Stevens-Johnson syndrome, respiratory distress and acute renal failure due to synergic bleomycin-cisplatin toxicity

Evaluation of Delayed-Type Hypersensitivity to Antineoplastic Drugs-An Overview

Nowadays, clinical practice encounters the problem of delayed-type hypersensitivity (DTH) induced by several drugs. Antineoplastic treatments are among the drugs which show an elevated proportion of DHT reactions, leading to the worsening of patients' quality of life. The range of symptoms in DHT reactions can vary from mild, such as self-limiting maculopapular eruptions, to severe, such as Stevens-Johnson Syndrome. The development of these reactions supposes a negative impact, not only by limiting patients' quality of life, but also leading to economic loss due to market withdrawal of the affected drugs and high hospitalization costs. However, despite this problem, there are no available standard in vitro or in vivo methods that allow for the evaluation of the sensitizing potential of drugs in the preclinical phase. Therefore, the aim of this review is to summarize the skin reactions caused by the different antineoplastic families, followed by a comprehensive evaluation of the in vitro and in vivo methods used to detect DTHs and that could be suitable to test antineoplastic hypersensitivity reactions.

Fibroblasts from patients with idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis are resistant to cisplatin-induced cell death via enhanced CK2-dependent XRCC1 activity

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) is a deadly and progressive fibrotic lung disease, but the precise etiology remains elusive. IPF is characterized by the presence of apoptosis-resistant (myo)fibroblasts that relentlessly produce a collagen-rich extracellular matrix (ECM). Recent studies showed that an anti-cancer chemotherapy drug cisplatin is implicated in the development of pulmonary fibrosis, suggesting that the treatment of cancer patients with cisplatin may alter fibroblast viability. To address this possibility, we investigated the cisplatin-induced cell death mechanism in lung fibroblasts derived from IPF and non-IPF patients in response to a collagen matrix. IPF fibroblasts showed enhanced resistance to cisplatin-induced cell death compared to non-IPF fibroblasts in a time- and dose-dependent manner. Molecular study showed that the expression of γH2AX, PUMA and caspase-3/7 activity was abnormally reduced in IPF fibroblasts, suggesting that DNA damage-induced apoptosis caused by cisplatin was suppressed in IPF fibroblasts. Our study further revealed that DNA repair protein XRCC1 activity was aberrantly increased as a result of CK2 hyper-activation in cisplatin-treated IPF fibroblasts, and this alteration protected IPF fibroblasts from cisplatin-induced cell death. Our results showed that IPF fibroblasts residing in a collagen rich matrix are resistance to cisplatin-induced cell death due to the aberrantly high CK2/XRCC1-dependent DNA repair activity. This finding suggests that pulmonary fibrosis may develop and worsen due to the presence of apoptosis-resistant lung fibroblasts in cisplatin-treated cancer patients.

Anticancer Drugs Induced Severe Adverse Cutaneous Drug Reactions: An Updated Review on the Risks Associated with Anticancer Targeted Therapy or Immunotherapies

Cutaneous adverse drug reactions are commonly seen in patients with anticancer drug treatment. Anticancer drugs, including chemotherapy, target therapy, and recent immunotherapy causing skin reactions ranging from mild skin rash to life-threatening severe cutaneous adverse reactions (SCARs), such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrosis (TEN) with increase morbidity and mortality while they are receiving cancer treatments, have been proposed to be a result of direct skin toxicity or drug hypersensitivity reactions (these are proposed mechanism, not definite). Differentiating SCARs from other more commonly seen reactions with a better outcome help prevent discontinuation of therapy and inappropriate use of systemic immunosuppressants for presumable allergic reactions, of which will affect the clinical outcome. In this article, we have reviewed published articles from 1950 to August 2017 for SJS/TEN associated with anticancer drugs, including chemotherapy, targeted therapy, and immunotherapy. We aimed to provide an overview of SJS/TEN associated with anticancer drugs to increase clinician recognition and accelerate future studies on the pathomechanism and managements.

