4.1 Article

Incidence of cetuximab-related infusion reactions in oncology patients treated at the University of North Carolina Cancer Hospital

Journal

JOURNAL OF ONCOLOGY PHARMACY PRACTICE
Volume 20, Issue 6, Pages 409-416

Publisher

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1078155213510542

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose The primary purpose of this study was to determine the rate of infusion reactions to cetuximab in oncology patients treated at the University of North Carolina Cancer Hospital. Secondarily, we sought to evaluate predictors of grade 3-4 hypersensitivity, including geography. Methods Data were collected by retrospective chart review for patients treated with cetuximab at the University of North Carolina Cancer Hospital between 15 November 2006 and 31 December 2010. Data were analyzed for occurrence of hypersensitivity reaction in 125 patients with various cancer types. Results Of the 125 subjects, 31 (24.8%) experienced an infusion reaction of any grade. Of 125, 18 (14.4%) experienced a grade 3 or 4 reaction. The odds ratio for patients with an allergy history having a grade 3 or 4 reaction was 2.57 (95% CI 0.93 to 7.09, p=0.07). Pretreatment with steroids was associated with absence of grade 3 or 4 reaction with an odds ratio of 0.21 (95% CI 0.05 to 0.83, p=0.04). Mapping of reaction rates by county revealed higher rates in some of the more rural counties of North Carolina, however, statistical power was lacking. Conclusions Rates of hypersensitivity reaction at UNC are similar to rates seen in other areas of the southeastern United States and higher than in other regions of the United States and Europe. Rates of both hypersensitivity reactions and grade 3 to 4 hypersensitivity reactions have not substantially changed over time. Geography, allergy history, and perhaps smoking or cancer type may help predict who will react to cetuximab. Steroids should be strongly considered as premedication in addition to diphenhydramine.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available