4.6 Article

Incidence and associated factors of cetuximab-induced hypersensitivity infusion reactions in 1392 cancer patients treated in four French areas: a possible association with Lyme disease?

期刊

BMC CANCER
卷 22, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12885-022-10192-4

关键词

Cetuximab; Infusion reaction; Lyme disease; Hypersensitivity; Risk factors; Alpha-gal; Head; And neck neoplasms

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study found that patients treated in the French area with the highest incidence of Lyme disease are at a higher risk of CI-IRs, suggesting the need for increased attention to the risk of CI-IRs in these patients in those regions.
Background: Previous studies have observed an increased incidence of Cetuximab-induced hypersensitivity infusion reactions (CI-IRs) in the southeastern states of the USA. Tick's bites were suspected of generating cross-reactions between cetuximab and alpha-gal. This study aims was to describe the incidence and associated risk factors of CI-IRs, in the French areas chosen according to their Lyme disease incidence. Patients and methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted on patients that received cetuximab infusion from January 2010 to June 2019 in 4 French areas with different Lyme disease incidence rates. Results: Of 1392 patients, 117 (8.4%) experienced a CI-IR, including 68 severe (grade 3 or 4) reactions (4.9%). This CI-IR incidence was significantly higher in the Lyme disease high-risk area than in the other areas (13.2% versus 7.1%, 8.1% and 6.4%; P = 0.016). Sex (P = 0.53), premedication (P = 0.91), primary cancer location (P = 0.46) and chemotherapy regimen type (P = 0.78) had no impact on CI-IR incidence in the overall population. In the head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) patient subgroup, CI-IRs were significantly more frequent in the high-risk area (16.4% versus 6.7%, 7.1% and 7.0%; P = 0.0015). Conclusion: This study suggests that patients treated in the French area with the highest incidence of Lyme disease are at a higher risk of CI-IRs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据