Drug Class Combination–Associated Acute Kidney Injury

Objective: To evaluate the quality of available evidence of drug class combinations and their association with the development of acute kidney injury (AKI). Data Sources: A search of MEDLINE and Embase databases was completed using the following terms: “risk factor AND (acute kidney injury or acute kidney failure) AND (drug or medication).” Study Selection and Data Extraction: Inclusion criteria were the following: English language, full-text availability, and at least 1 drug-combination. Each citation was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria. The literature was evaluated using the quality of evidence component of GRADE. No standardized definition of AKI was applied throughout.. Data Synthesis: Out of 2139 total citations, 151 were assessed for full-text review, with 121 citations (6%) meeting inclusion criteria, producing76 unique drug class combinations. Overall, 56 combinations (73.7%) were considered very low quality; 12 (15.8%) were considered low quality. There were 8 (10.5%) of moderate quality, and no combination was considered high quality. 58 (76%) combinations that had a single citation,with a mean of 1.6 citations per drug class combination. The combination of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and diuretics was reported in 10 citations, the largest number of citations. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates a lack of well-designed studies addressing drug class combination–associated AKI. The combination of NSAIDs and diuretics with or without additional renin-angiotensin aldosterone agents had the strongest level of evidence. Despite limitations, the information included in this review may result in additional scrutiny about combining certain individual nephrotoxic drugs.

Toxic epidermal necrolysis related to AP (pemetrexed plus cisplatin) and gefitinib combination therapy in a patient with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer

Toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) is a rare acute life-threatening mucocutaneous disorder that is mostly drug-related (80%-95%). It is clinically characterized as a widespread sloughing of the skin and mucosa. AP regimen (pemetrexed plus cisplatin) has been the preferred first-line chemotherapy for metastatic non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Gefitinib, a small-molecule epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), has already been recommended as a first-line treatment in EGFR-mutant metastatic NSCLC. We report rare presentation of TEN involving adverse effects of AP and gefitinib combination treatment in a 42-year-old woman diagnosed with metastatic NSCLC harboring an EGFR mutation. On the 21st day after administration of the first cycle of AP regimen and the 8th day after the initiation of gefitinib treatment, she developed an acne-like rash, oral ulcer, and conjunctivitis, which later became blisters and ultimately denuded. The characteristic clinical courses were decisive for the diagnosis of TEN. Treatment with systemic steroids and immunoglobulin as well as supportive treatment led to an improvement of her general condition and a remarkable recovery.

Drug Eruption Due to Peplomycin: An Unusual Form of Stevens-Johnson Syndrome with Pustules

A rare case of Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) due to peplomycin in a 48-year-old man is described. The patient had squamous cell carcinoma on the scalp and underwent preoperative neoadjuvant chemotherapy with peplomycin. On the fifth day of the chemotherapy, he developed a fever and multiple dusky violaceous erythematous areas and pustules on his trunk, thighs, and palms. Erosive erythema and erosions also developed on his soles, scrotum, and oral mucosa. A biopsy specimen taken from the eruption on the thigh revealed marked liquefaction degeneration of the basal layer of the epidermis. Laboratory examinations demonstrated aggravation of liver function. Additionally, the patient developed conjunctivitis and corneal erosions. Although he had some subcorneal pustules, we diagnosed the case as an unusual form of SJS because of severe mucous membrane involvement. Oral prednisolone was administered, and the symptoms subsided. Then the patient underwent wide local excision. One month after surgery, we performed patch tests and a lymphocyte stimulation test with negative results. Then we re-administered peplomycin starting with 1/20 of a daily dose and gradually increasing the dose each day. After administration of the regular daily dose, the patient had a relapse of fever, eruptions, stomatitis, corneal erosions, and liver dysfunction. Therefore, a definite diagnosis of drug eruption due to peplomycin was made.

