AIM: To assess safety of rapid infusion by measuring infusion-related side effects and toxicities. METHODS: Participants received the first rituximab infusion according to the manufacturers' recommendations. If well-tolerated, they then received the second and subsequent infusions at a rate of 20% of the dose over the first 30 min and the remaining 80% over the next hour. Premedication was administered for all the infusions. RESULTS: A total of 243 infusions in 65 consecutive participants were evaluated. Six experienced a grade 1 reaction and one a grade 3 transfusion-related adverse event. Three of these participants were withdrawn from the rapid infusion study. The other four participants (grade 1 only participants) were re-challenged. The same premedication was used as in the first rapid infusion. On experiencing a grade 1 reaction, promethazine 12.5 mg i.v. was administered and infusion recommenced at 50% of the previous rate upon the resolution of symptoms. Three patients developed a grade 1 adverse event and one patient experienced no adverse reaction. The three patients who did not tolerate the second rapid infusion were withdrawn from this study. CONCLUSION: A rituximab infusion over 90-min was safe and feasible for participants who seek treatment at ambulatory cancer centre. The new regimen has been adopted as a standard practice with better resource utilization.
AIM: To assess safety of rapid infusion by measuring infusion-related side effects and toxicities. METHODS:Participants received the first rituximab infusion according to the manufacturers' recommendations. If well-tolerated, they then received the second and subsequent infusions at a rate of 20% of the dose over the first 30 min and the remaining 80% over the next hour. Premedication was administered for all the infusions. RESULTS: A total of 243 infusions in 65 consecutive participants were evaluated. Six experienced a grade 1 reaction and one a grade 3 transfusion-related adverse event. Three of these participants were withdrawn from the rapid infusion study. The other four participants (grade 1 only participants) were re-challenged. The same premedication was used as in the first rapid infusion. On experiencing a grade 1 reaction, promethazine 12.5 mg i.v. was administered and infusion recommenced at 50% of the previous rate upon the resolution of symptoms. Three patients developed a grade 1 adverse event and one patient experienced no adverse reaction. The three patients who did not tolerate the second rapid infusion were withdrawn from this study. CONCLUSION: A rituximab infusion over 90-min was safe and feasible for participants who seek treatment at ambulatory cancer centre. The new regimen has been adopted as a standard practice with better resource utilization.
Authors: William Donnellan; Jesus G Berdeja; Diana Shipley; Edward R Arrowsmith; David Wright; Scott Lunin; Richard Brown; James H Essell; Ian W Flinn Journal: Oncologist Date: 2017-07-07