AIM: Repeated treatment with carboplatin increases the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions. Current managements for carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions involve premedication, desensitization, and replacing agents. However, preventive effects for recurrent reactions by the former two methods are still limited, and substituting non-platinum agent can attenuate efficacy against platinum-sensitive diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of substituting nedaplatin, another platinum compound, as a strategy to deal with carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions in gynecologic cancers. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who experienced carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions and subsequently switched to nedaplatin between 2001 and 2009 were identified through our database. The incidence and severity of nedaplatin hypersensitivity were examined. Response to nedaplatin therapy was evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and serum CA-125 levels. RESULTS: Forty-six of 570 patients (8.1%) experienced carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions, and the increased cycle numbers of carboplatin-based regimens correlated with the high incidence of hypersensitivity (≤6, 0.9% vs ≥7, 19.2%). Of these 46 patients, 38 subsequently switched to nedaplatin-based regimens (ovarian, tubal or peritoneal carcinoma, 30; endometrial carcinoma, 6; cervical carcinoma, 2). Three of the 38 patients (7.9%) eventually developed hypersensitivity against nedaplatin, and all their reactions were grade 2. The response rate to nedaplatin therapy among 32 evaluable patients was 31.3%. CONCLUSION: Replacing carboplatin with nedaplatin provided a safe and efficacious approach to manage carboplatin hypersensitivity. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to indicate the usefulness of nedaplatin after carboplatin hypersensitivity reactions. Further evaluations are warranted to confirm our finding.
AIM: Repeated treatment with carboplatin increases the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions. Current managements for carboplatinhypersensitivity reactions involve premedication, desensitization, and replacing agents. However, preventive effects for recurrent reactions by the former two methods are still limited, and substituting non-platinum agent can attenuate efficacy against platinum-sensitive diseases. The aim of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of substituting nedaplatin, another platinum compound, as a strategy to deal with carboplatinhypersensitivity reactions in gynecologic cancers. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Patients who experienced carboplatinhypersensitivity reactions and subsequently switched to nedaplatin between 2001 and 2009 were identified through our database. The incidence and severity of nedaplatinhypersensitivity were examined. Response to nedaplatin therapy was evaluated according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and serum CA-125 levels. RESULTS: Forty-six of 570 patients (8.1%) experienced carboplatinhypersensitivity reactions, and the increased cycle numbers of carboplatin-based regimens correlated with the high incidence of hypersensitivity (≤6, 0.9% vs ≥7, 19.2%). Of these 46 patients, 38 subsequently switched to nedaplatin-based regimens (ovarian, tubal or peritoneal carcinoma, 30; endometrial carcinoma, 6; cervical carcinoma, 2). Three of the 38 patients (7.9%) eventually developed hypersensitivity against nedaplatin, and all their reactions were grade 2. The response rate to nedaplatin therapy among 32 evaluable patients was 31.3%. CONCLUSION: Replacing carboplatin with nedaplatin provided a safe and efficacious approach to manage carboplatinhypersensitivity. To the authors' knowledge, this study is the first to indicate the usefulness of nedaplatin after carboplatinhypersensitivity reactions. Further evaluations are warranted to confirm our finding.