Life-threatening dermatologic adverse events in oncology

The incidences of life-threatening toxicities such as Stevens-Johnson syndrome (SJS) and toxic epidermal necrolysis (TEN) are inconsistently reported. The potential association of anticancer agents with SJS or TEN has not been systematically investigated. We searched the literature (Ovid: 1950 to June 2013 and PubMed: 1948 to June 2013) using terms for SJS/TEN and anticancer therapies. Primary case reports, case series, and clinical trials were included. In addition, MedWatch, the Food and Drug Administration Adverse Event Reporting System (FAERS), was searched (1968 to August 2012) for SJS/TEN reports associated with anticancer therapies. Proportional reporting ratios (PRR>2, N>3), empirical Bayes geometric mean (EBGM>2, N>3), and lower 95% confidence interval (EBGM0.05>2) were used as thresholds to constitute a signal of association between SJS/TEN and anticancer drugs. There were 46 SJS and 37 TEN cases associated with 18 and 22 anticancer drugs in the literature, respectively. Among cases in the FAERS, significant signals were associated with SJS for bendamustine and with TEN for bendamustine, busulfan, chlorambucil, fludarabine, lomustine, and procarbazine. Several drugs reported in the published literature to be associated with SJS/TEN were not found to have significant signals in FAERS. Proactive pharmacovigilance to detect and define safety signals serves to aid oncology practitioners in the recognition of possible, yet uncommon, serious, and/or life-threatening skin reactions.

The Need for Routine Bleomycin Test Dosing in the 21st Century

OBJECTIVE

To review the clinical evidence for routine use of bleomycin test dosing.

DATA SOURCES

English-language review articles, references from retrieved articles, case reports, and clinical trials were identified from a MEDLINE literature search (1966–July 2005). Key search terms included bleomycin, test dose, anaphylactic reactions, and hypersensitivity. Information from an unpublished E-mail survey, the manufacturer, and the Internet was also used.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Early clinical trials and isolated case reports suggest that bleomycin-induced acute hypersensitivity reactions occur in 1% of patients with lymphoma and <0.5% of those with solid tumors. The reactions are mainly characterized by high-grade fever, chills, hypotension, and in a few cases, cardiovascular collapse, which can lead to death. The exact mechanism of these reactions is unclear, but is thought to be related to the release of endogenous pyrogens from the host cells. Evidence does not suggest any correlation between doses and the onset or severity of the reactions. Supportive care, including hydration, steroids, antipyretics, and antihistamines, may resolve the symptoms. However, it may not completely prevent recurrences.

CONCLUSIONS

The incidence of acute hypersensitivity or hyperpyrexic reactions associated with bleomycin is very low, but the reaction is potentially fatal. Clinicians should monitor their patients for any signs and symptoms of acute hyperpyrexic reactions during bleomycin administration. Since the onset of the reactions can occur with any dose of bleomycin and at any time, routine test dosing does not seem to predict when drug reactions may occur.

Assessment and management of cutaneous reactions with amifostine administration: Findings of the ethyol (amifostine) cutaneous treatment advisory panel (ECTAP)

PURPOSE

To review reports of severe skin reactions during amifostine treatment.

METHODS AND MATERIAL

The expert panel reviewed postmarketing reports of skin reactions and discussed strategies for evaluation and management.

RESULTS

Between 1994 and April 2002, 35 events were classified as severe skin reactions worldwide: erythema multiforme (8), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (10), toxic epidermal necrolysis (11), toxicoderma (3), and bullae (3). Unadjusted incidences were 6-9 per 10,000 radiotherapy patients and 0.8-1 per 10,000 chemotherapy patients. In 10 patients (29%) amifostine was continued after cutaneous signs and symptoms appeared.

CONCLUSIONS

Practical recommendations for practicing clinicians were developed. Cutaneous evaluation for rash, ulceration, or lesions-particularly on lips/mucosa, palmar/plantar surfaces, and the trunk-should be performed before amifostine administration. Reactions can be classified as local injection site/radiation port reactions or non-injection site reactions; and non-injection site reactions with associated fever or constitutional symptoms must be differentiated from radiation-induced dermatitis or cutaneous reaction with another etiology. Amifostine should be permanently discontinued for severe skin reactions or reactions associated with constitutional symptoms not known to be due to any other etiology. Increased physician awareness, proper patient management, monitoring before administration, and early intervention/discontinuation for non-injection site reactions may reduce the incidence of cutaneous reactions and enhance amifostine safety.

