Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

E-Poster Display

1892P - One-year experience at the Catalan Institute of Oncology (ICO) Drug Desensitisation Centre (DDC)

Date

17 Sep 2020

Session

E-Poster Display

Topics

Supportive Care and Symptom Management

Tumour Site

Presenters

Kevin Molina-Mata

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2020) 31 (suppl_4): S988-S1017. 10.1016/annonc/annonc291

Authors

K. Molina-Mata1, J. Martí-Garrido2, P. Vazquez-Revuelta2, R. Lleonart Bellfill2, C. Fernández-López3, R. Madrigal-Burgaleta4

Author affiliations

  • 1 Medical Oncology, ICO - Institut Català d'Oncologia l'Hospitalet (Hospital Duran i Reynals), 08908 - Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona)/ES
  • 2 Allergy Service, Internal Medicine, Bellvitge University Hospital, 08908 - Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona)/ES
  • 3 Pharmacy Service, ICO - Institut Català d'Oncologia l'Hospitalet (Hospital Duran i Reynals), 08908 - Hospitalet de Llobregat (Barcelona)/ES
  • 4 Allergy & Severe Asthma Service, St Bartholomew's Hospital, London/GB

Resources

Login to get immediate access to this content.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 1892P

Background

Hypersensitivity reactions to antitumoral agents are increasing. Rapid Drug Desensitisation (RDD) is a technique that enables patients (pts) to receive the antitumoral they are allergic to. RDD induces temporary tolerance by a gradual introduction of increasing subthreshold doses of the culprit drug. RDD is cost-effective, and life-expectancy is similar in pts receiving chemotherapy with RDD when compared to non-allergic pts. RDD has optimal safety outcomes in the hands of multidisciplinary teams (MDT). Our aim was to audit our MDT performance, and to profile our drug-reactive pts.

Methods

We retrospectively analysed our MDT database. We collected data from pts reacting to their antitumoral therapy from April 2019 to April 2020. They underwent systematic allergy workup with skin testing (ST), risk stratification, in vitro tests. Pts with negative ST and favourable risk-assessment underwent drug challenge to rule out an allergy. Confirmed allergic pts or high-risk pts underwent RDD with validated protocols. These techniques were performed in a dedicated AllergoOncology Day Case Unit with the necessary safety measures.

Results

There were 104 pts. Pts characteristics shown in the table. Platins were most frequently involved (55%, n=57), followed by taxanes (29%, n=30), anti-HER-2 agents (4%, n=4), irinotecan (4%, n=4), rituximab (3%, n=3), anthracyclines (2%, n=2) and cetuximab (2%, n=2). 27 pts (26%) had no other treatment options. ST were positive in 43% (n=45) of pts. 64% (n=67) of pts underwent RDD, and only 35% (n=82) of the RDD procedures showed reactions, 98% of them were mild and did not jeopardise treatment completion. Table: 1892P

Baseline population clinical characteristics

Age – yr
Median 61.5
Range 21-82
Sex – no. (%)
Male 35 (33.7)
Female 69 (66.3)
Tumor histologic type – no. (%)
Colorrectal 32 (30.8)
Ovarian 20 (19.2)
Breast 20 (19.2)
Lung 6 (5.8)
Endometrial 6 (5.8)
Other 26 (25)
Disease stage – no. (%)
Non-metastatic 42 (40.4)
Metastatic 56 (53.8)
Tumor biomarker characteristics – no. (%)
Colorrectal RAS wt 14 (46.6)
Breast luminal-like 11 (55)
Breast HER2+ 7 (35)
Lung PD-L1 >50% 1 (20)
BRCA mutated 6 (42.9 of tested)
Treatment line – no. (%)
First 73 (70.2)
Second 13 (12.5)
Third or more 18 (17.3)
Treatment intention – no. (%)
Radical 41 (39.4)
Palliative 60 (57.7)

Conclusions

Study and risk assessment by expert allergists in a dedicated space and MDT efforts enabled all the pts referred to our DDC in one year to safely receive their oncohematological therapy of choice (either by RDD or by ruling out an allergy after negative drug challenge), which was a first line therapy for 70% of them, and had radical treatment intention for 39%.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

All authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.