Cetuximab, a chimeric mouse-human IgG1 monoclonal antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor, has proven effective in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer and squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck. However, a high incidence of immediate hypersensitivity reactions (HSR) to cetuximab after the first infusion has been observed. We have developed a test for identification of patients likely to show treatment-related HSR to cetuximab. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) for detecting anti-cetuximab IgEs was developed and tested on serum samples collected from cancer patients before start of cetuximab treatment, and from healthy blood donors. Similar levels of anti-cetuximab IgE were detected in pre-treatment patient sera (24/92, 26.1%) and sera from healthy blood donors (33/117, 28.2%). HSR were observed in 14 out of the 92 patients (15.2%), and 8 of these (57.1%) were grade 3-4. Anti-cetuximab IgEs were detected in 7/8 of the patients (87.5%) with severe HSRs as compared with 14/78 patients (17.9%) with no HSR (p=0.0002). Predictive value of the anti-cetuximab IgE test for HSR events of grades 3-4 was calculated using Receiver Operating Characteristics analysis. With a cut-off value of 29 arbitrary units for the anti-cetuximab IgE, the ELISA test showed a sensitivity of 87.5%, specificity of 82.1%, positive predictive value of 33.3% and negative predictive value of 98.5%. Anti-cetuximab IgE ELISA detection could be a valuable tool to help the physician anticipate an anaphylaxis episode following cetuximab infusion and opt for a suitable alternative treatment.

Objectives In ANCA-associated vasculitis (AAV), classifications have emerged to individualize homogeneous clinical and outcomes patterns, including the recently defined anti-MPO granulomatosis with polyangiitis (GPA) subgroup. This study aimed to retrospectively evaluate the impacts of re-classification based on clinicopathological criteria and/or ANCA specificity. Methods A retrospective monocentric study conducted at Caen University Hospital led to the identification of PR3 or MPO-ANCA AAV patients from January 2000 or September 2011, respectively, to June 2016. Eosinophilic GPA patients were excluded. AAVs were thereby also classified either as GPA or microscopic polyangiitis (MPA) according to the European Medicines Agency vasculitis algorithm. Results A total of 150 AAV patients were included (94 GPA, 56 MPA; 87 anti-PR3 and 63 anti-MPO patients). GPA patients exhibited a worse relapse-free survival but a better renal survival (P < 0.001 and P = 0.021, respectively) than MPA patients. Overall, relapse-free and renal survival rates were similar between anti-PR3 and anti-MPO patients (P = 0.35, 0.17 and 0.15, respectively). Similarly, the prognosis was identical between anti-MPO MPA patients and anti-PR3 MPA patients (P = 0.33, 0.19 and 0.65, respectively), and between anti-MPO GPA patients and anti-PR3 GPA patients (P = 0.06, 0.99 and 0.64, respectively). Moreover, anti-PR3 GPA and anti-MPO GPA patients exhibited no differences in clinical manifestations or BVAS score. Conclusion Clinicopathological classification appeared to be the strongest criterion for distinguishing among homogeneous prognoses of AAV. Individualizing the anti-MPO GPA subgroup does not appear to bring additional value to clinical practice, but multicentre studies are required to confirm this trend.

No abstract