BACKGROUND: Administration of L-asparaginase is limited by hypersensitivity reactions mediated by anti-asparaginase antibodies. To overcome this problem, native Escherichia coli L-asparaginase was conjugated to polyethylene glycol (PEG) to formulate PEG-L-asparaginase, a preparation with decreased immunogenicity and increased circulating half-life. In early trials, PEG-L-asparaginase was tolerated by patients known to be hypersensitive to the native E. coli product. METHODS: The Pediatric Oncology Group conducted a phase II, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and toxicity of PEG-L-asparaginase compared with native E. coli asparaginase in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in second bone marrow relapse. All patients (n=76) received standard doses of vincristine and prednisone. Nonhypersensitive patients (n=34) were randomized to receive either PEG-L-asparaginase of 2500 IU/m/dose intramuscularly on days 1 and 15 (treatment I) or native E. coli asparaginase of 10,000 IU/m/dose intramuscularly on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, and 26 (treatment II). Patients with a clinical history of an allergic reaction to unmodified asparaginase were directly assigned to treatment with PEG-L-asparaginase (n=42). Asparaginase levels and anti-asparaginase antibody titers were monitored in all patients. Response and toxicity were scored using conventional criteria. RESULTS: The complete response rate for the total study population was 41%. There was no difference in complete response between patients randomized to PEG (47%) and native asparaginase (41%). PEG was well tolerated even in patients with prior allergic reactions to native asparaginase. PEG half-life was shorter in patients with prior allergy. CONCLUSIONS:PEG asparaginase is a useful agent in patients with allergic reactions to native asparaginase.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND: Administration of L-asparaginase is limited by hypersensitivity reactions mediated by anti-asparaginase antibodies. To overcome this problem, native Escherichia coliL-asparaginase was conjugated to polyethylene glycol (PEG) to formulate PEG-L-asparaginase, a preparation with decreased immunogenicity and increased circulating half-life. In early trials, PEG-L-asparaginase was tolerated by patients known to be hypersensitive to the native E. coli product. METHODS: The Pediatric Oncology Group conducted a phase II, randomized trial to compare the efficacy and toxicity of PEG-L-asparaginase compared with native E. coliasparaginase in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia in second bone marrow relapse. All patients (n=76) received standard doses of vincristine and prednisone. Nonhypersensitive patients (n=34) were randomized to receive either PEG-L-asparaginase of 2500 IU/m/dose intramuscularly on days 1 and 15 (treatment I) or native E. coliasparaginase of 10,000 IU/m/dose intramuscularly on days 1, 3, 5, 8, 10, 12, 15, 17, 19, 22, 24, and 26 (treatment II). Patients with a clinical history of an allergic reaction to unmodified asparaginase were directly assigned to treatment with PEG-L-asparaginase (n=42). Asparaginase levels and anti-asparaginase antibody titers were monitored in all patients. Response and toxicity were scored using conventional criteria. RESULTS: The complete response rate for the total study population was 41%. There was no difference in complete response between patients randomized to PEG (47%) and native asparaginase (41%). PEG was well tolerated even in patients with prior allergic reactions to native asparaginase. PEG half-life was shorter in patients with prior allergy. CONCLUSIONS:PEGasparaginase is a useful agent in patients with allergic reactions to native asparaginase.
Authors: L A Clavell; R D Gelber; H J Cohen; S Hitchcock-Bryan; J R Cassady; N J Tarbell; S R Blattner; R Tantravahi; P Leavitt; S E Sallan Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1986-09-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: David O Riley; Jenna M Schlefman; Hans Christoph Vitzthum Von Eckstaedt V; Amy L Morris; Michael K Keng; Firas El Chaer Journal: Curr Hematol Malig Rep Date: 2021-05-12 Impact factor: 3.952
Authors: Yiwei Liu; Colton A Smith; John C Panetta; Wenjian Yang; Lauren E Thompson; Jacob P Counts; Alejandro R Molinelli; Deqing Pei; Nancy M Kornegay; Kristine R Crews; Hope Swanson; Cheng Cheng; Seth E Karol; William E Evans; Hiroto Inaba; Ching-Hon Pui; Sima Jeha; Mary V Relling Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2019-06-12 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael E Rytting; Deborah A Thomas; Susan M O'Brien; Farhad Ravandi-Kashani; Elias J Jabbour; Anna R Franklin; Tapan M Kadia; Naveen Pemmaraju; Naval G Daver; Alessandra Ferrajoli; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Marina Y Konopleva; Jorge E Cortes; Gautham Borthakur; Rebecca Garris; Maria Cardenas-Turanzas; Kurt Schroeder; Jeffrey L Jorgensen; Steven M Kornblau; Hagop M Kantarjian Journal: Cancer Date: 2014-07-17 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Michael E Rytting; Elias J Jabbour; Jeffrey L Jorgensen; Farhad Ravandi; Anna R Franklin; Tapan M Kadia; Naveen Pemmaraju; Naval G Daver; Alessandra Ferrajoli; Guillermo Garcia-Manero; Marina Y Konopleva; Gautam Borthakur; Rebecca Garris; Sa Wang; Sherry Pierce; Kurt Schroeder; Steven M Kornblau; Deborah A Thomas; Jorge E Cortes; Susan M O'Brien; Hagop M Kantarjian Journal: Am J Hematol Date: 2016-06-30 Impact factor: 10.047
Authors: B Patel; A A Kirkwood; A Dey; D I Marks; A K McMillan; T F Menne; L Micklewright; P Patrick; S Purnell; C J Rowntree; P Smith; A K Fielding Journal: Leukemia Date: 2016-08-02 Impact factor: 11.528