A protocol for risk stratification of patients with carboplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions

Background Management of patients with carboplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) has been complicated by high false-negative rates of carboplatin skin test (ST) results. These patients might be at risk for future carboplatin-induced HSRs. In this article we identify a strategy to improve...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inJournal of allergy and clinical immunology Vol. 129; no. 2; pp. 443 - 447
Main Authors Patil, Sarita U., MD, Long, Aidan A., MD, Ling, Morris, MD, Wilson, Michael T., MD, PhD, Hesterberg, Paul, MD, Wong, Johnson T., MD, Banerji, Aleena, MD
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published New York, NY Mosby, Inc 01.02.2012
Elsevier
Elsevier Limited
Subjects
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

Loading…
More Information
Summary:Background Management of patients with carboplatin-induced hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) has been complicated by high false-negative rates of carboplatin skin test (ST) results. These patients might be at risk for future carboplatin-induced HSRs. In this article we identify a strategy to improve risk stratification of patients with a history of carboplatin-induced HSRs by using a protocol that includes repeat skin testing and drug desensitization. Objective We sought to identify a management strategy for patients with a history of carboplatin-induced HSRs with negative carboplatin ST results. Methods From 2008-2010, patients with carboplatin-induced HSR underwent risk stratification per a protocol using 3 repeat STs with intervening drug desensitizations. Results Of the 44 patients with carboplatin-induced HSRs, 39 completed the protocol. Patients were classified as having positive ST results (n = 16), having negative ST results (n = 11), or ST converters when the ST result converted to positive after an initial negative result (n = 12). ST converters are more likely to have HSRs during subsequent desensitizations than patients with negative ST results (56.1% vs 4.5%, P  < .001). ST converters had a significantly longer time interval between their initial HSR and initial ST evaluation compared with either patients with true-negative ST results (22.1 vs 6.0 months, P  = .03) or patients with positive ST results (22.1 vs 1.8 months, P  = .001). Conclusion Our experience suggests that repeat STs are necessary for risk stratification in patients with a remote clinical history of HSR and an initial negative ST result because there is a significant rate of conversion to a positive ST result. ST converters have an increased risk of HSRs during subsequent carboplatin treatment.
Bibliography:ObjectType-Article-2
SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1
ObjectType-Feature-1
content type line 23
ISSN:0091-6749
1097-6825
DOI:10.1016/j.jaci.2011.10.010