Establishing the dose of the oral NK1 antagonist aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

The neurokinin-1 antagonist aprepitant (EMEND; Merck Research Laboratories, West Point, PA) has been shown to reduce chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting when it is given with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 receptor antagonist and dexamethasone. The current study sought to define the most appropriate dose regimen of oral aprepitant.

METHODS

This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted in patients with cancer who were receiving initial cisplatin (> or = 70 mg/m(2)) and standard antiemetic therapy (intravenous ondansetron plus oral dexamethasone). Patients were randomized to receive standard therapy plus either aprepitant 375 mg on Day 1 and 250 mg on Days 2-5, aprepitant 125 mg on Day 1 and 80 mg on Days 2-5, or placebo. Due to an apparent interaction with dexamethasone suggested by pharmacokinetic data obtained while the study was ongoing, the aprepitant 375/250 mg dose was discontinued and replaced with aprepitant 40 mg on Day 1 and 25 mg on Days 2-5, and a new randomization schedule was generated. Patients recorded nausea and emesis in a diary. The primary endpoint was complete response (no emesis and no rescue therapy), which was analyzed using an intent-to-treat approach with data obtained after the dose adjustment. Treatment comparisons were made using logistic regression models. Tolerability was assessed by reported adverse events and physical and laboratory assessments, and included all available data.

RESULTS

The percentages of patients who achieved a complete response in the overall study period were 71.0% for the aprepitant 125/80-mg group (n = 131 patients), 58.8% for the aprepitant 40/25-mg group (n = 119 patients), and 43.7% for the standard therapy group (n = 126 patients; P < 0.05 for either aprepitant regimen vs. standard therapy). Rates for Day 1 were 83.2% for the aprepitant 125/80-mg group, 75.6% for aprepitant 40/25-mg group, and 71.4% for the standard therapy group (P < 0.05 for aprepitant 125/80 mg vs. standard therapy), and rates on Days 2-5 were 72.7% for the aprepitant 125/80-mg group, 63.9% for the aprepitant 40/25-mg group, and 45.2% for the standard therapy group (P < 0.01 for either aprepitant group vs. standard therapy). The efficacy of the aprepitant 375/250-mg regimen was similar to that of the aprepitant 125/80-mg regimen. The overall incidence of adverse events was generally similar across treatment groups: 85% in the aprepitant 375/250-mg group (n = 34 patients), 76% in the aprepitant 125/80-mg group (n = 214 patients), 71% in the aprepitant 40/25-mg group (n = 120 patients), and 72% in the standard therapy group (n = 212 patients), with the exception of a higher incidence of infection in the aprepitant 125/80-mg group (13%) compared with the standard therapy group (4%).

CONCLUSIONS

When it was added to a standard regimen of intravenous ondansetron and oral dexamethasone in the current study, aprepitant reduced chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting and was generally well tolerated, although increases in infection were noted that were assumed to be due to elevated dexamethasone levels as a result of the pharmacokinetic interaction. The aprepitant 125/80-mg regimen had the most favorable benefit:risk profile.

Mucocutaneous reactions to chemotherapy

Chemotherapeutic agents are a widely used treatment modality. Side effects range from common to unusual and may be confused with other cutaneous sequelae of oncologic treatment. The goal of this communication is to elaborate on previous descriptions of the cutaneous manifestations of chemotherapeutic treatment and to discuss more recent findings.

LEARNING OBJECTIVE

At the conclusion of this learning activity, participants should be able to generate a differential diagnosis of possible etiologies for varying patterns of cutaneous involvement in patients receiving chemotherapy and identify the various cutaneous side effects of chemotherapeutic treatment. In addition, they should be able to distinguish life-threatening side effects that require immediate management from more benign manifestations of chemotherapeutic treatment.