Purpose: Rituximab is prone to infusion-related reactions, which commonly requires desensitization to maintain its administration. Conventional desensitization protocols are using multistep infusion by diluting solutions. However, the process of diluting drugs and stepwise delivery needs additional time and effort. The objective of this study was to investigate the safety and efficacy of a nondiluting, one-bag protocol of rituximab desensitization. Methods: A retrospective study was performed by reviewing the medical records of patients who underwent rituximab desensitization between 2009 and 2018. The completion rate, occurrence and severity of breakthrough reactions (BTR), and time required to complete the therapy were compared between one-bag protocol and multibag protocol. Results were analyzed by generalized estimation equation method, and odds ratios (ORs) of completion rate and BTR incidence were estimated. Results: Total 190 cases of desensitization therapy were performed in 49 patients; the incidence of BTR was 16.84% and the overall completion rate was 96.32%. No significant difference in completion rate was found (OR, 3.58; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.79-16.38) and there was no significant difference in BTR incidence (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.23-2.82) in one-bag protocol. BTR in the one-bag protocol tended to occur even through entire steps, whereas most of the BTR in the multibag protocol occurred at later steps of the process. The average time spent in the desensitization was 60 minutes shorter in the one-bag than the multibag protocol (258.15 minutes vs. 329.81 minutes, P< 0.001). Conclusion: One-bag desensitization protocol showed no significant difference in safety and efficiency compared to the conventional multibag protocol, with shortening the time required for completion. (
Previously, immediate reactions to ionic high-osmolar iodinated contrast media (ICM) were regarded as nonimmunological. However, despite the use of lower-osmolar ICM, ICM hypersensitivity still occurs in some patients and recent studies suggest that there would be a true allergic response, especially in more severe form. Currently, it is important to identify the sensitized ICM and avoid the agent; however, the usefulness of skin tests and challenge tests has not yet been established, since there are few large-scale studies on them. Although, skin test-negative ICM can be safely used in clinical practice, conflicting results have been reported through various studies, depending on the challenge protocols used. Therefore, standard protocols need to provided. Even if a culprit agent is not proven by skin tests, its use should be avoided. Reuse of contrast media increases the risk of occurrence of hypersensitivity reactions. For patients with previous hypersensitivity reactions to contrast media, premedication can help prevent recurrence, but breakthrough in hypersensitivity is not fully achieved by premedication, especially when the previous reaction was a severe form such as anaphylaxis. Therefore, it is necessary to establish an optimal strategy to choose alternative ICM and premedication protocols to prevent recurrence of hypersensitivity reactions to nonionic contrast media.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.