients with inconclusive clinical history or to provide safe alternatives. Treatment of anaphylaxis is standard and intramuscular epinephrine is the main agent to prevent morbidity and mortality. Rapid desensitization may be indicated in selected cases.

Basophil Activation Test is a Relevant Biomarker of the Outcome of Rapid Desensitization in Platinum Compounds-Allergy

BACKGROUND

Rapid drug desensitization (RDD) has become a cornerstone in the management of immediate drug hypersensitivity reactions (DHRs) to chemotherapeutic agents. Because of the inherent risk of anaphylaxis during RDD, biomarkers to predict patients at risk of developing such severe reactions are needed. The basophil activation test (BAT) has been used in DHRs as a diagnostic tool.

OBJECTIVE

We evaluated basophil CD63 and CD203c expression (BAT) as a biomarker to assess the safety and effectiveness of RDD in platinum compounds-allergic patients.

METHODS

Patients allergic to platinum compounds (n = 15) undergoing RDD were assessed through clinical history, skin testing, serum tryptase levels, and BAT. BAT was performed immediately before RDD, assessing CD203c and CD63 expression on basophils. BAT was also performed in 6 patients tolerant to platinum compounds and in 6 healthy volunteers.

RESULTS

BAT was positive to CD203c or CD63 in 11 out of 15 patients allergic to platinum compounds (73%), with increased expression of CD203c and CD63 in 11 (73%) and 6 (40%) patients, respectively. Increased CD63 expression tended to be associated with more severe initial reactions. All controls had negative test results. Reactions during RDD were associated with BAT positivity and increased tryptase levels. Only 1 of 4 patients with negative BAT had a mild reaction during RDD. BAT remained positive in multiple sequential RDD.

CONCLUSIONS

BAT identified patients allergic to platinum compounds with an increased risk of reactions during desensitization and higher CD63 expression was observed in severe reactions. Multiple RDDs to platinum compounds did not induce persistent hyporesponsiveness on basophils. BAT is a potential biomarker for RDD.